Failure to report colleague misconduct

Short answer

Yes, in principle you can. For most regulated professions in England and Wales there is a positive professional duty not just to avoid causing harm yourself, but to raise concerns about the conduct, health or performance of colleagues where patients, clients or the public may be at risk. A failure to do so can itself be treated as a fitness-to-practise (FTP) matter, because it is a breach of your own professional obligations, quite separate from whatever the other person did.

That said, this is not automatic. Whether a failure to report actually amounts to impaired fitness to practise depends heavily on the facts: which regulator you fall under, what you knew, how serious and immediate the risk was, what steps (if any) you took, and whether your inaction fell seriously short of the standard expected. It is important not to assume that any failure to report is misconduct.

The professional duty to raise concerns

The exact wording depends on your regulator, but the principle is consistent across the main ones.

For doctors, the GMC in Good Medical Practice and its guidance on Raising and acting on concerns states that all medical professionals have a duty to raise concerns where they believe patient safety or care is being compromised by the practice of colleagues, or by systems and processes. You are expected to act promptly and to escalate if concerns are not addressed.

For nurses, midwives and nursing associates, the NMC Code and its Raising Concerns guidance are explicit that you have a professional duty to report concerns that put people in your care or the public at risk, and that “doing nothing and failing to report concerns is unacceptable.” The NMC states directly that failure to report concerns may bring your fitness to practise into question and put your registration at risk.

Similar duties apply under other regulators, for example the HCPC standards of conduct, performance and ethics for allied health professions, the SRA Principles and Codes of Conduct for solicitors (including the obligation to report serious misconduct to the SRA), the GDC for dental professionals, the GPhC for pharmacists, and the various accountancy and other professional bodies. If you tell me your profession and regulator, I can be more precise.

When a failure to report can amount to impairment

Regulators generally look at whether your conduct fell seriously short of the expected standard, not at every imperfect judgement. Factors that tend to matter include:

1. The seriousness of the underlying conduct. Failing to report a genuine, ongoing risk to patient or public safety is treated far more seriously than not reporting a minor or one-off matter.

2. What you actually knew or reasonably suspected. A duty to raise concerns is usually triggered by a genuine, reasonable belief, not by proof. But you are not expected to report mere rumour or something you had no real basis to suspect.

3. Whether you took any reasonable steps. Raising the matter with a line manager, a designated safeguarding or clinical lead, or through an internal governance route will often discharge the duty, even if you did not go directly to the regulator. Complete inaction is treated very differently from imperfect but genuine escalation.

4. Whether you had a personal or supervisory responsibility, or a conflict of interest, that made silence more culpable.

5. Persistence and pattern. A single lapse in a difficult situation is viewed differently from repeated turning of a blind eye.

6. Insight and remediation. If concerns are later raised about you, showing that you understand what you should have done and have taken steps to put it right significantly affects the outcome.

Alternative explanations and important distinctions

It is worth separating a few situations that can look similar but are treated very differently.

Not reporting because you reasonably believed the concern had already been dealt with, or because you escalated internally and were entitled to expect action, is usually a defence or strong mitigation rather than misconduct. The duty is generally to raise concerns appropriately, not personally to guarantee the outcome.

Not reporting because you were unsure whether the threshold was met, and you sought advice or raised it tentatively, is materially different from deliberately concealing known wrongdoing.

Deliberately covering up, colluding, or discouraging others from reporting is the most serious category and is where regulators and the courts have been most robust, particularly after public inquiries into healthcare failings.

So the label “failure to report” covers a wide spectrum, and the regulatory outcome tracks where on that spectrum your situation sits.

Whistleblowing and legal protection

Raising concerns in good faith about patient or public safety, wrongdoing or breaches of legal obligations may qualify as a “protected disclosure” under the whistleblowing provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (as inserted by the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998). This can give you protection from dismissal or detriment for having raised the concern. Regulators actively encourage staff to speak up and treat retaliation against genuine whistleblowers as a serious matter. This is relevant because the fear of adverse consequences is not a valid reason to stay silent, and the legal framework is designed to reduce that risk.

Practical steps if you are worried about your own position

1. Act now if the risk is live. If patients or the public are currently at risk and you have not yet raised it, raising the concern promptly through the correct channel is both the right thing to do and the best protection for your own registration.

2. Follow your organisation’s escalation route first where it is safe and appropriate: line manager, clinical or safeguarding lead, or a Freedom to Speak Up Guardian in the NHS. Escalate externally to the relevant regulator if internal routes fail or are inappropriate.

3. Keep a clear, dated record of what you knew, when, whom you told, and what response you received. Contemporaneous evidence of appropriate escalation is often decisive.

4. Read the specific standard for your regulator so you can point to exactly what was expected and show that you met it.

5. Get support and advice from your professional body, defence organisation (such as the MDU, MPS or MDDUS for medical professionals), or trade union, especially if you are already facing questions or fear reprisals.

What would help me give a more precise answer

Tell me which profession and regulator you are under, whether this is a hypothetical or a live situation, what you knew and when, and what if anything you have already done to raise the concern. If you are already the subject of an FTP referral, the stage it has reached (initial complaint, investigation, case examiner decision, or hearing) changes the advice on how to respond.