What to do if you get a Complaint to the College

Regulated professionals like dentists, nurses, teachers, and doctors, have their practice overseen by various regulatory bodies in Ontario and throughout Canada. Dentists in Ontario, for example, are regulated by the Royal College of Dental Surgeons of Ontario (RCDSO), while nurses are regulated by the College of Nurses of Ontario. Regulatory Colleges helps to ensure all licensed regulated professionals are properly qualified and licensed to practice their respective profession, as well as to ensure quality care for members of the public who seek out services or otherwise interact with regulated professionals.

Virtually any member of the public can make a formal complaint against a regulated professional if they have a concern about the member’s practice. Such complaints are thoroughly investigated by the College. Where the College is of the opinion that a complaint is valid, they will appoint a formal investigator and launch a full investigation into the matter.

This investigation will involve the investigator collecting any relevant documentation related to the complaint, as well as speaking with the complainant and various witnesses who may have pertinent information regarding the matter. The member will also be provided with an opportunity to review the evidence and provide a response. The results of the investigation will then be forwarded to the Inquires, Complaints, and Reports Committee of the respective College, who may, among other things, refer the matter to the Discipline Committee. Some Colleges have an Investigation Committee instead of an Inquiries, Complaints, and Records Committee. Both Committees carry out largely the same functions.

When will a Matter be Referred to the Discipline Committee?

As noted above, when the College receives a complaint regarding a regulated professional, they will look into the complaint to determine whether an investigator should be appointed, and a full investigation carried out. The initial stages of the complaint process will involve the investigator collecting evidence, including speaking with the complainant and any other witnesses.

Once the investigator has completed their investigation, they will pass along all the evidence they have gathered to the impugned member. The member will be provided an opportunity to review the material and provide a formal response. The response should include legal submissions addressing the complaints, as well as any other relevant information that may assist the Inquires, Complaints, and Reports Committee in determining the appropriate next steps.

Once the member’s response submissions are received, the investigator will pass them along to the Inquiries, Complaints, and Reports Committee (ICRC) or Investigation Committee for review, along with all the other evidence collected through the investigation process. The Committee will then meet, review all the material, and come to a decision on the next steps. Where the Committee is of the opinion that the member has committed professional misconduct, they will refer the matter to the Discipline Committee.

A matter will be referred to the Discipline Committee only where the ICRC or Investigation Committee is of the opinion that the member has engaged in some form of professional misconduct. Professional misconduct can include anything from abusing a patient, to performing or recommending unnecessary services, to providing services without informed consent.

The Discipline Process

Once a matter has been referred to the Discipline Committee, the College will typically hire independent legal counsel to prosecute the impugned member. Once independent legal counsel has been hired, they will reach out to counsel for the member, or to the member directly where they are unrepresented. Counsel for the College will typically reach out to defence counsel to canvas the likelihood of resolving the matter.

The member may be willing to admit some of all the allegations against them. Where the member is willing to admit to some or all the allegations, the lawyers will work out what is known as an agreed statement of facts. Once the agreed statement of facts has been finalized, counsel for both parties may discussed a proposed joint position on penalty.

Where the lawyers can agree on penalty, the matter can be set down to be heard by the Discipline Committee, who will determine whether or not the proposed agreement is appropriate in the circumstances. It is important to note that where a joint position on penalty is agreed upon between defence counsel and counsel for the College, the Discipline Committee has very little authority to reject it. A joint position on penalty may only be rejected in rare cases where the proposed penalty is considered “unhinged”. In the vast majority of cases, the Discipline Committee must accept the proposal.

In situations where the member is unwilling to admit to some or all of the allegations, the matter may be set down for a discipline hearing. A discipline hearing is essentially a trial to determine if the member is guilty of professional misconduct. The hearing process is discussed in more detail below.

What is an Agreed Statement of Facts?

An agreed statement of facts is a written summary of the allegations to which the impugned member is willing to admit. Similar to a guilty plea in criminal court, these are the facts that will be admitted that form the basis of a finding of professional misconduct. Counsel for the member will collaborate with counsel for the College to come to an agreed set of facts. This agreed statement of facts will then eventually be submitted to the Discipline Committee and will form the basis of the member’s guilty plea.

An agreed statement of facts can be very beneficial to the impugned member for many reasons. Firstly, it allows the member to have input into what actually occurred. Many times, when a complaint is filed with the College, the allegations are exaggerated, and in some cases fabricated altogether. Working out an agreed statement of facts will allow the member to admit to only the facts that occurred, while removing any exaggerated or fabricated portions of the story. This is also an important tool in removing particularly damaging facts from the file.

An agreed statement of facts also provides the member with a wholesome idea of what exactly they will be pleading guilty to. This helps to ensure no surprises during the formal hearing and protects the member from being asked to admit to anything that did not occur.

Where an agreed statement of facts is agreed upon between the lawyers, a joint position on penalty may also be discussed. A joint position on penalty is an agreement between counsel for the member and counsel for the College regarding the appropriate penalty in the case.

Where the member is unwilling to admit to any of the facts, the matter will go to a discipline hearing and the College will be forced to prove the allegations against the member. The burden of proof at a discipline hearing is proof on a balance of probabilities. This means the College must prove that it is more than likely that the member committed the accts as alleged.