Despite an upcoming appeal hearing, the UK orders Nigerian nurses to leave due to alleged exam fraud. As soon as their visas were revoked, several nurses received formal letters from the Home Office telling them to leave as early as March 17.
According to Nursing Times, Nigerian nurses involved in a fraud probe have been ordered to leave the UK while they await the results of their appeal hearings.
This occurs while the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) is looking into claims of fraud at the Yunnik Technologies Test Centre in Ibadan, Nigeria, where proxy testing for the UK’s nursing competency exam is said to have taken place.
The NMC probe, which identified irregularities in computer-based test (CBT) results from the Pearson VUE-run centre, had an impact on about 2000 Nigerian nurses.
Legal action against the NMC resulted from the dismissal of some nurses and their removal from the register.
In February, the NMC received a pre-action protocol letter from a group of 50 nurses, supported by Nurses Across the Borders and represented by Broad Street Solicitors, requesting assistance to stop deportations before appeals are finished.
However, the legal struggle escalated when the NMC did not answer by the time.
The impacted nurses contend that the NMC purposefully postponed their hearings; the regulator refutes this, saying it is attempting to wrap up the process as quickly as possible.
Twelve of the forty-eight accused registrants have been heard thus far; two were cleared and ten were struck from the register.
The assistant registrar has only approved nine applications for people looking to join the register, rejecting 191 due to character issues. At least 17 instances are still being investigated.
Pastor Peters Omoragbon, the president of the Diaspora Nurses Association of Nigeria and executive president of Nurses Across the Borders, has accused the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) of “deliberately delaying” appeal hearings so that the Home Office could send notices to the impacted nurses, according to Nursing Times.
“That saves them the trouble of trying to prove or litigate,” said Omoragbon. The NMC can be charged with purposeful postponement in order to deny these nurses their UK residency privileges.
A representative for the NMC responded by denying any deliberate delays and highlighting the fact that the agency was collaborating with all stakeholders to effectively arrange hearings. “Our priority is to maintain the integrity of the register, and it is in everyone’s best interests for hearings to be held as swiftly and safely as possible.”
A recent appeal victory for one of its clients was emphasised by Broad Street Solicitors, who contended that the case’s circumstances were “materially the same” as those of other nurses it represents.
The corporation argued that the decision in the appeal should be applied uniformly to all cases that are comparable.
Nurse D, who chooses to remain anonymous, was referred to the Appeal Review (AR) after the NMC earlier determined that she had obtained her Computer-Based Test (CBT) unlawfully. It asserted that she took an absurdly short amount of time to finish the test.
But Nurse D insisted that she was able to finish fast because of her thorough preparation, the ease of the test, and her twelve years of nursing experience.
The AR determined that her test time was still inexplicable and declared her unfit for registration in spite of her explanations. Nurse D, however, successfully appealed this ruling in December 2024.
Nurse D, speaking on behalf of the Royal College of Nursing, demonstrated during the hearing her intense study regimen, which included four and a half months of planning, significant study guide use, and practice with hundreds of sample questions.
The panel recognised her excellent level of clinical experience and numeracy skills and agreed that 70% of the exam questions matched those she had studied for.
Her explanation was therefore deemed believable by the tribunal, which overturned the NMC’s ruling and instructed the registrar to add her to the register. Since then, the NMC has been encouraged by Broad Street Solicitors to use the same logic for all impacted nurses.
The NMC argued that although it takes into account all panel judgements, each case is evaluated independently when asked if Nurse D’s case will have an impact on future hearings.
The regulator restated that independent case-by-case evaluations were required because its inquiry had revealed trends of quick test completion and proxy testing.
Restoring expelled nurses throughout their appeals, accelerating all appeal procedures, and communicating with the Home Office to avoid visa cancellations and deportations were among the demands made to the NMC by Broad Street Solicitors.
Additionally, it required a thorough explanation if Nurse D’s appeal was successful and the NMC declined to reinstate nurses.
The firm threatened to initiate judicial review procedures and claim legal expenses against the NMC if it did not take action within 14 days.
The NMC said that it had asked the Home Office for more information but that it was unable to comment on ongoing legal issues.
It reiterated its dedication to settling matters quickly and coordinating with all parties to set up hearings as soon as possible.
“We are determined to minimise that distress while ensuring public safety,” said Lesley Maslen, executive director of professional regulation at the NMC, who acknowledged the distress caused by regulatory action.
We are still committed to finding a quick and equitable solution to these issues, but independent panels must evaluate each one separately.”