CET and skills guides

Study and gain CET points through OT’s online CET exams, and access archived CET, CPD articles and skills guides in our education library

Find out more

Science and vision

News and features about the latest scientific developments and advances in optometry, ophthalmology and eye medicine

Find out more


News and features about the latest developments in optics with a focus on industry

Find out more

Professional support

News and features about the latest developments relating to professional support from across optics. This includes updates from optical organisations such as the AOP and the GOC

Find out more

In practice

News and in-depth features about business management and career development in optics

Find out more


Explore the latest UK and global jobs in the optical sector for optometrists, dispensing opticians and more

Find out more

Optometrist suspended following sight test failures

A Bradford-based practitioner has been suspended for three months after failing to carry out adequate sight tests and keep adequate records

GOC reception
Bradford-based optometrist, Shahid Nazir (GOC registration 01-20683), has received a three-month suspension order from the General Optical Council (GOC) after a fitness to practise committee found he had failed to carry out adequate sight tests and keep adequate records.

The committee found that in relation to several patients, Mr Nazir completed inaccurate records that did not reflect what he had seen or done during the eye examination.

“While a number of the factual findings on their own may not be serious enough to constitute misconduct, taken cumulatively they gave rise to a risk to continuity of patient care, and therefore a risk of harm to patients,” the committee stated in its decision.

In mitigation, the committee considered the remorse and insight shown by Mr Nazir, the remediation steps he had taken, his self-referral to the GOC and the likely financial hardship he would face if suspended.

“The committee also bore in mind the public interest in allowing a competent and valuable professional to continue to practise,” the decision stated.

The committee determined that a three-month suspension would be proportionate to reflect the seriousness of the dishonesty as well as the mitigating factors in the case.