Department of Health

Website of the Department of Health

Please note that this website has a UK government access keys system.

You are here:

Chapter 22: Care Concern's schools in Clwyd

22.01  As we have said in our earlier outline of private residential establishments for children in care[313], Care Concern was the name given in 1976 to an organisation conceived by David Rattray, a former Deputy Director of Social Services for Denbighshire, which opened a new independent private school for boys known as Ystrad Hall in 1974. This was the name of the property, owned by Rattray, on which the school was sited on the A5 road on the Corwen side of Llangollen; and it comprised two residential units, that is, the Hall itself and an hotel known as Eirianfa Hotel, which Rattray had run as a business, together with 14 acres of land.

22.02  Ystrad Hall was registered as a school provisionally in September 1974 and fully in October 1975. A fire damaged one of the two residential units (Eirianfa) at the end of the decade and the school ceased to be registered in May 1981, when it closed because of a substantial fall in the number of pupils. It was re-opened, however, as a residential school for girls on about half the site, called Berwyn College for Girls, almost immediately and Berwyn College was registered from 13 August 1981 to 31 March 1985. Although it was a school for girls, it did admit some boys during a period of industrial action by social workers.

  22.03  The 20 to 22 senior boys who were living in Eirianfa at Ystrad Hall when the fire occurred were transferred to another residential establishment (previously occupied by priests) that had been acquired by Care Concern. This was St David's College at Carrog, near Corwen, which was a school for girls and which was provisionally registered as such. The boys' period of exile there lasted about eight months but Ystrad Hall school closed quite soon after their return. The 12 or so girls who were at St David's College transferred to the new Berwyn College and St David's College became a home for adults with learning disabilities. We have not received any complaints of physical or sexual abuse at St David's College.

  22.04  The activities of Care Concern were not confined to the three schools that we have so far discussed in this chapter. They opened also in 1976 schools in Gwynedd known as Cartref Melys[314] near Conway and Hengwrt Hall at Rhydymain between Dolgellau and Bala. The latter will be dealt with in Part VIII of this Report. The boys left at Ystrad Hall on its closure were offered places at Cartref Melys. In addition, Care Concern ran a halfway house accommodating 13 boys at Chester, a residential home for adults with learning difficulties in Colwyn Bay and a residential home known as The Village at Llangwyfan in Clwyd. Although the latter was essentially a home for adults, it did cater for some teenagers and we will make brief reference to it again later in this chapter.

Ystrad Hall School

  22.05  This school was registered as a school catering wholly or mainly for handicapped pupils in the socially maladjusted category. The age range was, in general, 11 to 16 years and the permitted number of pupils was not specified but there were usually 50 to 55 boys in residence. The school did not have general SEN approval but exceptional admissions of statemented pupils were authorised from time to time[315]. One of the recommendations made by the Registrar on granting final registration on 21 October 1975 was that "Greater care should be taken in the vetting of pupils to ensure that too many disruptive boys are not admitted at the same time".

  22.06  The structure of the school was that there were two substantial residential blocks (the country house and the former hotel) and a separate free-standing demountable block of classrooms. The Principal was in day-to-day charge of both care and education and there were two Assistant Principals, one responsible for care, the other for education. The bulk of the teaching was undertaken by two senior teachers, a remedial specialist and six class teachers. On the care side, each residential unit had a House Warden, three Senior Care Officers and six Assistant Care Officers.

  22.07  The person with the main administrative responsibility for Ystrad Hall School was Richard Ernest Leake, who was recruited by David Rattray from Bersham Hall, where Leake had been Officer-in-Charge or Superintendent from 4 August 1972[316]. He was 33 years old when he joined Rattray on 1 July 1974 and had about 16 years relevant experience, having worked in the administrative department of a local education authority and in a children's department before becoming a care worker in increasingly senior positions in a children's home and a variety of remand and assessment centres. He had also obtained in 1972 an advanced certificate in residential care from Bristol University. Leake was the first Principal of Ystrad Hall School but, when Care Concern acquired Cartref Melys in 1976, he became an administrator with the title of Assistant Director of Professional Services and two years later he was advanced to Director. He continued to carry the same responsibilities within the organisation (under the title Assistant Director from 1980 with Rattray as Director) until January 1986 when he became involved in preparations for extending the organisation to the south of England; but he left a year later to work in the private sector in Kent, caring for adults with learning difficulties.

  22.08  Rattray advertised the school widely amongst local authorities in England and Wales and the lists of pupils that we have seen show that it was mainly used by distant English local authorities. A few were admitted from Gwynedd but there appears to have been a clash of personalities in relation to Clwyd, possibly stemming from the recruitment of both Leake and the Headteacher from Bersham Hall, and we are not aware of the admission of any Clwyd child. It was noted by HMI Stone, when reporting on a visit made on 17 May 1979 that:

"Boys from this school very rarely return to their home community until they have attained school leaving age and a special dispensation has had to be granted for one or two boys for whom no suitable outlet was available at school leaving age . . . Although the aim of the school is to return boys to their home as soon as possible so far this has not happened to any extent. The proprietor was unable to quote exact numbers but said it would be in the order of ones or twos rather than any significant number."

  22.09  Despite the comparatively short life of this school no less than 40 former residents made complaints of abuse subsequently to the police and about 20 members of staff in all were named in those complaints.

Allegations of sexual abuse

  22.10  An early culprit was Bryan Davies, who was named as a sexual abuser by eight former residents. Davies had been appointed Deputy Principal or Warden of Eirianfa unit, which housed boys aged from 11 to 14 years, in or about 1975, having had some previous experience of residential care work with children. He was arrested on 25 May 1978, however, and subsequently convicted in Llangollen Magistrates' Court on 4 September 1978 of three offences of indecent assault upon two residents of the school, for which he was made subject to a probation order for 12 months, with a condition requiring him to undergo hospital treatment, and ordered to perform 160 hours community service[317]. He did not return to the school after his arrest.

  22.11  We received the evidence of two of the eight complainants, neither of whom was the subject of the charges on which Davies was arrested. A, who gave oral evidence, was a boy from the Midlands who was a resident of Eirianfa for nearly a year at the age of 14 years. He said that he was taken to Davies' home on two occasions by another care worker when he thought that the purpose of the visit was preparation of a report for a case conference. On both occasions Davies made A fondle Davies' groin and did the same to him. He reported what had happened to Davies' Deputy, Christopher Williamson, four to six weeks later and thought that nothing had been done about it but he learnt later that Davies had subsequently been convicted of other similar offences. He said also that Davies would have known from his social services file that he had been sexually abused previously by his step-father.

  22.12  Witness B said in his written statement that he went to the school when he was 12 years old (probably in 1977 when he was 13 years old). One day, when he was telephoning his mother, Davies came up behind him and started to rub his chest and the side of his leg; Davies then started to do something to B's penis so B turned around and kicked Davies.

  22.13  Leake's evidence was that he was aware that some boys would stay from time to time with Davies and Davies' wife at their home. He was not suspicious because he knew Mrs Davies and the home. Leake learnt of a complaint by a boy resident (neither A nor B) when the Principal, Susan Hildred, telephoned him about it. He was horrified and informed the police immediately. Leake and Hildred then went to Davies' home and suspended him forthwith. They did not carry out an investigation themselves but Davies was dismissed following certain admissions that he made to the police.

  22.14  It was not possible for the Tribunal to serve Davies with a Salmon letter and we have not received any statement from him. We do not know, therefore, the extent of his express admissions but we have no reason to doubt the correctness of his convictions or the evidence that we received of his additional indecent assault on B. There is difficulty, however, about A's evidence in relation to dates, which we explain in paragraphs 22.21 and 22.25.

  22.15  We were not able to investigate allegations of sexual abuse made against Leake himself by former residents of Ystrad Hall School because they were the subject of continuing police investigation[318].

  22.16  Four other members of the staff (one unidentified) and one resident were the subject of allegations of sexual abuse made by five different former residents, each of whom referred to only one abuser. As we understand the position, police officers investigated the allegations, which were not corroborated, and no prosecution ensued. The evidence of two of these complainants was read to us. In his first statement to the police, made in prison on 10 August 1992, this witness, C, described in detail how he had been indecently assaulted and later buggered by a named member of staff in a staff bedroom at Eirianfa. He alleged that the last occasion when buggery occurred was shortly before the fire at Eirianfa. He had not complained to any member of the staff about what had been done to him but he had confided in four named friends.

  22.17  Although that statement reads quite straightforwardly, doubt about the general credibility of the witness C arises from two subsequent statements that he made. Shortly after his first statement a former resident told the police that he had seen C assaulted physically on two occasions by another member of the staff, Christopher (Chris) Williamson. C was seen, therefore, on 26 November 1992 by a police officer, who wished to ascertain whether C would confirm the allegation. In response, however, C denied that he had been assaulted by Williamson and said he recalled the latter only vaguely as a handyman who had never worked as a care assistant. C described Williamson as an elderly man with a grey beard who was cross-eyed.

  22.18  C made his third statement on 16 January 1997 when he was seen by a representative of the Tribunal. In that statement he repudiated the second statement attributed to him, saying that he did not make it and that its contents were not true. He went on to say (contrary to his first statement) that he had complained to Williamson in his office about the first act of buggery on the day after it had occurred, but that he did not recall anything being done about it. Later in the same statement to the Tribunal C gave a full description of Williamson, putting his age in the early forties, and alleged that Williamson had assaulted him twice physically: the first occasion was when he had complained of being buggered, whereupon Williamson had come around his desk, grabbed him by the shoulder and smacked him across the face and had then pushed him down on to an arm chair, shouting "No, he didn't do it"; and the second occasion was when he repeated the allegation of buggery by a member of the staff to Williamson after some discussion with a friend's father and Williamson had thumped him on the face and head and kicked him in the ribs when he went to the floor.

  22.19  The internal conflicts between these three statements are such that we cannot be sure that any of them is correct. The other complainant whose evidence was read named another young boy as his abuser and it has not been appropriate to pursue that allegation.

Allegations of physical abuse

  22.20  The main target of complaints about physical abuse was Christopher Williamson, to whom we referred in paragraph 22.17 and who was named by 12 complainants. Two of these, however, alleged only that he had failed to act upon complaints made to him. Williamson went to Ystrad Hall as a care officer in March 1976 at the age of 23 years, after working at a remand centre for two years. His only training was an in-service pre-qualifying course in residential care for children involving attendance at Cartrefle College once per week for a year. Nevertheless, he was promoted to Deputy Officer-in-Charge of the Eirianfa Unit, under Bryan Davies, after six months. Williamson remained at Eirianfa until 1981 and then worked successively at St David's College, Carrog[319], and The Village, Llangwyfan[320], mainly with adults. After leaving Care Concern's employ in 1986 he went to South Glamorgan as a senior RCCO.

  22.21  We received evidence from three of the complainants against Williamson, two of whom were A[321] and C and the latter's complaints have already been dealt with[322]. A's complaint against Williamson was that the latter failed to pass on or act upon the complaint of A that Bryan Davies had sexually assaulted him. There is considerable confusion about this allegation, however, because A says that his complaint was made towards the end of his stay at Ystrad Hall, which was from 13 March 1978 to 5 February 1979, whereas Davies was arrested on 25 May 1978 and never returned after that date to Ystrad Hall. Williamson was firm in his own recollection that two other boys complained to him on 20 May 1978, in circumstances that he described in detail, of sexual assaults by Davies. These two boys were the victims named in the subsequent criminal charges against Davies and he (Williamson) believed their complaints. He reported the matter directly to Leake so that Leake could investigate and he did not tell Davies about the complaints, despite the fact that Davies was a friend of his. Williamson did not recall A's complaint.

  22.22  The result of all this is that we cannot accept that there was any cover up or failure to report by Williamson. Moreover, A said in cross-examination that he trusted Williamson and thought that he was "a good bloke". The other "complainant" against Williamson made a written statement in which he merely said that Williamson had once dragged him downstairs: he added that Williamson had later apologised to him for doing so and that he did not wish to complain about the matter. Finally, another witness (not one of the 12 complainants referred to in paragraph 22.20) alleged that he was kicked across the boot room by another member of staff (thought now to be in Holland) and that he had complained to Bryan Davies. The witness said that he was about 15 years old at the time and that he was "on about going to the police about it" to "a couple of the lads" but Williamson warned them not to go to the police. Speaking generally of Ystrad Hall, however, this witness said that the regime was good.

  22.23  It follows that there is no basis, on the evidence that we have received, for a finding that Williamson physically abused children at Ystrad Hall and we are not satisfied that he condoned such abuse. In his own evidence to us he denied any such behaviour.

  22.24  Although 11 other former members of the staff were alleged by individual former residents (in statements to the police) to have committed physical assaults upon them of varying gravity, only one was named by as many as three former residents, most of them were named by only one and few of these complainants provided statements to the Tribunal. Witness A, for example, complained that Bryan Davies had assaulted him physically as well as sexually but there are difficulties about the dates when some of the physical assaults are alleged to have occurred, as in respect of the alleged sexual assaults.

  22.25  A was a persistent offender who had been sent from Nottingham to Ystrad Hall for that reason. According to his oral evidence, he and two others burgled a factory next to the school six days after his arrival, when Davies was still in charge of Eirianfa. He said that the police were involved in investigating the burglary and, when the culprits returned to Eirianfa, they were put in the office before Davies, who punched A in the ribs and slapped him across the face (he was not able to say precisely what happened to the other two). On another occasion A crept out at night and drove the school's minibus around the compound but was caught by one of the night security staff with the result that he received similar punishment from Davies in the latter's office next day. His identification of Davies on another occasion must have been wrong because he said that he was struck by Davies in the same office early in October 1978 on his return to Eirianfa after he had absconded from a local judo club to London with two other boys.

22.26  Other allegations of physical abuse by staff members that we heard in evidence were of variable weight. One former resident whose evidence was read, for example, alleged generally that he had been hit by staff for no reason whilst another spoke (in his third statement to the police) of being punched in the face by a named member of staff, with a resulting nose bleed, after he had been cheeky to a woman dietician, who was checking the diet. This witness alleged also that he had seen the same male staff member punch and head-butt another boy without any provocation.

  22.27  The treatment of the former resident who alleged that he had been buggered by another boy at Ystrad Hall[323] did give rise to anxiety for other reasons when he was resident there between September 1977 and April 1981. This witness, D, whose evidence was read to us, originated from Wiltshire and had been admitted to Gwynfa Residential Unit for about eight months before moving to Ystrad Hall. His hyperactive and intrusive behaviour antagonised both the staff and his fellow residents with the result that he was subjected to frequent bullying, and it seems that he may also have been accident prone. In May 1978, when D was 13 years old, Care Concern's Properties Manager and the Domestic Supervisor became concerned about D for differing reasons and the upshot was that Leake carried out an investigation, including a survey of D's recent injuries. The investigation disclosed that at least three members of the staff had physically chastised D and each of them was cautioned. The school's prohibition of corporal punishment was also re-affirmed to all members of the staff. Leake's view was that D had been suffering excessive physical abuse because of the inexperience of staff, who were unable to understand the depths of his problems, and the frustration of his peer group, who were unable to cope with him.

Welsh Office inspections

  22.28  From the documents produced to us, it appears that Ystrad Hall School was visited by HMIs on five occasions, the last being a formal inspection.

  22.29  The first two visits were made on 19 November 1974 and 26 February 1975 in connection with the school's application for full registration following its provisional registration in September 1974. The second of the visits was a follow up by an SWSO with two HMIs because, although the teaching arrangements had been found to be adequate on the first visit, subject to expansion of the provision for abler children, there had been some criticism of the care arrangements. In particular, it had been said that the dormitories were unheated and overcrowded and that additional spaces ought to be provided in the residential units for privacy. The report by the SWSO on the second visit emphasised that the nature of the visit allowed for only impressions of the quality of care provided and no recommendations were made. On a third visit by HMI a year later, however, when 54 boys were on the roll, the school made a satisfactory general impression.

  22.30  The fourth visit did not take place until 17 May 1979, when two HMIs (and another HMI as observer) called at the school. The report of this visit did not comment directly on the quality of care but the inspectors told Rattray that they considered that the residential care arrangements were very poor. They commented to him also upon "the poor standards of work and behaviour in the education block", which they attributed directly to inadequate supervision and implementation of organisational plans and schemes devised by the Head of the school (Susan Hildred). For these reasons they thought that a formal inspection ought to take place later in the year.

  22.31  That inspection, by two HMIs, took place on 3 December 1979 and resulted in a favourable report, although time did not permit the inspectors to visit the residential part of the school. In relation to that, the inspectors appear to have accepted an assurance that considerable reorganisation had taken place and that the general standards were much improved. On the educational side they found that there had been complete reorganisation and a number of changes of staff. There were 53 boys attending the school, who were taught in eight groups of varying size, including a remedial group of four. All the classrooms were visited and the improvement in their layout and decor and in the display of children's work was said to be quite remarkable. The domestic subjects teacher's achievement in developing her work and the boys' involvement were also praised as "most remarkable". The reporting inspector concluded:

"I do not think we would any longer have any justification for withholding placement, provided the overall number did not exceed 56[324]. I think, however, that these 2 visits illustrate the absolute necessity for regular and close monitoring of independent schools of this kind. With our present manpower we are unable to do this, and will therefore, always be to some extent 'at risk' with these establishments."

Conclusions

  22.32  We have not been able to obtain a full picture of the alleged abuse at Ystrad Hall School and some serious matters remain unresolved. The fact that sexual abuse has been proved here too gives additional cause for substantial concern and adds to the gloomy history that we have narrated in earlier chapters. Sexual abuse apart, the record of the school was patchy. It is clear that other physical abuse did occur on quite frequent occasions early on and that the prohibition on corporal punishment was not fully observed but it is reasonable to infer from the dates before us that physical abuse became less frequent as time went on, probably after the investigation by Leake into D's treatment. The quality of care fluctuated but the school might have survived, bearing in mind the improvements noted on the inspection in December 1979, but for the fire in the Eirianfa unit that occurred very soon afterwards and the consequent disruption. We draw attention, however, to the passage from the inspector's report cited in the preceding paragraph in which he emphasised the need for regular inspections and monitoring of this type of school.

Berwyn College for Girls

  22.33  We can deal with the history of this school over a period of about three and a half years from August 1981 to the end of March 1985 quite shortly. It was established in the Ystrad Hall unit of Ystrad Hall School when the latter closed. The Eirianfa unit was never part of the new school, which occupied seven or eight acres of the original 14 acre site on the banks of the River Dee. Ystrad Hall itself, the former country house, served as residential and recreational accommodation, with dormitories on the upper floors. There was also a demountable house with two bedrooms, living room, kitchen and bathroom, which was used as an independence unit for training in daily living routines; and the classrooms, which had been used by Ystrad Hall School, were in demountable single storey buildings about 200 yards from the main house.

  22.34  The school does not appear to have achieved full registration before it closed. When it was provisionally registered on 13 August 1981 it was said that HMI would visit the school in the near future and that the Secretary of State would communicate his further decision about the school after that. In the event, however, the visit did not take place until 1 and 2 November 1984 and the Welsh Office was informed of the decision of Care Concern to close the school by letter dated 10 January 1985, when the inspector's report was about to be, or had only just been, signed. Nevertheless, the school was granted exceptional SEN approval for named pupils on at least seven occasions[325].

  22.35  At the time when the school was provisionally registered there were 17 resident pupils in the age range of 13 to 16 years, including the 12 pupils who had been transferred from St David's College. The staffing establishment of the new school was said to be based on 24 beds. By November 1983 it had been agreed with the Welsh Office that up to 27 girls could be admitted but Care Concern then informed HMI that it was intended that the school should function on a co-educational basis with an additional 28 placements (presumably bringing the Eirianfa unit into use again), beginning the admission of additional pupils on and after 1 December 1983. This received the response in January 1984 that HMI were prepared to agree provisionally to an increase in numbers, provided that it was a gradual increase and that Care Concern was perfectly satisfied that the care and safety arrangements were adequate. Almost exactly a year later, however, there were only 12 resident pupils and Care Concern decided that the school would close on 31 March 1985.

  22.36  From the few lists of pupils at Berwyn College that we have seen, it appears that they were drawn from quite a wide range of local authorities. London boroughs were particularly prominent and there were children from a number of southern English counties. We know of only one placement from Wales, by Gwent County Council.

  22.37  The full inspection by two HMIs on 1 and 2 November 1984 was successful from the school's point of view. There were then 15 pupils at the school, aged between 14 and 16 years. They were divided into four classes, each of mixed ability. All the pupils were in the care of a local authority and about half of them had formal statements of special educational need. The majority were in care because they had been out of parental control or truanting from school or the subject of a place of safety order. They had all been referred by social services departments and the average length of stay was two years (a minimum of six months was expected), continuing usually to school leaving age. A prospective pupil was required to visit with her social worker before a place was offered to her and parents were encouraged to attend. The pupil was assessed over an eight week period on admission after which she was reviewed and subsequent reviews (involving the social worker, pupil and staff) were at six monthly intervals.

  22.38  The inspectors found that the residential leisure facilities were adequate in size and reasonably well furnished and decorated: the dormitories were functional and orderly rather than homely. Their comments on the education programme and the quality of care were generally favourable and the conclusion of the inspector who signed the report was summarised as follows:

"Berwyn College is well organised and supported by the Care Concern Organisation and provides a stable and supportive background for young girls with certain kinds of social, emotional and behavioural problems. The general arrangements and the care programme are vigorously implemented and supervised by the Principal[326] but there are some weaknesses in the provision of education, which could be overcome if the same degree of oversight were exercised in this sector. Despite these weaknesses, in some of the education provision, the overall standard of provision is such that it should be approved under the Education Act 1981 . . . I suggest that, without holding up approval, reference to the need to continue with the development of sound schemes of work and to ensure that they are fully implemented, should be made in the covering letter."

Allegations of abuse

  22.39  Berwyn College attracted some unhelpful local publicity in September 1982 when two resident girls, aged 14 and 15 years respectively, pleaded guilty at Llangollen Juvenile Court to an offence of arson at the school. They had deliberately set a bed in a spare bedroom alight, causing damage estimated at £2,500. Fortunately, the local fire brigade had responded promptly to the alarm. The explanation given by one of the girls was that she hated the college to which she had been sent by a local authority; and it was said by a solicitor on behalf of one of the two that "she had been so upset that this week-end she had tried to take an overdose and to cut her throat". The girls were made subject to orders of conditional discharge for two years.

  22.40  We are not aware of any complaint of sexual abuse at Berwyn College.

  22.41  We received copies of statements made to the police by eight former residents of Berwyn College who alleged that they had been assaulted whilst they were there. One of these complained only about a fight that she had with another resident on her arrival at the school, which she regarded as a form of initiation ceremony, connived at by the staff and intended to put her in her place. The other seven all complained of physical abuse by David Trevor Tinniswood, mainly in the form of excessive restraint. Only one of the seven, however, provided evidence to the Tribunal and he was the only male complainant who made allegations against Tinniswood.

  22.42  David Tinniswood was employed by Care Concern for about seven years, starting in October 1979, when he was 31 years old. He had not had any previous training in or experience of residential child care work but he had been a certificated teacher for 12 months at the end of the 1960s before running the family hotel and a couple of shops at Corwen for most of the 1970s. He was taken on by Care Concern initially as a care officer at Ystrad Hall School, moving with the boys to St David's College after the fire and then back to the previous campus until the school closed. He then worked at Berwyn College before moving in 1984 or 1985 to Cartref Melys until June or July 1986, when the latter was due to close. After Care Concern he worked for seven years or so with adults with learning difficulties as an employee of Clwyd Social Services Department until he ceased work to look after his father. Tinniswood said that he did not receive any actual training whilst working for Care Concern, apart from staff development meetings: courses were available for some members of the staff but he was not selected for one.

  22.43  During his period at Berwyn College, Tinniswood was listed initially as one of the assistant teachers but he was later shown as a Group Leader on the care staff. The former pupils remembered him as a member of staff who was mainly involved in outdoor activities. The male former resident who complained about him, E, was a Coventry boy who had been taken into care at the age of nine months and who was just 16 years old when he went to Berwyn College at the end of 1983 for about six months after being expelled from other schools. E said in his oral evidence to the Tribunal that he did not "get on" with any of the staff: he simply looked on in the classroom and did not learn very much. He had particular trouble with Tinniswood, who was then a Group Leader and who thought that he could make E do things that E did not want to do. E alleged that more than once Tinniswood slapped him in the face and kicked him on his legs. E added that he ran away every day but he would be taken to the police station, told off and then sent back to the school.

  22.44  E said also that he was a regular glue sniffer and that on one occasion Tinniswood caught him doing this by the canal. Tinniswood punched and kicked him and then dragged him all the way to the college from the canal.

  22.45  Tinniswood denied all the former girl residents' allegations when he was interviewed by the police and said that they were made by a certain type of girl within the school. In his oral evidence to the Tribunal and in his written statement he dealt specifically with E's allegations and denied that he ever punched or kicked E. Tinniswood explained that E was only admitted to Berwyn College because of the national industrial action by social workers until a placement could be found for him in his home area. It was necessary to restrain E or to remove him from situations on several occasions to prevent him from harming himself and others when he was intoxicated as a result of solvent abuse; one of his practices had been to stand motionless ("playing statues") on the A5 trunk road, which ran past the college. Tinniswood did not recall now the alleged incident by the canal but said that he would have had to drag E back to the school for his own protection in the circumstances described. Speaking more generally of E, Tinniswood described him as "a loner", who was a victim of the industrial action and who should not have been at Berwyn College. Despite several hiccups the school thought that progress had been made with him because it was agreed at one stage that, on leaving, he would go to live at Berwyn Station on the Llangollen Railway and become stationmaster there, subject to overcoming his solvent abuse.

  22.46  The allegations against Tinniswood illustrate the problems that are likely to arise if an untrained care worker is placed in charge of disturbed children, who may have to be restrained physically from time to time. The dangers are aggravated if the children are girls and the care worker is a robust man. In the absence of any evidence to the Tribunal from the former girl residents, however, it would be inappropriate for us to make any finding about their complaints. In relation to E we suspect that he is more bitter now than he was at the time, even though he never wanted to be at Berwyn College. Such contemporary documents as we have seen confirm his problems and suggest that he was handled quite sensitively. They show also that work was arranged for him on the local railway (his major interest was in his model railway, which he had with him) and, in one review, reference was made to his "nice rapport" with Tinniswood, who had suggested the work on the railway. We are not satisfied therefore, that Tinniswood was guilty of slapping or kicking him habitually or of using excessive force in returning him from the canal to the school.

Conclusions

  22.47  The evidence before us does not suggest that Berwyn College was a school in which physical or sexual abuse of children occurred. It took upon itself the difficult task of looking after emotionally disturbed girls far from their own homes and achieved a degree of success, despite the shortcomings in training of most of the staff. Tinniswood spoke feelingly, however, of "working in a dustbin" because members of the staff felt that they were taking on responsibilities that had been abandoned by the placement authorities. We do not endorse that view but we shall comment again later upon the undesirability of distant placements and the problems that arise when children who have been subject to them leave school. It must be added that, although the basic quality of care at Berwyn College was probably adequate, it was formal and rather rigid, lacking much of the quality of homeliness, which is an important aspect of a young girl's training for life.

The Village, Llangwyfan

  22.48  A postscript about this establishment is necessary, although it was neither a children's home nor a residential school, because it was owned by Care Concern and was the subject of complaints by one witness who gave oral evidence to the Tribunal.

  22.49  The Village occupied the site of a former purpose built sanatorium for tuberculosis patients established under the auspices of the King Edward VII Memorial Fund in a village near Ruthin. Care Concern opened its residential institution there in March 1983 with the object of providing training for persons of both sexes between the ages of 16 and 65 years with learning difficulties and it included workshops in which residents could learn a variety of appropriate trades.

  22.50  We deal with this matter briefly because the witness, F, does not appear to have been in care when he went to live at The Village on 28 June 1983, at the age of 16 years 8 months. F's background was that he had been born prematurely and suffered from both cerebral palsy and epilepsy. After he had attended special schools, The Village was recommended to his mother and his social worker and others and he stayed there for just over five years. F's complaints came to light in June 1996 (the month when he made a statement to the police) after he had seen a television programme and had communicated with a television company, which led to appearances on television and radio and interviews with the press.

  22.51  The allegations made by F in his oral evidence to the Tribunal, were that (a) he had been indecently assaulted and buggered by a member of the staff on one occasion before his 18th birthday at The Village in the latter's office behind a locked door in an incident that lasted 20 to 30 minutes; (b) he had also been indecently assaulted and buggered on numerous occasions by a fellow resident several years older then him (who was a known homosexual) from before his 18th birthday until he left; (c) he had been punched in the stomach by two members of the staff independently of each other on two separate occasions but that he had become quite good friends with one of the two later.

  22.52  Whilst we have no specific reason to doubt the veracity of allegation (b), it is impossible for us to be satisfied that (a) and (c) are correct. We heard evidence from the staff member referred to in (a) and he denied the allegations vehemently, describing it as "absolute rubbish". Moreover, it is the only allegation of that kind that has been made against him in respect of a long period of service with Care Concern in various establishments. There is no evidence whatsoever tending to confirm the allegation and, like the allegations in (c), it is said to have been an isolated incident, which was never repeated.

  22.53  In these circumstances it is not appropriate for us to comment further upon the regime at The Village.

Footnotes:

313   See paras 4.12 to 4.16.

314   See para 5.08.

315   See Appendix 6, paras 38 and 39.

316   See paras 13.07 and 50.31(6).

317   See para 2.07(3).

318   See para 50.31(6) for the position in September 1999

319   See para 22.03.

320   See para 22.04.

321   See para 22.11.

322   See paras 22.17 and 22.18.

323   See para 22.19.

324   This referred to a temporary suspension of further exceptional SEN approvals recommended by the same inspector in July 1979 following the fourth visit but not apparently implemented by the Welsh Office.

325   See Appendix 6, paras 38 and 39

326   Shirley Smith-Jones.

Access keys