Website of the Department of Health

39.37  In the light of this 1987 report the Welsh Office started to draft a Notice of Complaint as a prelude to removing Ysgol Hengwrt from the register. However, the process of removal was very protracted. Inspectors visited the school in June 1988, in September and October 1989 and again on 31 January 1990. All their reports were critical of the school and the last of these visits took place shortly after the London Borough of Brent had removed six pupils that they had placed at the school, leaving only two pupils on the roll. But it was not until Hett wrote to the Welsh Office on 7 March 1990 referring to the "demise" of the school that the WOED felt able to remove it from the register on the basis that the school no longer existed.

  39.38  The saga was not yet over, however, because on 12 July 1990 Hett informed the WOED that there were five pupils[529] at Ysgol Hengwrt once more and applied to be registered again as an independent school. The WOED concluded in September 1990 that this application had to be granted, by which time the number of pupils on the roll had risen to seven. There followed yet another inspection in December 1990, when there were eight pupils (six boys, two girls), aged 15 and 16 years, who had been placed there by the social services departments of English local authorities, primarily for social rather than educational reasons. All of them were described as having severe emotional and behavioural difficulties. By this time Hett was absent during the week, taking his full-time post-graduate course at Exeter and returning to Ysgol Hengwrt only at week-ends. There were three teachers, who had replaced others who had resigned in October 1990, and nine care assistants, none of whom had a professional qualification and eight of whom had been recruited from August 1990 onwards. The police had been involved on 15 occasions between 13 September and 8 December 1990 in matters affecting these pupils, including some visits to help staff to restore order.

  39.39  The inspectors concluded that, although the accommodation was of a generally satisfactory standard, the staffing of the school was unsatisfactory, the curriculum was inadequately developed and the care arrangements did not ensure that pupils were adequately supervised. In their view individual teachers and care assistants made considerable efforts to teach the pupils and to deal with them with kindness and understanding but, as a whole, the school made unsatisfactory provision for the education and care of pupils.

  39.40  Even this further adverse report did not result in the early removal of Ysgol Hengwrt from the register of independent schools. The WOED wrote to Hett on 10 April 1991 requiring him to carry out specified improvements within six months; and copies of that letter and the published HMI report were circulated to all authorities in England and Wales. A probable consequence of this adverse publicity was that, when HMI again visited the school in November 1991, there was only one pupil on the roll. Shortly after this visit Hett wrote to the WOED indicating that he proposed to seek registration of Ysgol Hengwrt with Gwynedd County Council as a community home with education[530]. Acting on this information Ysgol Hengwrt was finally removed from the register of independent schools on 9 December 1991 but the proprietor was reminded that, if five children or more were to receive full time education on the premises, it would again be necessary to register as an independent school.

Complaints of sexual abuse

  39.41  We are not aware of any former resident of Ynys Fechan Hall who complains of sexual abuse during the Hett regime there.

  39.42  One former resident of Dol Rhyd School, who was there in 1983 and 1984 did complain of sexual abuse. He alleged that he was buggered against his will by another boy resident, who was older than him and a bully; but he did not make a complaint about it, as far as we know, until he made a statement to the police in March 1993. He said that he had consensual homosexual relationships with other boys whilst he was at the school from the age of 13 years. This complainant alleged further that he was indecently assaulted briefly by hand in his bedroom by a male member of the staff. He did not report the incident but the member of staff was dismissed within a week of its occurrence, apparently for other reasons.

  39.43  It is to be noted also that HMIs who visited Dol Rhyd School much earlier in November 1981 were informed that one of the care staff had been summarily dismissed following an allegation by a pupil of sexual interference.

  39.44  Three former residents of Ysgol Hengwrt complained of sexual abuse by a member of the staff there but the alleged perpetrator was different in respect of each of them. Attempting to deal with them chronologically, the first was a girl (A) who arrived on 2 June 1987 from a children's home in Altrincham and who remained at Ysgol Hengwrt until 11 March 1988. A alleged that a senior member of the staff (X) befriended her initially and then forced her to have sexual intercourse on many occasions, sometimes once or twice per week, until she complained to another member of the staff, who came from Liverpool. That member of the staff put the allegation to X, who denied it, but eventually, after A had absconded several times, the Liverpool man and his wife helped her to escape. She subsequently made a written statement to the police in Manchester but was later told that "there was no evidence".

  39.45  The second complainant was placed at Ysgol Hengwrt at the age of about 14 years, probably late 1986 or early in 1987, and he remained there until late in 1988. He alleged that during his period at Ysgol Hengwrt he was persistently indecently assaulted and buggered by a member of the staff. He did not make a complaint about this because he was threatened with an "unruly certificate"[531] if he did so. Eventually he ran away with two others and took a motor car, after which he was removed from Ysgol Hengwrt and went to live with his grandmother. He made a statement to the police in 1993 but a fellow resident who had been present when the alleged indecency began did not make any reference to it in his own statement.

  39.46  The third complainant, B, whose evidence was read to the Tribunal, was at Ysgol Hengwrt in or about 1989, when she was 16 years old. B had previously been at the Bryn Alyn home in Shropshire known as Cotsbrook, where concern about her relationship with a female member of the staff, Y, had led to B's transfer to another residential home in Birkenhead. B's evidence was that she was moved on to Ysgol Hengwrt after just over six months in Birkenhead and was surprised on her arrival there to find that Y was on the staff. B alleged that Y resumed abusing her sexually until it was discovered after about two months that she and Y were again together in the same home. B was thereupon transferred to Gatewen Hall[532].

  39.47  It appears from the evidence submitted by the Welsh Office that the complaints of A were reported to the Dolgellau Area Office of Gwynedd Social Services Department by the care worker from Liverpool already referred to and his girl friend on 11 March 1988, when they had been made redundant after only ten days' employment at Ysgol Hengwrt. Larry King[533] attended there and A was interviewed briefly about her complaints, as were the two care workers. The North Wales Police at Dolgellau, the Social Services Department (Trafford) responsible for A and the Welsh Office were all informed. Trafford agreed to collect A the same day in view of her refusal to return to Ysgol Hengwrt and the incident was reported to the Gwynedd Co-ordinating Committee. The member of staff accused denied A's allegations and said that they had been investigated (and dismissed) by Hett two months earlier. He was, however, the head of care referred to in paragraph 39.36, about whom his former employer had supplied a devastatingly critical report dated 5 October 1987; and he resigned in March 1988 following suspension in relation to A's allegations.

  39.48  After investigating A's complaint, Trafford Metropolitan Borough withdrew three pupils from Ysgol Hengwrt in March 1988. The same month the Metropolitan Borough of Sefton withdrew their only pupil placed there for the same reason.

  39.49  Although the allegations at the Hett residential establishments between 1974 and 1991 were few in number, some of them were particularly grave. We do not have sufficient evidence before us to adjudicate firmly upon the allegations but, on the material that we do have, it is likely that most of them were true; and it is noteworthy that in most of the cases the complainant and the source of abuse were separated at quite an early stage. The response of Hett to the case of A, however, gave rise to justifiable misgivings about his ability to look after children in care and inspectors had drawn attention earlier to the potential vulnerability of girl pupils because of the layout of their accommodation at Ysgol Hengwrt.

Complaints of physical abuse

  39.50  One of the many difficulties of investigating alleged abuse in the private residential establishments has been the fact that former residents of them are now very widely dispersed over the United Kingdom. Most of them were placed in North Wales from far afield with the result that they are difficult to trace now and many of them will be unaware of the existence of this Tribunal and its relevance to their experiences in care. We cannot be confident, therefore, that the picture that we have obtained of the extent of abuse in these homes is comprehensive.

  39.51  In the event 16 former residents of the Hett establishments are known to have complained of physical abuse to the police and 15 of these have made allegations against identified members of the staff. However, comparatively few of these related to the Dol Rhyd/Ynys Fechan period and most (ten) related to the period between 1986 and 1990 at Ysgol Hengwrt. We heard oral evidence, however, from only two witnesses about the earlier period and none about Ysgol Hengwrt.

  39.52  All three known complainants from Ynys Fechan Hall and one of the three from Dol Rhyd School alleged that they had been physically abused by Paul Hett and two of them complained about the other qualified social worker who was employed in the early years. The other complainant referred to two of the staff who were dismissed in December 1984[534].

  39.53  All these complaints were of the use of excessive physical force in a variety of circumstances. The first of the "live" witnesses said that he was sent to Dol Rhyd on 21 May 1976, when he was 12 years old, and that he remained there and at Ynys Fechan for four years. He was happy for the first two years but, when he grew older, he received beatings from Hett (he estimated four or five times in all). On one occasion when he was queuing at tea time, Hett just lashed out at him with his elbows and fists, hitting him in the mouth, with the result that his lip was cut, both inside and out, and his nose bled. There were three similar attacks on him by Hett later. On a couple of occasions other staff were present but he was not offered any assistance. He saw other children being struck similarly.

  39.54  The second "live witness" who was placed at Dol Rhyd very shortly afterwards, on 1 June 1976, was 14 years old; he was transferred to Ynys Fechan and remained there until 25 May 1978 but he ran away 15 times. This witness complained of regular beatings by Hett, about once a week and starting after he had been at the school about ten months. Some of the assaults occurred in the sitting room in front of other children and staff whilst others took place in Hett's private study. Hett would "chin" him (hit him under the chin with Hett's elbow) and thump him in the stomach or chest and sometimes the face. If he fell to the floor, he would be kicked in the stomach. Hett would not say anything whilst administering these beatings but would pull funny faces and, after them, the witness would be left with red marks, which would last two or three days. This witness too saw other children suffering similar beatings. However, the situation improved after he was moved to Ynys Fechan. His complaint against the other member of staff was that the latter would punch him on the spots where he knew the complainant to be sensitive and that on one occasion he was picked up by his cheeks, leaving marks for a fortnight.

  39.55  Two other former residents in the Dol Rhyd/Ynys Fechan period who made statements to the police made similar complaints about Hett (one of them also alleged physical abuse by the other qualified social worker); and two of the ten complainants who were at Ysgol Hengwrt also complained to the police of serious physical assaults by Hett. There were complaints to the police also in 1993 of serious physical assaults by two other members of the staff at Ysgol Hengwrt in the late 1980s. None of these other complainants provided evidence to the Tribunal and at least one of them told the police that he became used to the way of life at Ynys Fechan, considering it to have been "a fairly good time" for him. It is necessary to mention these other complaints, however, because the Welsh Office itself received a number of similar complaints at the time of ill-treatment by Hett and other members of the staff, particularly in the first half of the 1980s.

  39.56  In his written statement to the Tribunal the senior Welsh Office witness, John Lloyd, who was Director, Social Policy and Local Government within the Welsh Office from 1988, gave an account of these allegations of ill-treatment at the Hett establishments that were either made to or referred to the Welsh Office in the course of the 1980s. Thus, there was a complaint by an Islington parent in September 1980 that her son had been injured by Hett, which led to a visit by Gwynedd Social Services Department to Dol Rhyd School on 22 September 1980. The conclusion by Gwynedd was that the injury had been inflicted accidentally in the course of restraint. But just over a year later, following the dismissal of two members of the care staff, 16 London boroughs that had placed children at the Hett establishments attended a meeting (at which Hett was present for part of the time) to discuss reports about conditions there. The decision of the meeting was to notify Hett of a number of requirements in writing including an explicit policy for the phasing out of corporal punishment and the introduction of a clear complaints procedure. The London boroughs resolved also to undertake reviews of all the children placed there for a period of months. Then, in March 1982, a local prospective Parliamentary candidate produced a bundle of statements from pupils, a care worker and a teacher alleging ill-treatment at Dol Rhyd, mainly by Hett; and in late 1984 there were further allegations by a pupil alleging assaults by two teachers, which were investigated by the police (no prosecution ensued); and complaints by two members of the staff at Dol Rhyd, who requested private interviews with HMI to express their concerns about the running of the school, including the harsh treatment of pupils, followed by the dismissals of three senior members of staff in December 1984[535].

  39.57  Paul Hett denied all these allegations of assault when he gave oral evidence to the Tribunal. He said that the only corporal punishment used was the slipper and that was used very infrequently. Control of the children was exercised on "a family basis" and they tried to be caring and understanding. However, they were dealing with exceptionally disturbed children and he had to restrain residents throughout the years, which he had learnt how to do from his previous experience in a hospital, in a private approved school and, in particular, the care environment that he himself had developed. Some of the older and bigger pupils were violent and streetwise and had a tendency to go out to burgle and steal; he had to restore order in his school when violence occurred and there was no Welsh Office guidance on how to handle physical violence. Hett alleged also that at one stage from about 1989 Ysgol Hengwrt was receiving mainly 16 to 19 year olds because of the refusal of the Welsh Office to approve the admission of younger SEN children and Welsh Office warnings to local authorities intending to make placements, which had begun earlier.

  39.58  It is impossible for us to reach a satisfactory conclusion about the extent of physical abuse at the Hett establishments or the allegations against Hett personally on the limited evidence before us. We accept that the staff had to deal with many very difficult and disturbed adolescents with whom various community homes had been unable to cope and that physical restraint had to be exercised quite frequently. Hett was, however, an unimpressive witness and we certainly do not accept that corporal punishment was limited to the use of the slipper. We have no doubt that excessive force was used to residents quite frequently by largely untrained staff in the absence of any clear guidelines but this was but one respect of many in which the quality of care provided fell below an acceptable standard.

Conclusions

  39.59  The Hett establishments occupied the attention of the WOED and SWSO/SSIWs to an extraordinary extent for a period of 17 years during which only Dol Rhyd of the three schools achieved full registration, and none of the three received general SEN approval but each was permitted to survive in turn until a sale or a transfer of registration or a reduction in numbers led to cancellation of its registration. The blame for this does not, in our view,rest upon the Inspectorates, who reported fully and frequently uponthe deficiencies in management, staffing and organisation of the schools and who consistently pointed to their failure to achieve acceptable standards of care and education provision. In our judgment the fault lies, firstly, with the inadequate regulatory system and its over-elaborate procedures for de-registration and, secondly, with the Welsh Office for undue timidity and lack of grip in setting in train and implementing the Notice of Complaint procedure. Some blame must be attached also to the placement authorities but the history underlines the difficulties facing such authorities in monitoring adequately distant residential establishments. The evidence before us suggests that initially most of these authorities were conscientious in visiting Ynys Fechan Hall and Dol Rhyd School but, almost inevitably as time passed, visits became irregular and pupils were only withdrawn after specific complaints had been received or a warning from the Welsh Office.

  39.60  More generally, we accept the criticisms of Paul Hett and the successive schools made by the Inspectorates from time to time, which we have summarised. In our view the whole venture was ill-conceived and the gloomy forebodings of the inspector whose comments are cited in paragraph 39.11 of this report were abundantly fulfilled, to the serious detriment of many of the children and young persons who passed through the schools between 1974 and 1991.

Postscript on Ynys Fechan Hall

  39.61  As we have said in paragraph 39.16, this establishment has been run as a private children's home for up to 11 resident boys and girls since late 1986; and it has been registered as such under the Children Act 1989 with Gwynedd County Council.

  39.62  We have not received any complaints of abuse from present residents of Ynys Fechan Hall or from any former residents who lived there after September 1986 under the proprietorship of Barry Young. We did hear evidence, however, from John ap Iwan[536], who was employed there as a care worker from 1 September 1990 to 24 July 1992. He said that the home caters for children who have suffered abuse in the past and, when he was there, seven such children were in residence: although it is not a school, five of them were educated on the premises, one attended a local school and the other was undertaking a college catering course. There were four members of the staff and two handymen.

  39.63  Ap Iwan made a number of allegations in his oral evidence to the Tribunal of physical abuse by Young to residents at Ynys Fechan Hall but he claimed to have witnessed only one such incident. Ap Iwan's allegation was that Young struck a boy on the left side of the head with his fist for no apparent reason. Ap Iwan's other allegations were made to the Social Services Department at Dolgellau Area Office early in 1991 and were based on alleged complaints made to him by three residents (two girls, one boy) six to eight weeks earlier. He met the Principal Officer (Children's Residential Services), Peter Hibbs, and two police officers on 1 February 1991 in relation to the complaints and an investigation followed (according to Hibbs it was already under way). The investigation did not result in any proceedings against Young.

  39.64  A Salmon letter was served on Barry Young in respect of these allegations but no signed response was received from him, despite several reminders. However, we received a statement prepared on his behalf by solicitors in which he denied all the allegations made and reported by ap Iwan.

  39.65  The Tribunal considers that ap Iwan was quite an impressive witness and we do not doubt that he saw the specific incident that he described but it is clear that, on the evidence as a whole, we cannot be satisfied that there has been any abuse at Ynys Fechan Hall since Young acquired it apart from that incident.

Footnotes:

524   See para 21.02.

525   See para 39.13.

526   Under section 11(3)(a) of the Education Act 1981

527   He had previously been a "partner" briefly in running Clwyd Hall School: see para 23.06.

528   See para 39.28.

529   A school with less than five pupils is not within the definition of an "independent school" contained in section 114(1) of the Education Act 1944.

530   See para 39.06 for the fate of that application.

531   See section 22(5) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 and the Certificates of Unruly Character (Conditions) Order 1977 SI 1977 No 1037.

532   See para 21.05(d).

533   Then Principal Officer (Child Protection).

534   See para 39.28.

535   See para 39.28. Hett said in evidence that one reason for these dismissals was that the three had been "running down" the school with a view to purchasing it from him on favourable terms

536   See paras 38.29 and 38.30 for his previous employment at Hengwrt Hall.