The former headteacher of a primary school in Pontardawe who ran an unlawful wraparound childcare service and failed to ensure children with special educational needs received the support they required has lost her claims of unfair and wrongful dismissal.

Linda Frame, the former headteacher at Llangiwg Primary School, claimed she was the victim of a conspiracy and a witch hunt by some staff.

She was sacked from her post in April 2017 after having been suspended since June 2015, while investigations were undertaken.

An employment tribunal has now dismissed her claims which she brought against the school’s board of governors and Neath Port Talbot Council.

The school’s chairman of governors Mike James said in defending its position the school had ended up in deficit which would probably take three years to clear.

He described the last few years of investigations as “years of agony”, adding that the entire process had placed the school in “the worst situation that any school could be”.

Mrs Frame who has over 39 years’ teaching experience first became the headteacher at the school in 2007.

She was dismissed after it was discovered she had overseen a wraparound care provision at the school which was generally run on an entirely cash basis with monies paid to it, or from it, not passing through any of the school’s bank accounts or appearing on any of the school’s existing budgets.

According to the tribunal report, staff involved were paid cash in hand without deduction of tax or national insurance, there were inadequate HR records, it was impossible to say whether appropriate CRB/DBS checks had taken place on all staff and the money received from parents was kept in a tin.

Concerns were initially investigated by a senior auditor at Neath Port Talbot Council who found the service was being provided from 11.40am to 3pm for three to four year olds, and for children two and over, from 1pm to 3pm.

He concluded Mrs Frame was ultimately responsible for running it and that the way it was being operated amounted to gross misconduct.

The illegal child care provision ran for more than two hours per day, proper procedures were not put in place and it was not registered, the investigation found.

An independent disciplinary panel which met in November 2016 concluded Mrs Frame had “clearly chosen” to operate a childcare scheme “without due regard to legislation, procedures and financial controls”.

While it was for the wraparound provision allegations that Mrs Frame was dismissed, the tribunal ruled more serious allegations related to her role as the Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator (SENCo), saying these would have led to her dismissal had she still been in post.

An investigation found there were “many instances” where children whose needs had been identified as requiring additional intervention were not referred for long periods or were referred with inadequate supporting evidence which then led to further delays in their assessment and support.

It concluded Mrs Frame misled parents and others regarding the progress made after referrals for assessment and/or support, stating there was a failure to intervene early with many children and provide the support that could have made a difference to the child’s special educational needs.

The inadequate recording system resulted in there being “no way of knowing” what the child’s journey through SEN had been.

The employment tribunal judge ruled the allegations were of the “utmost seriousness” due to the potential for serious harm being caused as a result of the delays in medical intervention.

He said there was “a wealth of evidence” to support the conclusions and the claims of a conspiracy put forward by Mrs Frame were “entirely unsupported”.

He said: “The allegations, if true, reveal an appalling failure of the duty of care owed to the children involved.

“Had the claimant not already been dismissed she would have been fairly dismissed at the conclusion of the SENCo appeal.”

Mrs Frame originally faced three sets of allegations – the third of which involved a nine-year-old boy’s prescribed medication ending up with the family of a four-year-old girl who had a similar condition and was undergoing statutory assessment by the local authority.

An investigation concluded there was evidence Mrs Frame had been involved in the process where the medication had been transferred but that she did not physically pass it to the four-year-old’s mother.

Mrs Frame said the allegation was not only untrue but was “deliberately fabricated”.

A disciplinary panel found her to have committed a serious breach of safety standards in the maladministration of a prescribed medicine and she was given a final written warning.

But Mrs Frame appealed the decision saying it was unwarranted on the basis of evidence before the disciplinary committee and her appeal against this was successful.

Considering the evidence as part of the employment tribunal, the judge found that the committee could have “reasonably drawn much more serious conclusions…. that she had arranged the transfer of the prescribed medication; and had made false allegations against other members of staff…. and could reasonably have dismissed the claimant”.

However the judge said the allegations involving the medication maladministration were not relevant for his decision as they had not resulted in dismissal.

He said he only considered them in relation to Mrs Frame’s defence that she had been the victim of an agenda, adding that the fact the school did not dismiss her on the basis of the evidence demonstrated the good faith of those involved in the process.

Concluding Mrs Frame’s actions involving the wraparound provision and SENCo responsibilities fell within the definition of gross misconduct, the judge said she ran the wraparound provision unlawfully and ran a “shockingly lax” system of record keeping and administration when the SENCo.

He said: “The evidence in support of those conclusions is simply overwhelming.

“The conduct was so serious that it inevitably destroyed the mutual relationship of trust and confidence and justified the respondent dismissing without notice.

“Accordingly the wrongful dismissal claim must also be dismissed.”

Chairman of governors at the school Mike James said: “As a governing body of the school – and I have been a governor in that school for almost 27 years, it’s the worst situation that any school can be put in – to see a head suspended and then the years of agony of being involved in the tribunal investigations where staff and governors have to be questioned in court.

“I don’t think any signed up for being put through that when they joined the school.”

Neath Port Talbot Council welcomed the judgement of the employment tribunal, saying it “fully vindicates the school’s action in this matter”.

A spokesman said: “The judgement states that it was reasonable to conclude that Mrs Frame was responsible for failings of the utmost seriousness.

“While the local authority will pursue any avenues to recoup costs in this case, our prime objective was to support the school in defending its justified actions.”

Mrs Frame who is now a community councillor and chairman of Mawr Community Council declined to comment saying she had submitted a notice of appeal to the employment appeal tribunal in London and it would inappropriate to comment at this stage.