Benjamin Hiscox
Introduction
Benjamin Steven Hiscox was a maths teacher at South Nottinghamshire Academy in Nottingham. Between October 2022 and February 2023, he exchanged sexual messages, photographs and videos with a former pupil of the Scottish school where he had trained, met her at a hotel, bought her a sex toy and had sexual intercourse with her, according to findings by a Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) professional conduct panel. The panel described his actions as akin to grooming behaviours and placed them at the higher end of the spectrum of serious misconduct. In October 2025 the Secretary of State’s decision maker prohibited him from teaching indefinitely, with no review period and no entitlement to apply for restoration.
Background Information
Hiscox was appointed as a Teacher of Maths at South Nottinghamshire Academy in January 2020, his first teaching post after a training year at Madras College in St Andrews, Scotland. Pupil A was a pupil at Madras College while he trained there but had later moved to a different school to complete her secondary education. At the beginning of October 2022, Pupil A followed his Instagram profile and the two began engaging with each other on the platform. Scottish educational authorities, alerted to the relationship by Pupil A’s parents, informed Police Scotland. As Pupil A was [REDACTED] and Hiscox was not her present teacher, the police took the view that no criminal offences had taken place, but they referred the case to the TRA on 3 April 2023.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
A sexual relationship with a former pupil.
The panel found that conversations between Hiscox and Pupil A on Instagram “moved quickly into a sexual nature and resulted in them meeting up at a hotel on one occasion on 28 October 2022”. Pupil A told police the hotel had been arranged and paid for by Hiscox. A further arrangement to meet in January 2023 did not take place after her parents became aware of the contact. The panel found every element of the allegation proved: the pair exchanged messages, photographs and videos of a sexual nature; Pupil A stated that Hiscox “asked me to pick a vibrator from Love Honey and he bought it”; and, during the October hotel stay, the two had sex on a number of occasions, shared wine and kissed. The panel was satisfied it was “more likely than not that he knew her age early on in their conversations”, rejecting his account that he was only told her age about a week before a planned second meeting in January 2023. Pupil A told police that when she mentioned her age and that she was still at school, he replied “well it makes it even naughtier then”; Hiscox said the remark related to his own relationship status. The panel found the conduct was sexually motivated and the allegation proved in full.
Some of Hiscox’s admissions were treated with caution. Although he admitted all of the allegations in a signed statement of agreed facts, his December 2024 statement to the TRA “appeared at odds with some of the admitted facts”, including a claim that Pupil A had proposed wearing a uniform herself. The panel regarded the uniform admissions as equivocal and, finding Pupil A’s police statement reliable, concluded it was more likely than not that Hiscox asked her to bring her school uniform and put it on in the hotel room. It noted his actions in “engaging in sexual activity with a child, whilst not a criminal offence, plainly sat far outside the expected behaviour of teachers towards children”, and that it was “a proven fact in this case that Mr Hiscox knowingly incited a child into sending indecent images of herself to him”. The panel concluded he was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and that his actions constituted conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The panel recommended that a prohibition order be imposed with immediate effect, with no review period. It found his behaviour was “a sustained course of conduct on his part using online behaviour with the sole intention of that behaviour moving into physically inappropriate contact for the purposes of his sexual gratification – it was akin to grooming behaviours often seen before TRA panels”, and viewed his actions as being “at the higher end of the spectrum of serious misconduct”. It found no mitigating factors applied and “considered the ‘risk of repetition’ at this time was at a heightened level”. The decision records no press coverage; the academy prepared a public statement in case the allegations were publicised during its disciplinary process. His employment at the academy had ended on 28 May 2023 after he disclosed the TRA investigation, and no criminal charges were brought. Decision maker David Oatley imposed the prohibition order on behalf of the Secretary of State on 3 October 2025.
Current Status
Hiscox is prohibited from teaching indefinitely. “This means that Mr Benjamin Hiscox is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England,” the decision states. No review period was set, and the decision maker went further: “I have decided that Mr Hiscox shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach.” The order takes effect from the date it is served on him, and he has a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of being given notice of the order.
Impact on Their Career/Life
The ban ends Hiscox’s teaching career in England. His employment at South Nottinghamshire Academy had already ended on 28 May 2023, and the prohibition order now bars him for life from teaching in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home. “The findings of misconduct are particularly serious as they include a finding that the teacher had sexual intercourse with a child,” the decision maker noted. The panel found no evidence of “developed insight and effective remedial steps” and considered the risk of repetition heightened; on that basis, the decision maker concluded that prohibition, without any review period or restoration right, was necessary to maintain public confidence in the profession.