Simon Constantinou

Introduction

Simon Constantinou is a former deputy headteacher of River House School in Warwickshire who is prohibited from teaching after a panel found he claimed and received approximately £174,000 in overtime payments he was not entitled to, plus around £21,000 in excessive or unsupported travel expenses, from school funds over nearly a decade. The Teaching Regulation Agency panel found a pattern of dishonest conduct over a number of years totalling in excess of £210,000, rejected his defence that he genuinely believed he was owed the money, and the decision maker, Marc Cavey, banned him on 13 December 2024 with a four-year review period. By then Constantinou, born May 1951, was over 70 and had not taught since his suspension in May 2015.

Background Information

Constantinou began employment with Warwickshire County Council in 1988. In 2004 he was seconded to River House School — a school for boys struggling in mainstream education — as a deputy headteacher tasked with setting up an education programme that became the school’s Individual Learning Programme (ILP), and he became a permanent deputy head in 2008. In March 2015 a consultant brought in to work with the school discovered potential financial irregularities and reported them; an initial audit by the county council escalated into a detailed investigation whose report was produced on 28 October 2015. Constantinou was suspended on 14 May 2015 and referred to the TRA in January 2016 — yet the regulatory proceedings did not conclude for almost a decade, convening in a virtual hearing from 2 to 10 December 2024, which he attended with counsel.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated findings. The panel found proved that between 2006 and 2015 Constantinou caused or permitted the improper use of school funds by claiming and receiving approximately £174,000 in overtime payments when not entitled and without supporting evidence, and approximately £21,000 in travel expenses at rates above his entitlement, unsupported, and in part unnecessary or non-existent. A third allegation — failure to follow proper recruitment practices in employing Individual D — was found not proved, as was a second expenses allegation in part.

The heart of the defence was that the overtime was real work honestly claimed. Constantinou told the panel he effectively had two jobs — one in the school, one leading off-site provision — and that he was “working these extra hours” and “felt justified in claiming for them”. He relied on paragraph 52(c) of the School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document as an exception to the rule that deputy heads do not receive overtime. The panel accepted the document contained contradictions, but concluded that as an experienced teacher he should have known the activities he claimed for — managing pupil behaviour issues and staff wellbeing — were management and leadership duties squarely within the deputy head role, not claimable overtime. The claim form template itself warned that deputy headteachers “are not eligible” for such payments. The panel found the claims were rounded figures, often 8-10 hours weekly for a provision serving around 20 children, “beyond credibility”, and that he said he did all the overtime himself without requiring other ILP staff to work any. A November 2014 letter agreeing to pay his overtime from the ILP budget was rejected as retrospective approval — its author was new to the role and had taken what she was told in good faith; in the school’s investigation she said “I’ve been had. He was already paid for the deputy role”.

On travel, the panel heard he claimed approximately £21,000 across 2006-2015 with claims “scribbled onto a standard claim form” — no destinations, dates, or pupils involved; he admitted claiming at a higher rate than appropriate while holding a lease car. The panel found a pattern of dishonest conduct over a number of years, “a cavalier attitude to laws and regulations”, and was not reassured the conduct would not be repeated. It noted the matter had taken nearly ten years to reach a panel with no explanation why, that he was now over 70, and still concluded the public interest required prohibition.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The case drew no press coverage at the time; the published decision is the full public account. Its consequences were decisive nonetheless: the panel recommended a prohibition order with immediate effect, finding the loss to the school’s budget “huge” and the conduct a poor example to vulnerable pupils. Cavey adopted the panel’s recommendation and set a four-year review period, so the order cannot be set aside before 20 December 2028 at the earliest — and only if a fresh panel then agrees. No criminal prosecution findings appear in the decision; the audit and the TRA process were the accountability route. Constantinou retains a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice, and the published record shows none was filed.

Current Status

Constantinou is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. The order took effect from service on him, with any application to set it aside barred until 20 December 2028 — nine years after his suspension and more than two decades after the claims began. The decision’s date of determination is 10 December 2024, with the decision maker’s order dated 13 December 2024. Now in his seventies, he has not taught since May 2015; whether he would have sought to return or not, the regulator has closed the door until at least the end of 2028.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The case is one of the largest financial-misconduct sums in the TRA’s published catalogue — over £210,000 across nine years — and a study in how a plausible-sounding entitlement defence fails when the paperwork contradicts it: a claim-form template that excluded deputy heads, a witness who had said “I’ve been had”, and rounded weekly claims the panel found incredible. It also illustrates the regulator’s patience with delay: nearly ten years from suspension to determination, with the panel expressly factoring the lapse and his age into proportionality yet still finding prohibition required. For school business managers, the audit trail — a consultant’s suspicion, a two-stage audit, a comparison of claims against entitlement — is the template that converts quiet payroll drift into a career-ending finding.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Simon Constantinou” — source