Timothy Price

Introduction

Timothy Price is a former teacher at Westfield Primary School in Cottingham who was banned from teaching in May 2026 after a Teaching Regulation Agency panel found he had lied about his employment history, his reasons for leaving previous schools and his Newly Qualified Teacher induction status in job applications. Price denied the allegations, but the panel found them all proved and concluded his conduct was dishonest, amounting to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. He is prohibited from teaching indefinitely, but may not apply for the order to be set aside until 13 May 2033 at the earliest.

Background Information

Price worked at Dunswell School from 1 January to 30 October 2014, resigning by a handwritten letter dated 3 October 2014. He started at Winstanley Community College as a Newly Qualified Teacher on 27 October 2014, and that employment ended on 30 November 2014 — by resignation, the panel found, not through the expiry of a fixed-term contract. On or around 14 November 2014 he applied to Archbishop Sentamu Academy (ASA) claiming he had worked at Winstanley since September 2014 and had completed one full term of NQT induction there. Following an offer dated 5 December 2014, he started at ASA on 1 January 2015. In March 2015 a personnel files audit found a reference missing; re-requested, it showed he had started at Winstanley on 27 October 2014, contradicting his application. ASA investigated, and he was dismissed for gross misconduct at a hearing on 8 May 2015, confirmed in a letter dated 12 May 2015, for misleading the Academy about his start date and induction. Before September 2016 he applied to Westfield Primary School, repeating the false Winstanley dates and reasons and omitting Dunswell entirely. A referral was made to the TRA on 20 September 2024.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Adjudicated vs. alleged. The findings below are regulatory, made on the balance of probabilities by a TRA panel at a virtual hearing on 5 to 7 May 2026. They are findings of professional misconduct — not criminal findings; no criminal charges are mentioned in the published decision. Price denied the facts of all four allegations in his response dated 2 March 2026; the panel found allegations 1, 2 and 3 proved and found allegation 4, dishonesty, proven.

Price was not present at the hearing. On allegation 1, his ASA application gave his Winstanley start date as “Sep 2014”, while a contemporaneous offer letter dated 30 September 2014 confirmed “Your contract will commence on 27th October 2014” and Winstanley’s SIMS staff record showed he started on 27 October 2014. His emailed explanation — that the form was “wrote at night after a day at school” and the error habitual — did not assist him: the panel found he knew his real start date.

On allegation 2, the panel found it “would not have been possible” for him to have completed a full term of NQT induction by the time he joined ASA, his Winstanley employment having spanned barely five weeks; notes from ASA’s disciplinary hearing record him confirming he had done only half a term. On allegation 3, his Westfield application claimed Winstanley employment from 1 September to 31 December 2014, gave “End of Fixed Term contract” as his reason for leaving both Winstanley and ASA, recorded “N/A” against disciplinary action, and omitted Dunswell altogether — despite Winstanley’s appointment sheet recording his contract as “Permanent” and ASA’s letter confirming he was summarily dismissed “on the ground of gross misconduct”. Applying the Ivey v Genting Casinos test, the panel concluded his conduct “as found proved in relation to allegations 1, 2 and 3, was dishonest” and found allegation 4 proven.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found “the offence of serious dishonesty was relevant” and was “concerned that Mr Price’s conduct was not limited to an isolated incident but demonstrated a pattern of serious dishonesty over a period of time” — particularly that he had been dismissed for dishonesty in May 2015 yet “continued to deliberately mislead the School in his application in September 2016 in the same way”. It found his conduct frustrated the school’s statutory Safer Recruitment duties, breaching the Teachers’ Standards and Keeping Children Safe in Education. The panel attached no weight to his claim of employer pension contributions, unsupported by documents, nor to his explanation that ASA ended his employment because he was “really struggling”, unsupported by medical evidence. Rather than admitting his misconduct, he “doubled down” on his denial — telling a June 2024 disciplinary hearing his ASA job ended “from illness” — and had “not demonstrated any insight”, with an “absence of remorse or reflection” and “no mitigating factors of sufficient weight”. The panel agreed with the presenting officer that “dishonesty is so corrosive of public trust and confidence it must be met with serious consequences” and recommended prohibition with immediate effect.

Current Status

The determination is dated 7 May 2026, and decision maker Stuart Blomfield dated his decision 8 May 2026. Price is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Although the panel recommended the order without a review period, the decision maker concluded that a “seven-year review period is required to satisfy the maintenance of public confidence in the profession”: Price may apply for the order to be set aside, but not until 13 May 2033 at the earliest — and this is not an automatic right. Without a successful application, he remains prohibited indefinitely. The order takes effect when served on him, and he has a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice. The decision was published on 26 May 2026.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Teaching in England is closed to Price. His dismissal for gross misconduct from ASA in May 2015 had already cost him one post, and the prohibition order forecloses any other: the panel concluded that “the risk of repetition remained”, given his continued denial, concealment of wrongdoing and lack of meaningful reflection, and was “unable to identify any way in which Mr Price could demonstrate to a future panel that the prohibition order should be set aside”. The published decision preserves the details — the fabricated start dates, the false “End of Fixed Term contract” explanations, the concealed Dunswell employment — as a permanent, searchable public record.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Timothy Price,” published 26 May 2026 — source