My partners was recruited by the NHS from overseas as a GP and placed her daughter when new to the UK to a private fee paying school. They never complied with their own admissions policy and without any checks and despite the fact she was only 15 yrs 2 months when she sat her last exams and a good 14 months before having sat any GCSE equivalents. They put her daughter firstly into AS Levels then another post GCSE course : she as expected failed both having dyslexia dyspraxia ADHD and essential tremors. The child aged 16 was then placed in an environment that was completely unsuitable academically for her and would abscond as soon as she was dropped off each day. The parent was never told and after failing all AS levels the Deputy Head knowing she had no GCSEs and limited English suggested she resits the same AS levels or a University Foundation Course and even said he would check suitability - did he heck- thy just wanted the £££. The parent was billed another £25k and the Deputy Head placed the child under immense psychological pressure onto the UFC to the extent she came home daily and one day and tried to commit suicide by an overdose of some 30-40 tablets. Thankfully the mother came home in time from work took medical action but one hour later could have been fatal. The School closed ranks and the ISI proved indifferent despite the fact a Subject Access Request was raised at both the school and ISI to see if answers matched as every request for disclosure and academic authentication have been evaded by the school and the answers given failed scrutiny. The ISI Head of Legal and Safeguarding confirmed that there was no disclosure of the child's suicide attempt to the Inspectorate as 5 inspectors went to the school where they failed it on leadership and management and risk assessments, but the school when asked the same specific question whether her daughters suicide attempt was disclosed to these Inspectors who had just failed the Directors of the school on those management leadership risk assessments and countless other areas. And guess what their answer when disclosed only replied to a very specific question that stated 'no documents were hidden' from the inspectors by the school: thereby evading the question but any disclosure of a childs suicide would be recorded along with a risk assessment and why - all of which was shared with the ICO.So all bound couriered and shared with the ICO and guess what like almost everyone else reporting here they did nothing. Just waffled around set piece answers instead of investigating why the Schools data protection officer would blatantly mislead on a Subject Access Request that the Independent Schools Inspectorate contradicted and this is from their Head of Legal and Safeguarding.This dishonesty on a subject access request by the school claiming they disclosed the documents that recorded the child's suicide attempt let alone any attempt to get disclosure of who authenticated the child's academic suitability for two courses that she never met the entry criteria for were detailed, bound and in A3 and shared with the ICO including new commissioner John Edwards and they have frankly proved as collectively useless as they are complicit with turning a blind eye. The answers are vague and lack the attention to detail that would have shown dishonesty in s subject access request. The school lied to the parent and the ISI Inspectors knew about it : the ICO simply waffled around the subject failed to enforce disclosure and doing nothing . they have a few who are blatantly using it to gain poor quality experience yet cannot seem to grasp essentials or overstep the mark...that they lied as something as serious as a teenage girls suicide attempt needs tracking but the ICO is a joke and its mainly poorly paid poorly trained staff effectively script read the answers and don't do a great deal.
