Mr Adam Webb

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mr Adam Webb

Teacher reference number: 3354803

Teacher's date of birth: 09 July 1981

Location teacher worked: Boston, East of England

Date of professional conduct panel: 19 January 2026 to the 30 January 2026

Outcome type: Prohibition order

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Adam Webb formerly employed in Boston, East of England

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Adam Webb: Professional conduct panel hearing outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2026 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Summary of evidence 6 Documents 6 Witnesses 6 Decision and reasons 7 Findings of fact 7 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 50 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 57 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Adam Webb Teacher ref number: 3354803 Teacher date of birth: 9 July 1981 TRA reference: 21293 Date of determination: 30 January 2026 Former employer: Build A Future Independent School, Boston Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened from 19 January 2026 to 30 January 2026 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mr Adam Webb. The panel members were Mr Terry Hyde (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Paul Hawkins (lay panellist) and Ms Rosemary Joyce (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Rebecca Hughes of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officers for the TRA were Mr Mark Millin from 19 January 2026 and Mr Lee Bridges for 28 and 29 January 2026, both instructed by Kingsley Napley LLP solicitors. Mr Webb was not present and was not represented. The hearing took place in public, save that portions of the hearing were heard in private, and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of proceedings dated 17 September 2025. It was alleged that Mr Webb was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst working as the headteacher at Build A Future Independent School (“the School”): 1. Between 28 September 2020 and 28 January 2021, he: a. Engaged in and/or allowed inappropriate behaviour with pupils as set out in Schedule 1; b. Used and/or allowed inappropriate language around and/or about pupils, as set out in Schedule 2; c. Engaged in the inappropriate behaviour set out in Schedule 3; d. Shouted and/or swore at members of staff; e. Told Colleague C “what happens in BAF stays in BAF, it does not go out of these walls”, or words to that effect. 2. By reason of his conduct at allegations 1a and/or 1b, he did not safeguard the welfare of pupils. 3. He made the comments to Pupil E as outlined in Schedule 2, paragraphs i and/or ii and /or v and/or xii and/or xvi, when he knew, or ought to have known that [REDACTED] Schedule 1 i. You allowed play fighting between pupils; ii. You allowed a member of staff, namely Colleague A, lying on Pupil B; iii. You threw stones at or near pupils on one or more occasions; iv. You allowed other staff and/or pupils to throw stones at or near pupils; v. You encouraged one or more pupils using a dead animal as a ball; vi. You threw and/or allowed the throwing of aerosols on a fire; vii. You threw eggs at or near pupils on one or more occasions and/or allowed other staff to throw eggs at or near pupils. 5 Schedule 2 i. You called Pupil E “fat” and/or overweight; ii. You said to Pupil E “look at the size of your thighs, you should go into goal with your fat stomach”, or words to that effect; iii. You called Pupil F “fat tits” and/or “fat bastard”, or words to that effect; iv. You referred to and/or allowed other staff to refer to one or more pupils as “fat fucker”, or words to that effect; v. You referred to Pupil E as “as wide as a fridge” and/or “as wide as a bus”, or words to that effect; vi. You referred to the Husky House as the “spastic house”, or words to that effect; vii. You referred to and/or allowed other staff to refer to pupils as “mong” and/or “mong face”, or words to that effect; viii. You called pupils “window lickers”, or words to that effect; ix. You called Pupil G “horse fucker” and/or “donkey fucker”, or words to that effect; x. You called pupils “softs cunts” and/or “cunt”, or words to that effect; xi. You called pupils “spastics”, or words to that effect; xii. You called Pupil E “ugly”, or words to that effect; xiii. You told staff members that you had told Pupil B that you had “wanked over [REDACTED] mum’s tits”, or words to that effect; xiv. You told one or more pupils that you had sex with their mothers. xv. You said to Pupil A that he was “as wet as a spastic’s chin”, or words to that effect; xvi. You commented on Pupil E, who had previously [REDACTED] Schedule 3 i. You walked behind Pupil I and imitated how she walked; ii. You threw eggs at Colleague B; iii. You would only let Colleague B down from a cherry picker once she had shown you that she had deleted the video of eggs being thrown at her or proved she had not recorded it. 6 Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, list of key people and anonymised person list – pages 9 to 13 Section 2: Notice of hearing and response – pages 14 to 46 Section 3: TRA witness statements – pages 47 to 102 Section 4: TRA documents – pages 103 to 1270 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 1271 to 1312 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1313 to 1357 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1358 to 1396 Service Bundle for Mr Adam Webb – pages 1397 to 1447 Service Bundle for [REDACTED] – pages 1448 to 1498 Application to adduce hearsay – pages 1499 to 1819 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the hearing. In the consideration of this case, the panel had regard to the Teacher misconduct: Disciplinary procedures for the teaching profession May 2020 (the ‘2020 Procedures’). Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the presenting officer: Witness A - [REDACTED] Witness B –[REDACTED] Witness C – [REDACTED] Witness D – [REDACTED] 7 Decision and reasons The panel announced its decision and reasons as follows: The panel carefully considered the case before it and reached a decision. On 3 March 2017, Mr Webb commenced employment as headteacher at the School. On 28 January 2021, a police investigation commenced as a result of anonymous whistleblowing allegations made against Mr Webb, [REDACTED], [REDACTED]. On 3 February 2022, Collinson Grant LLP (previously Watershed) was instructed to conduct an internal investigation into Mr Webb, [REDACTED] following the police investigation. Witness A carried out this investigation. Following these investigations, allegations against Mr Webb came to light, which included Mr Webb allegedly engaging in inappropriate behaviour with pupils, including allegedly throwing eggs and stones at pupils and staff, swearing at pupils and calling them names, swearing and shouting at staff and failing to adequately safeguard the pupils at the School. On 17 November 2022, the matter was referred to the TRA. The panel noted that [REDACTED], [REDACTED] were also facing allegations before this professional conduct panel hearing. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel considered Mr Webb’s statement in which he outlined his dedication to the School. He explained that he had been leading the School during the global pandemic and that the health and well-being of the children were his priority. He wrote that he expressed that he was saddened by the allegations. The panel noted his comments that some of the pupils referenced in the allegations had been admitted to the School following exclusion from mainstream education, and that he stated they had not repeated the challenging behaviours previously exhibited. He further wrote that these learners had made significant progress during their time at the School. The panel also considered the meeting notes for the meeting held by Witness A and attended by Mr Webb, dated 24 March 2022. These recorded Mr Webb stating that he had spoken to Individual L on numerous occasions about several members of staff he had concerns about and wished to “formalise”. He explained that there were six individuals he was particularly worried about, namely: Individual F, Witness B, Witness D, Individual J, Individual K, and Individual A. In particular, Mr Webb is recorded saying that he said he was concerned about Witness B because she appeared very focused on providing [REDACTED], as opposed to looking after pupils. It is further recorded that he stated that he had spoken to his extended leadership team, Individual B and 8 [REDACTED] about Witness B, and although they suggested giving her more time, he “just knew she wasn’t right”. The panel asked Witness B whether any performance appraisals had ever taken place. In her oral evidence, she denied having had any performance conversations at this time, and the panel noted that Witness B remains employed at the School. The panel also asked Witness C, [REDACTED], whether any concerns had been raised with her regarding staff performance. She confirmed that no serious concerns had been brought to her attention. The panel further noted that it had not been provided with any documentary evidence of formal performance concerns. The panel considered the written and oral evidence of Witness B, who explained that she began recording the events at the School. The panel noted that Witness B [REDACTED] and that Mr Webb was arrested and ceased teaching on around 28 January 2021. Accordingly, anything Witness B witnessed occurred during the relevant period. The panel questioned Witness B in her oral evidence about when and how she made her notes. The panel considered that some of the notes were contemporaneous, having been written on the day of the incident. Witness B’s evidence was that she made notes as events occurred