Mr Zahid Patel

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 Zahid Patel

Teacher reference number: 1764569

Teacher's date of birth: 2 February 1995

Location teacher worked: Bolton, North West England

Date of professional conduct panel: 20 to 22 January 2025

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 Zahid Patel, formerly employed in Bolton, North West 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 Zahid Patel: Professional conduct panel outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education January 2025 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 5 Summary of evidence 5 Documents 5 Witnesses 6 Decision and reasons 6 Findings of fact 7 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 20 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 24 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Zahid Patel Teacher ref number: 1764569 Teacher date of birth: 2 February 1995 TRA reference: 19547 Date of determination: 22 January 2025 Former employer: Essa Academy, Bolton Introduction A professional conduct panel (‘the panel’) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (‘the TRA’) convened on 20 to 22 January 2025 by way of a virtual hearing, to consider the case of Mr Zahid Patel. The panel members were Ms Aisha Miller (teacher panellist – in the chair), Mr Paul Hawkins (lay panellist) and Ms Anila Rai (lay panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Ms Rebecca Hughes of Birketts LLP solicitors. The presenting officer for the TRA was Ms Louisa Atkin of Capsticks LLP solicitors. Mr Patel was present and was not represented. The hearing took place by way of a virtual hearing in public and was recorded. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of hearing dated 23 September 2024. It was alleged that Mr Patel was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that: 1. In or around December 2019 he caused or allowed one or more of the following pupils from School 1 to connect with him on social media: a. Pupil A and/or; b. Pupil D and/or; c. Pupil E. 2. Between around 22 December 2019 and 7 January 2020, in respect of Pupil A, he: a. Exchanged messages through social media; b. Made inappropriate remarks including and/or to the effect of one or more of the remarks set out in schedule 1; c. Failed to report a disclosure she had made about [REDACTED]. 3. By his conduct at any or all of 1(a) and/or 1(b) and/or 1(c) and/or 2(a) and/or 2(b) and/or 2(c), he failed to observe proper boundaries appropriate to his professional position. 4. His conduct at any or all of 1(a) and/or 2(a) and/or 2(b) was sexually motivated. 5. Between around March and April 2021, he caused or allowed incomplete and/or misleading information to be provided to his recruitment agency and/or School 3 in the course of applying for employment at School 3 in that he: a. Did not include your employment at School 2 on his CV; b. Did not provide the name of an appropriate referee from School 1; c. Suggested that Person K, who you had identified as a referee, had worked with him and/or had been his NQT mentor at School 1, when that was not the case. 6. His conduct at any or all of 5(a) and/or 5(b) and/or 5(c) was dishonest, in that he knew that he had caused or allowed incomplete and/or misleading information to be provided to his recruitment agency and/or School 3. 5 Schedule 1 i. “So you’re saying you’re not a virgin?” ii. “Your saying you’ve done nothing with a boy” iii. “I can’t believe you’ve not had a boyfriend” iv. “A girl as pretty as you not having a boyfriend don’t believe that” v. “Tell me the worst thing you’ve done and/or tell me the naughtiest things you’ve done” v. “You knew that you loved Pupil A from the minute she walked into your maths class” vi. “we’ll be together when you are older and/or we’ll be together when I am older” As outlined in the response to a notice of hearing signed by Mr Patel on 18 October 2024, Mr Patel admitted allegations 1, 3, 5 and 6 in their entirety, admitted allegation 2 in part (in that he denied making some of the remarks in schedule 1) and denied allegation 4 in its entirety. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the hearing, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: • Section 1: Chronology, anonymised person list and list of key people – pages 4 to 7 • Section 2: Notice of proceedings and response – pages 8 to 35 • Section 3: TRA witness statements – pages 36 to 56 • Section 4: TRA documents – pages 57 to 455 • Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 456 to 459. The panel also received a video of the police ABE interview with Pupil A on 19 May 2020. 6 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, and watched the video of the police interview referred to above in advance of the hearing. Witnesses The panel heard oral evidence from the following witnesses called by the TRA: • Witness A - [REDACTED] (School 1) • Pupil D - [REDACTED] (School 1) • Witness B - [REDACTED] • Witness C - [REDACTED] (School 3) • Witness D - [REDACTED] The panel also heard oral evidence from Mr Patel. 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 1 September 2018, Mr Patel commenced employment at Ladybridge High School (‘School 1’). He handed in his notice on 31 October 2019. Around his last day at School 1 in December 2019, Mr Patel allowed pupils, including Pupil A, Pupil D and Pupil E, to connect with him on social media. On 1 January 2020, Mr Patel commenced employment at Essa Academy (‘School 2’). On 6 January 2020, concerns were raised to the police regarding Mr Patel’s messaging with Pupil A over social media. On 7 January 2020, Mr Patel’s employment ended at School 2, and Mr Patel was arrested and interviewed regarding the allegations concerning Pupil A. In early 2021, Mr Patel submitted his CV to Edison Pope and provided Person K as a referee, indicating that Person K was his mentor while employed at School 1. On 23 March 2021, Person K provided a reference for Mr Patel to Edison Pope. 7 On 12 April 2021, Mr Patel commenced employment at St Matthews High School (‘School 3’) via Edison Pope. On 21 April 2021, Witness C of School 3 was made aware of the safeguarding concerns regarding Mr Patel, and after a discussion with Mr Patel, Witness C terminated his contract. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows: The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved for these reasons: 1. In or around December 2019 you caused or allowed one or more of the following pupils from School 1 to connect with you on social media: a. Pupil A and/or; b. Pupil D and/or; c. Pupil E. The panel noted that Mr Patel admitted allegations 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c) in his response to the notice of hearing, signed by him on 18 October 2024. The panel considered Mr Patel's email of 10 May 2021, in which he admitted that his conduct was inappropriate but wrote that he did not do so with any malicious intent. In this email, Mr Patel wrote that the pupils would constantly make TikTok’s in his classroom, and he would join in on some of them, so he did not “think much of it,” but he admits that this was a mistake. The panel also considered the transcript of the teacher’s police interview, prepared by Capsticks LLP, in which Mr Patel stated that on the last day of school, Pupil A and her two friends followed him on TikTok because it was “quite a trendy thing” and because there are lots of teachers involved in TikTok. The panel noted in the transcript that Mr Patel refers to Pupil A and Pupil E following him on TikTok. The panel also considered Mr Patel's oral evidence. In his oral evidence, Mr Patel stated that he allowed Pupil A, Pupil D, and Pupil E to follow him on TikTok. He stated that it was his mistake and that he had been “naive” to assume it was okay to have the pupils follow him on TikTok. The panel considered the oral evidence and written statement of Pupil D, who stated that around Christmas 2019, Mr Patel was leaving to move to School 2. She stated that the four people in her friendship group were in his classroom and wrote their TikTok names 8 on his whiteboard. She said that Mr Patel was present when they did this. She later received a request from an unknown account, which she accepted. Pupil D said that Pupil A told her Mr Patel had initially followed Pupil A on TikTok, and she compared the username that followed her to the one Pupil A said was Mr Patel’s, and they matched. The panel considered the oral evidence and written statement of Witness D, who stated that on 5 January 2020, Pupil A came to her at home and said that Mr Patel had been messaging her, added her on TikTok on the last day of term, and that he had added her on Snapchat. The panel had sight of the screenshots of messages between Mr Patel and Pupil A on TikTok. The panel considered the police interview with Pupil A conducted on 19 May 2020. During this interview, Pupil A mentioned that three students waited until the classroom was empty, at which point Mr Patel allowed them to enter their TikTok usernames in his phone. The panel noted that when asked to identify the two friends who were with her that day, and were asked to add themselves on Mr Patel’s TikTok, Pupil A named Pupil E and Pupil D. The panel found allegations 1(a), 1(b) and 1(c) proven. 2. Between around 22 December 2019 and 7 January 2020, in respect of Pupil A, you: a. Exchanged messages through social media; b. Made inappropriate remarks including and/or to the effect of one or more of the remarks set out in schedule 1; c. Failed to report a disclosure she had made about [REDACTED] The panel noted that Mr Patel admitted to allegations 2(a) and 2(c), as well as part of allegation 2(b), in his response to the notice of hearing, signed by him on 18 October 2024. The panel noted that in his oral evidence, Mr Patel ad