Church of England “Apologises” For Letting Down Survivors Of Abuse Following Settlement With “Teflon Priest”, Canon Andrew Hindley

It has been reported this week that the Church of England has settled a claim brought by Canon Andrew Hindley, following his removal from office. It is understood that an offer of £240,000 was made but that, due to a non-disclosure agreement, it is not possible to know the final sum agreed. The background to the matter is complex and has been covered in detail by the BBC here.

In short, Canon Hindley was removed from his role in 2021, when he was retired on the ground of “ill-health”. He subsequently commenced a legal claim seeking compensation in relation to his forced retirement. A settlement was reached, despite a history of concern that Hindley posed a risk to children and adolescent boys, and repeated safeguarding issues being raised. The decision to retire him on the grounds of ill health appears to have been the only mechanism by which the Church of England could legitimately remove him from his post.

Significantly, between 1991 and 2018, allegations regarding sexual assault and abuse by Canon Hindley were made by at least five individuals and five separate investigations by Lancashire Police took place. Despite the number of individuals who had bravely reported him, he denied the allegations and no further action was taken. Canon Hindley remained in his post as Canon Sacrist at Blackburn Cathedral; he was referred to as “Teflon” because the complaints made against him did not stick. Canon Hindley has denied all allegations of abuse levied at him.

Following disclosures of abuse, various risk assessments were commissioned by Blackburn Cathedral and the Church considered how best to remove Canon Hindley from his post but ultimately, this was not done until 2021.

In around 2007, a NSPCC risk assessment concluded that “Canon Hindley presents a risk of significant harm to children and young people, both through his role in the church and through is contact with children and young people in the community”. It was clear that the risk presented by Canon Hindley was heightened by virtue of his position within the Church. In an effort to minimise the risk he posed, restrictions were placed on Hindley in an effort to reduce the risk he posed and he was prevented from attending schools, choir school and junior confirmation groups; it is reported that these restrictions were never monitored.

Canon Hindley was not removed from his post, seemingly in part due to the Church of England’s fear that Hindley would commence legal proceedings against them. Weight also appears to have been given to the impact on the Church’s reputation, with it being noted in 2009 that “Should the unthinkable happen, accusations of inaction will fly, a life will be damaged, God’s name besmirched and the reputation of the Cathedral damaged.” One survivor reports being advised by former Bishop of Blackburn Cathedral to “move on” from the abuse, stating that their account of abuse was never properly investigated by the Church.

The recent settlement has led to Rowena Pailing, Blackburn Cathedral’s Vice-Dean and Head of Safeguarding, to step down from her role, commenting “I couldn’t work for an organisation which put its own reputation and the protection of alleged abusers above the protection and care and listening to victims and survivors”.

The background to this case, and the settlement reached, raises a number of very serious issues and is sure to be a source of significant disappointment for many survivors of abuse;

• Had robust action been taken against Canon Hindley in 1991, it may be that other individuals would not have been exposed to the risks that he posed, and possible further abuse. It is unclear why, in light of the disclosure made in 1991, steps were not taken by the Church of England to remove Canon Hindley at that point.
• Given the number of allegations, spanning a period of almost 30 years, it is unclear why Lancashire Police and the CPS did not take steps to prosecute Hindley in relation to those offences he had been accused of.
• The implication that the Church of England was reluctant to face potential legal proceedings commenced by Canon Hindley, and that this may have contributed to the Church’s inaction is also particularly frustrating. There is an established history of abuse, be it sexual, physical or emotional, within the Church of England perpetrated by members of its Clergy, with the issue being explored by the Independent Inquiry into Child Abuse.It is certainly not uncommon for survivors of sexual abuse, when bringing their own claims for damages against the Church of England to face robust arguments from the Church; often limitation is raised as a defence (meaning that the Claimant has to explain and justify the reason for their delay in commencing their claim) and the Church will seek to argue, where possible, that they are not responsible for the actions of its members of staff, in an attempt to dismiss the claim. For the Church of England to now reach a significant settlement agreement with Hindley, when there are hundreds (if not more) individuals who are either facing, or have faced, an uncompromising or aggressive stance from the Church of England when trying to bring their own claims for abuse by the Church’s members seems manifestly unfair.
• The level of damages seemingly paid to Canon Hindley, is in stark contrast to the level of damages typically awarded to survivors of abuse.

Archbishops Justin Welby and Stephen Cottrell have said following the settlement that “We are truly sorry when survivors are let down by the Church. We were both made aware of this case, including the concerning background and the challenges caused by statutory and Church processes ending with no further action.” One would hope that the Church of England will ensure that it acts swiftly in ensuring that safeguarding matters are properly dealt with and that those members of the Clergy who pose a risk to children and young people, are removed from their roles, rather than the priority being the avoidance of legal proceedings and/or reputation management. One would further hope that if the Church of England is genuine in its apology, that survivors of abuse are not routinely faced with arguments as to why their claims should fail, and in particular, have to justify why they have been unable to commence a claim for their abuse earlier.

If you have experienced sexual abuse or know someone who has experienced abuse within the Church of England, and wish to bring a claim for compensation and are unsure of the process, then we can provide you with initial free and confidential advice on the process of reporting to the police, what to expect and your options in bringing a civil claim.

You can contact our legal experts by calling 0808 296 7694, and speak with a specialist solicitor directly. Alternatively, you can request a callback.