Debra Anne Clancy v Ofsted [2026] UKFTT 794 (HESC)
[1]This is an appeal brought by Mrs Clancy against the decision of Ofsted to cancel her registration as a childminder due to her failure to pay the annual fee for continued registration. The Notice was dated 6 February 2026. This against a background of 20 years of exemplary work. Ofsted accept that they have no concerns about her performance as a childminder. Mrs Clancy was not present at the appeal due to issues of ill health.[2]On 7 May 2026 this appeal was considered by the Tribunal to consider amongst other things whether the Tribunal had discretion to allow the appeal to proceed, it having been filed on 27 March 2026. The Tribunal on 7 May expressed a preliminary view that the appeal fell foul of the statutory time limit of 28 days imposed by S21 care Standards Act 2000 and that accordingly they may be bound to only allow the appeal to proceed in accordance with well-established case law if “exceptional circumstances” apply.[3]This however is not a case governed by the Care Standards Act 2000. S21 makes it clear that it applies to appeals “under this part of the Act”. Part 2 of the Act applies to Establishments and Agencies. Thus it does not apply to the case of a Childminder. Such appeals are governed by the Childcare Act 2006.[4]S68(2) states as follows; (2) The Chief Inspector may cancel the registration of a person registered under Chapter 2, 3 or 4 in the early years register or the general childcare register if it appears to him—…… (e) in any case, that he has failed to pay a prescribed fee.[5]S74 Covers appeals; (1) An applicant for registration or (as the case may be) a registered person may appeal to the Tribunal against the taking of any of the following steps by the Chief Inspector under this Part—…… (e) The cancellation of the person's registration. …… (4) On an appeal the Tribunal must either— (a) confirm the taking of the step, the making of the other determination or the making of the order (as the case may be), or (b) direct that it shall not have, or shall cease to have, effect.[6]The Act does not provide a time limit for appeal. This is covered by the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier tribunal) Health Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008. The applicable Rule being;[20](1) If Rule 19 (application for leave) does not apply, an applicant must start proceedings before the Tribunal by sending or delivering an application notice to the Tribunal so that, unless paragraph (1A) or (1B) applies, it is received— (a) if the time for providing the application notice is specified in another enactment, in accordance with that enactment; (b) in a case under the Suspension Regulations, within 10 working days after written notice of the decision being challenged was sent to the applicant; (c) in a special educational needs case— (i) within 2 months after written notice of the decision being challenged was sent to the applicant; or (ii) within 1 month from the date of issue of the mediation certificate if that date would be a later date than the date calculated by reference to paragraph (i); (e) in any other case, within 28 days after written notice of the decision being challenged was sent to the applicant.[7]Thus in this case Rule 20(1) (e) applies. The appeal therefore lies outside the time limit. That being the case does the tribunal have any discretion on the issue? Rule 5 gives an answer to this;(1) Subject to the provisions of the 2007 Act and any other enactment, the Tribunal may regulate its own procedure.(2) The Tribunal may give a direction in relation to the conduct or disposal of proceedings at any time, including a direction amending, suspending or setting aside an earlier direction.(3) In particular, and without restricting the general powers in paragraphs (1) and (2), the Tribunal may— (a) extend or shorten the time for complying with any rule, practice direction or direction, unless such extension or shortening would conflict with a provision of another enactment containing a time limit (b) consolidate or hear together two or more sets of proceedings or parts of proceedings raising common issues, or treat a case as a lead case; (c) permit or require a party to amend a document; (d) permit or require a party or another person to provide documents, information or submissions to the Tribunal or a party; (e) deal with an issue in the proceedings as a preliminary issue; (f) hold a hearing to consider any matter, including a case management issue; (g) decide the form of any hearing; (h) adjourn or postpone a hearing; (i) require a party to produce a bundle for a hearing; (j) stay proceedings; (k) transfer proceedings to another court or tribunal if that other court or tribunal has jurisdiction in relation to the proceedings an[8]Case Management powers are thus extensive. In particular Rule 5 (3) (a) above (our emphasis) enables us to extend the time for service of an appeal provided it does not conflict with another enactment. In this case it does not (although in a case where Care Standards Act 2000 applies, it would).[9]We thus have discretion to extend the time limit for appeal and to allow the appeal to progress. In exercising that discretion, we are not bound by the well-known case law. We do however have to take account of a number of factors in exercising that discretion. For example; the nature of the appeal and whether this has any safeguarding implications, how late the appeal was, the reasons advanced for the lateness of the appeal, proportionality, fairness and the views of the regulator to name but a few.[10]In this case the Appellant stated her reasons as follows; “I have been childminding for 20 years and I am 60 years old. I have always achieved a good Ofsted inspection report. I did fail to pay my registration fee. I am very very sorry and cross with myself for this and I can say I am menopausal and always last minute with payments. I have 2 children I look after at the moment – one of whom is under social services care with her family. I am also having the child’s younger brother who is being tested for Autism. To let the family and children down is devastating! I love these children and they feel safe and cared for here. I will set a Direct Debit up to pay further fees. I am a single mum of 11 years to a 21 year old and a 16 year old and have never felt so bad and unappreciated for this fault. Please help me I have rent and bills and don’t want to stop childminding”.[11]This case raises a technical issue of a failure to pay a modest annual registration fee only. It does not raise any safeguarding issues and indeed can be said to hinder worthwhile safeguarding activities. The refusal to extend time in the circumstances of this case would adversely impact the care of vulnerable children and would be disproportionate in its effect upon the Appellant. Although Ofsted remained neutral on the issue, they have indicated that they would not argue against an extension of time. We therefore grant an extension of time to appeal.[12]Having allowed the appeal to proceed we now turn to the substantive appeal. This is not opposed by Ofsted. For the reasons advanced above there appear to be us to be no valid reasons for disqualifying the appellant to act as a childminder and we allow her appeal. IT IS ORDERED THAT:[1]The Appellant is allowed to appeal out of time.[2]The Appeal is allowed.[3]There shall be no order as to costs. 1. First-tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care) Date Issued: 28 May 2026