BRIEFINGS are to be held with councillors and claimants on future options for Stanhope Castle abuse claims. 

Middlesbrough Council came under fire in 2019 after a report by The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).

The probe directly criticised the authority over its handling of claims of physical and sexual abuse made by former students of Stanhope Castle Approved School, in County Durham. The council took over liability for claims after the abolition of Cleveland County Council. 

Cllr Chris Hobson, executive member for finance, told Thursday’s corporate affairs and audit committee how briefings were being lined up ahead of a fresh report on Stanhope Castle.

She said: “We’re going to have some Stanhope Castle briefings. We’re going to have a briefing for the executive on the position and the options. 

“We’re going to have a full member briefing, a briefing for the claimants, and a report to the full council.

“I thought this committee should know we’re following up on Stanhope Castle.”

Stanhope was run as an approved school by the Home Office before being transferred to Teesside County Borough Council as a controlled community home in 1973.

From 1974 until its closure in 1981 it was under the control of Cleveland County Council.

Middlesbrough Council then took on the liability after Cleveland was abolished with civil claims relating to abuse suffered at the site coming to its door. 

The Local Democracy Reporting Service spoke to victim Peter Smith in January 2019 – who bravely waived his right to anonymity to tell of the harrowing abuse he suffered while a pupil at Stanhope from 1963 to 1969.  

A major investigation by the IICSA into historical child sex abuse criticised the “attitude” of Middlesbrough Council for its response to legal claims.

The review said the wider experience of many victims seeking reparations for child sexual across the UK had been profoundly negative.

Former council finance director James Bromiley gave evidence to the inquiry in December 2018.

He said: “On behalf of Middlesbrough Council, I’d like to express our deepest sympathy and apologies for any abuse that took place at Stanhope Castle.”

But the authority was criticised for its handling of legal actions brought forward by victims after using a “limitation defence” – which essentially said it was too late to make a claim against the council.

At the time of the IICSA public hearings, more than 30 civil claims had been brought against Middlesbrough Council for physical and sexual abuse suffered at the Weardale site.

In a statement in September 2019, Middlesbrough Council said it would “carefully consider” the inquiry’s findings and recommendations, and respond to any issues relevant to the authority “in due course”.

At the time, Cllr Hobson said: “The council has always maintained that its inherited liability position in relation to Stanhope Castle School differs considerably from those of other local authorities considered by the (IICSA) inquiry.

“The council does not seek to avoid liability for claims made against it – every claim is investigated as fully as possible – and legal advice sought as to whether the council has a legal liability to pay compensation.

“That advice is based on the outcome of those investigations and the appropriate legal tests and the claim managed through the correct legal process.

“Where the council is advised that it has a legal liability to compensate individuals, it deals with these matters as quickly and sensitively as possible.

“We will of course continue to support and show compassion for the victims of child sexual abuse.”

Chief executive Tony Parkinson explained the council’s position on Stanhope Castle had remained unchanged.

He said: “We inherited the responsibility for the civil claims – we took that on behalf of the four Tees authorities. 

“We do so alongside our insurers and solicitors and follow their instruction.

“Until such time that the national inquiry comes out with any recommendations that might alter the instruction given by insurers and solicitors, we continue to do what we’ve always done which is handle each case individually.”