Letter from Vineyard Parents

On 13 April 2026, a vote was held at an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) to dissolve The Vineyard School PTA. We believe the process by which that vote was organised and conducted did not provide members a sufficient opportunity to weigh the rights they were being asked to surrender. After noting the seriousness of the concerns on the relevant Class List discussions, a group of parents came together and organised a letter to the Charity Commission and informed the school about this. Our only goal is to exercise our democratic and legal rights as de jure members of PTA decision-making processes (as parents are automatically members and form the legislature) and to ensure transparent and fair procedures for any future voting processes. Many of us didn't take a role in the management of the PTA or don't intend to do so, but that shouldn't mean that parents do not have a right to raise awareness about any unfair practices and lack of transparency in PTA governance matters. 

We, however, believe that a much wider awareness among parents is needed for the next steps in order to ensure that parents' involvement at Vineyard continues in line with the democracy and transparency values our kids deserve. We wholeheartedly believe that the School Administration will be sensitive to these points and carefully reconsider the process (Update: We see the email from the school sent on 19 May 2026 as a step in the right direction). We also hope that, if the PTA continues to exist, the revocation of the dissolution will be followed by a transparent, inclusive, active PTA election process where elections are regularly conducted with advanced notice and open nominee lists well in advance of meetings. Parents' involvement in school governance can make important differences in our kids' education life. Therefore, please save some time, read this letter,  and if you want to support our request for the revocation of the dissolution decision and the election of a new PTA board,  please add your name to this letter until 31 May 2026. The statement here will be shared with the school administration along with the parents' list. You can reach us via save.thevineyardschool.pta@gmail.com.

The reason we have chosen not to publish the list of our names for now is straightforward: many of us had no prior relationship or history with committee members who have been advocating for dissolution. Yet since we began raising our concerns to relevant official bodies, a number of us have been approached individually and repeatedly in person. We do not want to surrender our personal and private space simply because we exercised our democratic and legal rights — to file a formal complaint and to raise legitimate concerns about transparency. Approaching parents behind closed doors for them using their rights is a deeply concerning act, which has alas been going on since the beginning of the dissolution process, as evidenced by past acts such as censoring messages in school's WhatsApp groups. We trust that everyone, regardless of their position on the PTA, is keen to reflect the British values in education, i.e., respect for rule of law, individual liberty, democracy, and mutual respect and tolerance, in all of our practices. We also believe that anyone who does not agree with our concerns will acknowledge that and focus on the concerns raised below instead of shifting the focus to a personal dimension with a group of parents concerned about serious allegations.

What members were asked to vote on

On 13 April 2026, members were asked to vote to dissolve the PTA. Another body, The Friends of The Vineyard School (FOV), appears to be assuming the PTA's role in collecting and spending donations (while there is no formal replacement for the PTA in theory, this appears to be de-facto the case, given that FoV will be the only organization collecting the donations now). FOV is a separate charity with its own trustees. This represents a shift from a body in which all parents participate in decision-making processes through their vote or by standing for election, to one in which power is held by appointed trustees. In such charity organisations, unlike PTAs, trustees determine board membership without elections, with no guaranteed mechanism for parents to join the executive body, vote, stand for election, inspect accounts, or remove the board. Trustees are not required to be Vineyard parents. We believe that delegating these rights to a body not under the management of current parents is a significant issue that requires, at the very least, a thorough consultation process to ensure all parents are aware of the rights being surrendered.

Transparency and Fair Voting Concerns 

Unfortunately, many members had incomplete information regarding the implications of the vote on 13 April 2026. Following concerns raised by parents on the Classlist forum, we reviewed the communications regarding this voting. It appears that the lack of comprehensive information was largely due to significant transparency issues within the process.

1. According to the Charity Commission’s public register (accessed on 16 April 2026), the PTA Chair served as a trustee of FOV before and during the dissolution process, which raises a potential conflict of interest. This was not disclosed to members at any point before or during the EGM in any of the communications about the dissolution meeting, except for a footnote of a Classlist post, which is not followed by most parents.
   
   

2. We observed two significant changes to the Charity Commission's public register for FOV between 16 and 22 April 2026, following the public raising of conflict-of-interest concerns on Classlist.
   
   2.1 The Chair was removed entirely on the 22 April version (erasing the public record of her 30-month trusteeship of FOV before and during the EGM according to the 16 April version of the register), and

2.2 A school administrator's name was added, with an appointment date recorded as 15 March 2022, approximately four years before the amendment on the CC’s website was made. (In a group message from March 2026, the PTA chair stated that she was also the current chair of the FoV. We do not know if the school administrator is aware of this misinformation added to the official charity registers after the complaint.)

2.3 While we cannot know the motivation underlying these changes, the discrepancy between personal statements and the updated official registry is procedurally problematic. In addition, the involvement of an FOV trustee in the voting process warrants scrutiny. We are not making an allegation; we are seeking regulatory clarification of the public record.

3. We could find no information about FoV itself in the official school communication (email) announcing the EGM; the only pre-voting information we could find was in the footnote of a Classlist post (which is not followed by most parents). Since parents were not informed about the de facto replacement of a body with their full involvement in its governance by another charity, they likely were not able to make informed decisions about their attendance or voting preferences on 13 April 2026.
   
   

4. While there should be a consultation process before the voting, evidence from the school's official WhatsApp group for class representatives and meeting transcripts suggests that the conditions were surprisingly restrictive for any discussion to take place. The FAQ circulated on Classlist on 30 March 2026 - two weeks before the vote - stated that the EGM was "not a forum to discuss what comes next." The Chair confirmed this on the voting day: "This is not a consultation, so we won't be taking any questions". Most worrying is that in the class representatives' WhatsApp group, several parent messages about their concerns about the EGM’s goals and PTA's dissolution were deleted by the PTA Chair, who moderated the group. Any class representatives who wanted to discuss the issue were directed to speak privately instead. Class representatives were told to direct any people with questions or concerns about the dissolution to the PTA Chair, instead of alternatives such as open platforms. This closed approach meant that there was no opportunity to transparently observe parents’ concerns or justifications given to them regarding dissolution.
   
   

5. The EGM meeting was scheduled for 9:00 am on the first day of the term following a two-week holiday, a time that minimized pre-voting discussion and is structurally inaccessible to many working parents, single parents, and parents with disabilities, thereby narrowing the constituency in an inequitable manner.
   
   

6. EGM transcripts and attendees' statements (submitted to the Charity Commission) demonstrate that consultation and discussion were not possible during the EGM either. It lasted 15 minutes and had a low participation number. According to meeting transcriptions, a parent who attempted to raise concerns before starting the voting process was interrupted. The attendance register did not make a complete journey of the room before the vote was called, meaning that whether the dissolution reached a ⅔ vote share is technically unverifiable. Some parents posted on Classlist also reported counters reported different tallies, meaning that one count returned a result in favour of the PTA remaining. We are not aware of any documentary record of a verifying count. No call was made for votes against or abstentions.
   
   

7. A charity commission complaint was made following the Classlist discussions, which was suggested as an option by the Headteacher. We believe that our concerns are serious enough that we do not want our donations to be transferred to FoV or another body without resolving these concerns, which, we believe, requires a public discussion and a revote. (Update: According to the information we received, PTA funds were transferred without the treasurer's permission, now by the former PTA chair, who also started to work as a school employee since then. A solicitor's letter was sent to the School Administration.) Further concern was raised when the vote outcome announcement stated that funds would go "to the school", inconsistent with the preceding Classlist statement referring to uniform shop funds being transferred “to FOV.”

What you can do

1. Read this page in full and form your own view.
   Everything stated here is drawn from information that was sent to parents, posted publicly on Classlist, published on the Charity Commission's public register, or recorded in the official EGM minutes. But please gather your own information, and of course, if you notice any clear inconsistency in our understanding of the process,  please raise this, so the letter can be amended.
   
   

2. We trust that the Vineyard's administration will be sensitive and carefully reconsider the process after our concern. If you want the dissolution decision to be revoked and a new PTA board to be elected, please sign this letter, or, if you prefer, convey your own concerns directly to the Headteacher.
   
   

3. If you would like to escalate this further and directly with the charity comission, the CC accepts complaints from any member of an affected charity at gov.uk/complain-about-charity.

Notes on this page

We share this letter here due to the absence of a formal digital or physical forum for such concerns. This page does not assert any individual’s conduct as unlawful or improper; rather, it shares our understanding and opinions on the processes based on the evidence presented. These procedural matters are for the Charity Commission to review, following the submission of a formal complaint.