‘Significant concerns’ were raised about sick nursery worker 3 years before he was arrested for abusing sleeping kids

“SIGNIFICANT concerns” were raised about a sick paedophile nursery worker three years before he was arrested, according to reports. Vincent Chan was jailed in February having pleaded guilty to 56 offences on three-year-old girls in his care at Bright Horizons nursery in north-west London. Following his conviction, prosecutors describe Chan as a “prolific sexual predator”. It has now been revealed Chan was the subject of a previous safeguarding investigation, carried out by Bright Horizons, with the oversight of Camden council, The Guardian reports. It came after “significant concerns” were raised with the nursery in 2021 about Chan’s conduct and behaviours by the parent of a young girl, including concerns about what her daughter was saying to her about Chan. The nursery referred the matter to Camden council, which advised it to investigate. Read More on UK News While the investigation was carried out, Chan was put on duties that involved no contact with children. He was cleared to return to his role caring for young children at the nursery. Just a year later, in 2022, Chan filmed himself sexually abusing three-year-old girls at the Bright Horizons nursery. In June 2024, he was arrested, initially on suspicion of child cruelty, after videos were discovered by nursery staff that Chan had filmed of distressed children in his care. Most read in The Sun Cops then searched his devices and discovered he was a prolific sexual offender with tens of thousands of child abuse images on his computer. It was also revealed he had committed sexual offences in his previous job as a teaching assistant at St Mary’s Church of England primary school in Dollis Park, North London, including upskirting female pupils. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison in February this year. The case raises serious concerns about whether existing safeguarding measures for nurseries are adequate. Before Chan was arrested, other parents claim they raised concerns with Bright Horizons about Chan’s conduct at work. They say concerns were raised with the nursery that their children were telling them that Chan shouted at them, was “angry” and a “bad man”. The parents say their concerns were dismissed. The Bright Horizons nursery on the Finchley Road closed in June 2025. When there are concerns that a nursery work has been accused of harming or posing a risk of harm to children, may be guilty of criminal conduct or has exhibited behaviour that makes them unsuitable to work with children, nurseries have a responsibility to refer to local authority designated officers (LADOs) The ultimate responsibility for managing allegations raised that relate to adults who work with children lies with the local authority. If the concerns meet a criminal threshold, LADOs can recommend the matter is referred to the cops. It is understood the Met Police didn’t receive a referral in 2021 regarding Chan and were only later told of the concerns. Once Chan’s sexual offending came to light, Camden council carried out a rapid review of the decision to clear him to return to work, following the Bright Horizons investigation. That review ended in November 2025 and Camden council then commissioned a local child safeguarding practice review to look at how Chan was able to abuse children at the nursery as well as offences committed in his previous job. The review, which has been repeatedly pushed back, is now likely to be published in early 2027, according to Camden council. It is expected to be critical of the safeguarding culture within Bright Horizons. However, Camden council has said it cannot investigate Bright Horizons under health and safety laws because it is conflicted due to its participation in the safeguarding review. Local authorities have the power to prosecute businesses that do not comply with health and safety legislation. A letter sent to the parent of a child at the nursery, Camden council said the purpose of the safeguarding review was “not conducted to hold individuals, organisations, or agencies to account,” The Guadian says. The parents of Chan’s victims are unlikely to be satisfied by the review as it is unlikely to apportion blame to executives at Bright Horizons. The review was first due in the summer this year. There has been no explanation as to why it was delayed.