8,539 recordings lost, 231 unavailable, and a £150,000 fine for a music exam board
What happened
On 14 October 2026, Ofqual, the exams regulator for England, fined the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music £150,000. ABRSM, as it is usually known, runs graded music exams taken by huge numbers of learners, both face to face and digitally. Ofqual has recognised it as an awarding organisation since 2010. The fine was not about marking standards. It was about record keeping: ABRSM failed to keep assessment evidence across three separate incidents in 2024 and 2025. Because the evidence was gone, it could not be used when learners challenged their marks or when possible cheating was investigated. The three incidents are specific. In the first, a software error meant 8,539 audio recordings of completed assessments were not retained. Twenty learners who asked for a marking review could not have that review fully carried out. In the second, recordings and marking records for 16 learners were deleted by mistake. Their results were delayed, and they were unable to fully challenge their marks. In the third, ABRSM suspected possible malpractice by one tutor based overseas, who had entered 710 learners. But 231 of the recordings were no longer available, which limited how far the investigation could go. Ofqual also found that around 72,000 certificates carried incorrect qualification titles. ABRSM later corrected this, told learners and offered replacements, but Ofqual concluded it had not initially taken all reasonable steps. ABRSM agreed to pay the £150,000 fine, contribute £10,000 towards Ofqual's investigation and enforcement costs, and commission an independent audit of its record-retention arrangements. Amanda Swann, Ofqual's Executive Director for Delivery, said: "Awarding organisations have a responsibility to retain assessment evidence and ensure it is available when needed." She added that "weaknesses in its controls meant that important assessment evidence could not always be accessed when required", and that "given the seriousness of these failings, we have taken enforcement action".
Why this matters
If you have never sat a graded music exam, this can look like an administrative squabble. It is not. A music exam is a performance. It happens once, in a room, and then it is over. The recording is the only remaining evidence of what the learner actually played or sang. In a written exam you can always go back to the paper. In a performance exam, if the recording is gone, there is nothing to look at. That is why the right of appeal collapses without it. The twenty learners who asked for a marking review had done everything correctly. They queried their mark, which is their entitlement, and the answer was that the evidence no longer existed. There is no way to put that right afterwards. The malpractice case cuts the other way, and is just as serious. One overseas tutor entered 710 learners. Concerns were raised. But with 231 recordings missing, the investigation could not reach a full conclusion. That potentially leaves honest learners taught by that tutor under a shadow, and it means any wrongdoing may not have been fully established. Graded music exams matter practically too. They are used in school music departments, they can count towards UCAS points at the higher grades, and they feed into music college applications. They are not a hobby certificate. The certificates point is smaller but telling. About 72,000 certificates with the wrong qualification title is a lot of paperwork for learners to sort out, often years later when they need to prove what they achieved.
What the evidence actually says
It is worth being precise about what Ofqual did and did not find. Ofqual did not find that any learner was marked unfairly. The failings are about evidence not being retained, which meant fairness could not be checked. That is a real harm, but it is a different harm from wrong marks. The cause of the largest incident was a software error affecting 8,539 recordings, not a deliberate decision to delete them. The second incident was deletion in error. Ofqual's criticism is of the controls that allowed these things to happen and go unnoticed, which is what Ms Swann means by "weaknesses in its controls". On the overseas tutor, the finding is that malpractice was suspected and that the investigation was limited. Ofqual's statement does not say malpractice was proven, and it would be wrong to report it as though it was. On the certificates, ABRSM did act: it corrected the titles, notified learners and offered replacements. Ofqual's finding is that it did not initially take all reasonable steps. The settlement is also worth reading as a whole. Beyond the £150,000 and the £10,000 towards costs, ABRSM has to commission an independent audit of its record retention. In regulatory terms the audit is often the part that changes behaviour, because it brings someone external in to check. Finally, context on scale. ABRSM assesses very large numbers of learners each year. The incidents involve thousands of records, which is serious, but it is a fraction of its overall activity. Both things are true at once, and neither cancels the other out.
Practical advice
This is mainly a lesson in keeping your own records, which applies well beyond music exams. **Keep your own copy of anything that proves an achievement.** Photograph or scan certificates and store them somewhere you will still have access to in ten years. Email them to yourself if nothing else. **Check a certificate carefully when it arrives.** Make sure the qualification title, grade, subject, spelling of your name and date are all correct. Around 72,000 ABRSM certificates had the wrong qualification title, and most people never look closely. **If your certificate is wrong, ask for a replacement.** Awarding organisations will usually reissue. Do it while the records are current rather than when you need it urgently for a job or a course. **Know that you can query a mark.** Graded exams have a review or appeal process, usually with a deadline measured in weeks. If you think a mark is wrong, start quickly; waiting is the most common reason people lose the right. **Ask your teacher or exam centre to confirm the recording was submitted.** For performance exams, the recording is the evidence. A short email asking for confirmation creates a paper trail. **If you have a concern an exam board will not resolve, you can complain to Ofqual.** Ofqual does not re-mark work, but it does look at whether an awarding organisation followed the rules. That is precisely what happened here. **Do not let administrative problems put a child off music.** The exams are a tool, not the point. Playing is the point.
What to know
Ofqual has fined ABRSM, the music exam board, £150,000 for failing to retain assessment evidence across three incidents in 2024 and 2025. A software error meant 8,539 audio recordings were not kept, leaving twenty learners unable to have a requested marking review fully carried out. Recordings and marking records for a further 16 learners were deleted in error, delaying results and blocking appeals. And in a suspected malpractice case involving one overseas tutor who had entered 710 learners, 231 recordings were unavailable, limiting the investigation. Separately, about 72,000 certificates carried incorrect qualification titles. ABRSM corrected these and offered replacements, but Ofqual found it had not initially taken all reasonable steps. ABRSM will also pay £10,000 towards Ofqual's costs and commission an independent audit of its record retention. Importantly, Ofqual did not find that learners were marked unfairly, and it has not said malpractice was proven. The failure was that fairness could no longer be checked, because in a performance exam the recording is the only evidence there is. The practical lesson for everyone: keep your own copies of certificates, check the details when they arrive, and act quickly if you want to query a mark. Sources: Ofqual, "Ofqual fines ABRSM £150,000 over data retention failures", 14 October 2026, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ofqual-fines-abrsm-150000-over-data-retention-failures; Ofqual, "Complaints about qualifications and awarding organisations", https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ofqual; ABRSM, https://www.abrsm.org/ This article is for general information and is not legal or education advice. For help with a specific exam result or certificate, contact the awarding organisation or your exam centre first. It does not replace advice from a doctor, pharmacist or other qualified healthcare professional.
Related articles
Five sections, no new rules: the violence guidance schools were just sent
On 22 October 2026 the Department for Education published guidance called "Understanding and preventing serious violence in education". It was updated the follo…
72.3% is the best reception result yet. The free school meals gap got wider
On 22 October 2026 the Department for Education published the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile results for 2025 to 2026. This is the assessment teachers ma…
80% said it helps them get to work on time: the breakfast club findings
On 23 October 2026 the Department for Education published the final research report on the Free Breakfast Clubs Early Adopters scheme. The research was carried…