Moving into rented accommodation in the catchment area-when can I safely move back?

"If the education system was working properly, wherever you lived, you would know that there was a suitable school nearby that was going to do right by your child"

Really - not so.

Schools may end up at the top or bottom of the league tables, and be more or less desirable on the strength of their intake above all else.

ZOMBIE THREAD!!!!

Also, VA schools are schools owned by the religion, which are currently operated as part of the wider maintained sector. They are not state-owned schools.

So to remove them from the maintained sector and replace them with state-owned schools is do-able, but I doubt affordable right now.

I think the only fair solution to this problem is banding - which is now being introduced in bigger cities. All students take a test in Y6 - and each school takes 20% of students in each band. This tends to equate to at least 20% of advantaged students in each school and no more than 20% disadvantaged. After a couple of years all schools in the area have a similar intake and fair comparisons can then be made between them. There are no more wonderful schools and no more swervable schools.
I am strongly in favour of this at primary too - maybe based on family income. More logistics problems at this age perhaps - but no worse than those already faced by some families.

I've only just stumbled on this thread and I'm totally amazed at the level of anger expressed towards Enlondon for their original post.

Hers is no worse than all the other forms of deception people are forced by an unfair education system to use to secure a place for their child, not least lying about being a church-goer, which strikes me as far more heinous a crime.

The fact is that none of us should be forced to jump through such hoops.

If the education system was working properly, wherever you lived, you would know that there was a suitable school nearby that was going to do right by your child. We are all subject to the same taxation system that funds education, so why should we suffer if we happen to live in an area where the school isn't up to scratch or isn't right for our child in another way, such as putting in place a stipulation that they have to have been baptised under a certain religious denomination within minutes of their birth or else they don't qualify. EVEN THOUGH the given school is publicly funded, paid for by money from each and every one of our pockets.

Frankly, the whole catchment area system is failing and is creating a situation that stands in total contradiction of the principle behind comprehensive education. Those that are lucky enough to live in the right area, often the wealthiest areas or those with a particular religious affiliation - these are the cats that get the cream. That is plainly wrong.

In the absence of a particular government having the courage and the principle to set up a better system once and for all, I hold no grudge against anyone wishing to play the system as the lady who started this thread - and many others - are sadly obliged to do.

This comes up every year, so posting for anyone reading.

Yes, it is unethical. You harm another family directly by trying to benefit your own family. It also undermines community cohesion by having schoolmates not live nearby, and it harms the environment as larger distances need to be travelled.

But really, it is wrong because you hurt someone directly for your own child's interests. Caring for your child is not an excuse to directly hurt another child and take from that child what you want for your child. Period.

And to those who say 'but everyone is doing it' or 'likely to take a spot from another renting family' - That is an attempt to justify your situation and downplay your ethical dilemma - its a natural response to your cognitive dissonance - you don't want to think of yoruself as a bad person. But it is not true, an it is not helpful.

Not everyone is doing it. Some of us beleive in respecting our neighbours and others and won't directly hurt them to benefit our own kids. And what kind of moral code do you follow anyway if you truely believe that if many peopel do something unethical then its OK for you to do so as well?

It is also incredibly unlikely that you take the spot of another strategic renter. Less than half of the spaces will be taken up by strategic renters we can guess. And those renters won't be renting on the edge of the catchment, they'll rent as close as possible to be certain. You will take a place from someone on the edge who likely has been living there a lot longer and deserves the spot.

Its worse though - you are likely to be able to afford private school, or to move to another community altogether where schools are more to your liking. The person you take this space from probably can't. So you likely give them fewer options than you have by doing this to them.

So not only are you taking from someone what they should have because you want it for your kid, but you leave them with fewer options than you would have if they are not as wealthy as you (most likely the case).

The statement above that it 'might not be in the spirit of the law' but is legal is damning - if you admit it is not in the spirit of the law then you are admitting it is unethical and wrong. Yes you can get away with it in some places. But please admit you are being unethical and hurting someone - stop denying it or making excuses like 'its ok if its for my child'. Its not OK to take something away from someone else if it is for your child. Please recognise that.

But lavender there is nothing wrong with renting in catchment. Most ppl rent in expensive areas. OP wants to rent for literally a week or something, just until the application is in, and then move out again. Which is the issue.

The difference between buying in catchment and paying fees is that when your kid leaves school, you still own a house in catchment and you can sell it for super bucks to the next family. Ppl buying in catchment make more money, but those houses can be unaffordable, even to families who can manage school fees.

So a child whose parents come to buy a house to be in the catchment area is entitled a place and a child whose parents come to rent to be in the catchment area is a cheat? Seriously? I don't see why some mums call renting "fiddling the system". Not all familly can get a mortgage, especially in a good catchment area. This debate is ridiculous, and some mums really need to open their gated house to the real world.

but then if you sell the house again you may end up making money that way. private school fees you don't get back.

interesting thread: how good a school is has nothing to do with the children in it. Perhaps but it does have a lot to do with the parents of the children.

Also someone with a 2yo worried about a secondary school being in sm. Erm it won't be in 9 years . Equally schools are only 'outstanding' till the next time they are inspected (by which time the goalposts have moved) OFSTED is not only a complete load of bollocks but the ratings change.

It's funny how people are prepared to spend more money on a house in a particular school's catchment area than it would cost to put their kids through private school. Another site that seems to be trying to cut out the middle man is www.wouldliketomove.com but it appears a bit bare at the moment.

op can you afford to buy a small place instead of taking such risk. Or can you rent a place and at the same time put your home on the market.

Unfortunately we have a very unfair education system. Every decent parent wants to do their best for their dcs. This is depriving other dcs, of course it is. What about those who try to get their dcs into grammar schools from far far away way outside of their home counties? Many of our local dcs have been deprived for decades.

So you are saying it is all right to fiddle the system in order that your child gets a place at your preferred school at the expense of the child who should have got that place. And that is somehow more moral than saying the place should go to the child who, according to the rules, should get the place.

Renting in order to get a place at your preferred school is against the rules. LAs are getting tougher on this all the time so it is increasingly likely that anyone who tries this will be found out and could end up in a worse situation than they would have had they been honest about their home address.

The government is working to improve schools and has achieved considerable success. The number of schools performing below the floor standard has dropped substantially. It is also working on increasing choice through encouraging the formation of free schools. But, of course, there will always be some schools that are better than others. There is no way of preventing that. It is, however, also the case that the school which is best this year may no longer hold that position next year.

Oh and my door is open to the world of democracy. I am pretty sure you will find that the democratic will of the people is that the rules on school admissions should be enforced and that people who attempt to cheat the system by renting should be penalised.

What is the option if ' renting is not acceptable' and you can't get a mortgage? How about opening your door to the world of democracy, and opening the debate towards better schools for every child? Rather than repeat some "morals" which deep down have nothing moral.

It is highly unlikely her child did get a place given that she had alerted the LA to her intentions. Renting is not acceptable. You are attempting to do someone else out of a place that is rightfully theirs.

I hope her child got a place. Renting is perfectly acceptable in this rotten school system. And i hope that all the mums who are wishing bad luck to this mum and her children, get some sort of education too.

If OP has already spoken to the LEA, she WILL have alerted them. Your phone number comes up on the system, even if you are ex directory; I rang and reported a noise nusiance a couple of weeks ago, and when I went to give them my details, they already had them up on the screen. So unless you rang from a mobile that isn't registered to your address via your children's' current school, they know EXACTLY who rang. They even had my mobile on file.

This thread is over a year old. I doubt the OP is listening.

Op, go for it. Your DC deserves a place (at the shittiest school in the area, which is where they will end up if you get caught).

Be aware that other parents (particularly those who have children on the waiting list) will inform on you if they find out so it is not just the LEA and school you will need to fool.

OP - is the school in question one with a tiny catchment area because siblings and exam entrance candidates take most of the places? Is so, I'd forget the plan - the school knows every rented house on the local streets and are super vigilant to this sort of thing.

Op

Our next door neighbours have done this. Rented their house out and moved 20 miles away so they are in the catchment for grammar schools. (Both kids very bright.)

They moved when older one was in year 5 and plan to come back once younger one goes to university so will be gone for about 10 years.

They were originally going to sell their house (it was on the market for 6 months) but they couldn't get an offer and decided that as, long term, they want to come back anyway they would keep it.

If you are going to do it you should do it this way.

'Its essentially an active protest against the state who are trying to force children into a sub-standard education'

No, it isn't. It's standing on other people who are equally affected by the state system.

A bit like a bloke getting into a lifeboat on the Titanic, as a protest against the company that didn't provide enough spaces.

That's not very heroic or even very understandable.

Once the place has been offered and the child has started then you could move

As I have pointed out before this is wrong. The place can still be removed if the LA believes you have obtained the place by making a false or misleading application. It happens every year. And in that situation the child is going to end up at an unpopular school, possibly miles from home. So the parents could find themselves in a much worse situation than if they had been honest.

if the school you want your child to attend is an academy then they will not work that closely with the LA on admissions

Dream on. Academies don't like people breaking the rules any more than other types of school. The type of parent that is willing to break the rules to do other children out of places that are, like it or not, rightfully theirs is likely to cause problems for the school. They have no choice but to work closely with the LA on admissions. Their only involvement is to set their admission criteria and put the list of applicants in order. The rest of the process is handled by the LA. And, of course, if they allow parents to get away with this behaviour they may well face successful appeals for those children who have been deprived of places, resulting in the school having to admit beyond PAN.

Yes, it is possible you may get away with this. Some people do. But admission authorities (LAs and schools) are improving their enforcement all the time and if you are found out you could find your child attending a sink school you really hate that you would have avoided if you had been honest. That is the risk you take.