City of London Girls full and withdrawing offers - anyone heard similar and advice?

Sounds harsh. Locally here in bristol parents can pay a holding deposit
Do you have othet offers.
We just applied for 3 state and nervous about that but private offer were 2 weeks ago just before half term.
Lots here hedge their bets in private and mad state apllications as backup .

They can be as clear as they like in their literature, but they are in the same position as all the other schools listed here and have adopted a policy that favours the school not the applicant. That alone is tells me more about the ethos of the school than the open day did.

It is an uncommon practice and AFAIK only two or three schools in North London go in for it (SPQGS, mentioned earlier in the thread doesn't)

But it is clear in all the admissions literature that this is what they do, and so parents should not be caught out by it. But there is of course no obligation whatsoever on the school to make hedging easy.

Now, any school can muck up its numbers occasionally. One SW school had a much lower rate of rejections than expected and was considering adding an extra class (which would have essentially wiped out its 13+ entry point for that cohort) but it didn't come to that in the end. The key difference between that school and CLSG being that they would honour all offers.

I hope that the practice adopted by CLSG does not spread.

I think that it would be reasonable for parents to assume that they could wait until the offer holder's day before making a decision.

If I were an affected parent I would be tempted to write to City, asking for my registration fees back.

That's interesting missing, about the shift of CLSG catchment eastwards. Though my impression is that the eastwards schools also have a final acceptance date to coincide with state school offers, so unless they too are doing exploding offers there would be no inherent reason for CLSG to do them.

(Warning - don't rely on my impression!! about closing dates - if you have an offer, I mean!)

When City came out of the consortium they sited the fact that their catchment was moving Eastwards as a primary reason. I wonder if this has something to do with it all. Perhaps they are aligning with different schools than they used to do, in terms of test dates and acceptances, etc.

They should have said first come first serve and or offered to everone who confirmed before the "deadline" date. The date should also at least 1 week after the state school announcement date too as many people weighting with other state choices available. Reading this thread carefully I think City didnt handle this well. Its a shame as my friend's daughter has been with the school the last 9 years since primary and they love it, they are hoping for their second daughter to have a place too.

Needmoresleep I couldn't agree more!

I think it is bad form. Most London indies have a deadline just after state allocations day. They know that for many parents it is a stretch to pay the fees, and that the indie is back up in case they don't get the preferred state secondary.

They will also know that this group of pupils tend to do well. They tend to be motivated, and hard working, with good parental support. It is easier for richer parents to lose a deposit, as the price to be paid for holding onto a choice for longer. I can see several parents deciding that they will drop CLSG and have somewhere else (SHHS, Channing, G&L) as back up. This will weaken the City intake, including its economics diversity. More worrying is the knock on effect if it makes other school struggle to judge numbers and lead them to adopt the same approach.

I appreciate that there are bursaries, but the real strength of schools like City is that they also take a good number of the "missing middle". The children of London professionals ,who struggle with the cost of living in London, and who would only pay fees if the state alternative they are offered is unattractive, and unlikely to do give a bright child the opportunities they should have.

I agree with all you mums who have expressed disquiet at this practice! Just picking up on a few comments above, I don't think leaving the consortium helped reduce the number of applicants at all because City's exams were on the 4th Jan, two days before the first of the consortium exams. I know parents who sat City only as a "practice run" for consortium! If they were serious about focusing on candidates who consider City as their first choice they would have held their exams on the same date as St Paul's or NLC. I am now wondering - what is the point if this open day next week??

I agree with ChocolateWombat. I think this is very poor tactics on City's part and it will backfire as the parents who jumped and accepted are likely to be these for whom City was the best (or only feasible) offer on the table. Not a good way to attract the strongest candidates to your school. At least give everyone a chance to attend the open day before accepting deposits or bring forward the open day to this week like all other schools are doing. This has put me off City. Chaotic!

Yes we did aspirational/aspirational/realistic, no bankers too as I don't see the worth in paying for a banker as our local good state school seemed equivalent to me. Hence no firm decisions until we had all offers in. Ludicrous that schools think there are enough extremely wealthy people out there these days to fill entire schools with people who are just set on one school, without consideration, and that one school is so head and shoulders above all other choices that all applicants will only choose them. Very arrogant imo, the schools are businesses and we are their customers. Businesses ignore customer choice at their peril, as history has shown us time and time again. I have no vested interest btw (no daughters)

Just for the record, Highgate also do exploding offers. Or at least they did two years ago and had done the previous year too. At the post offers open day the sort of sounded a virtual klaxon warning people to commit quickly and created quite a panic, a bit like estate agents holding an open house to get buyers into competition with one another.

I felt at the time it was most unfair. City Boys, UCS, Habs etc (ie their competitors for boys) didn't do it, they respected the agreed deadline. I don't know why Highgate had to be different and ditto City Girls.

I also agree that it's very hard to know with any certainty which is the favoured school until you have offers on the table (ideally the state ones too - lots of us aren't set on private for private's sake). Certainly our least preferred became our favourite during the process. It's all very well saying having an aspirational, realistic, banker and go for the highest that is offered, but in reality it's not as straightforwardly hierarchical. We went for three dodgy aspirationals/realistics, no bankers, because these were the schools nearest us and which seemed worth paying for.

Whilst I sympathise with everyone who has had their offer turned into a waiting list offer and agree that the practice is unfair and off putting, it shouldn't really have come as a surprise to anyone that CLSG have done exactly what they said they would do (and have done for the past few years).

NL2016- we are very, very happy with our decision to send DD to Godolphin. She is extremely happy there and is thriving-socially and academically. We have no regrets whatsoever. Is there any thing in particular you want to know? Feel free to pm me if you prefer.

We were torn between City and Godolphin , two very different schools. Our Ds is at City boys and is very happy there so naturally we first looked to its "sister" school. We liked both schools but ultimately felt that Godolphin was a better fit for DD. There were a few things that put us off City girls ( that might not be off putting for other people) whilst the only "negatives" of Godolphin for us were that the fees were higher and also that it doesn't have the same social and ethnic diversity of City.

I also agree that this is unfair. The reason for the March deadline is to align with state school offers and there are many whose decision is dependent on what the 'free' option is. In addition, others will legitimately want to visit schools again, and to check out travel times at rush hour - which has only been possible this week. Pulling the offers before the Offer Holders meeting/state deadline is just cruel. Put simply, there is no need for City or Channing or any of the others to over-offer by so much. They could always make fewer offers and have a longer waiting list. I suspect they choose not to as it makes them seem more desirable when they can claim higher take-up than expected. Interestingly, Highgate have done this before as their offer:acceptance ratio changed from 2.5:1 to 1.5:1, however they have adjusted by making fewer offers and last year took a number from the waiting list.

It's the first time I hear about this but how horrible practice this is. I understand the constraints of space etc but that first come first served acceptance is just unfair. They got to think up something better.

I find it particularly unfortunate - but also a source of hope for those who now suddenly find themselves on the City waiting list - that the school is "full" before the state school offers. Many clever North London girls will be hoping for a great comp or have sat e.g. Henrietta Barnett - which might be the true first preference for some who have accepted City under time pressure. This could mean quite a bit of movement on the City waiting list late next week.

(This will then also impact waiting lists for several other schools, both highly selective and less so. One spot at HBS lead to a chain reaction affecting several kids)

I think it shows a school that doesn't have very good software in place. Modern AI systems with decent algorithms should be able to predict how many offers they should make with good accuracy. Of the three schools we applied to last year, none went to their waiting list at all and all places were filled from the initial round of offers. Obviously there are blips, the schools occasionally have to run bulge classes, but this seems elitist and grabby to me.

Whilst I sympathise with the OP and others in this thread, I emailed the registrar last week as DH was away so no 2nd signature for the forms. To be fair, the admissions office were clear (if asked) that they had no idea when the list would be full, but last year it was March. She advised she would email everyone when it reached 75%. everyone who had an offer had the same opportunity to accept. If, like us, it was a genuine 1st choice, it was a no-brainer to send back the paperwork as it was clear there was a risk in not doing so. I honestly do not think that there is a massive cohort of parents hedging their bets but clearly there will be the odd one or two. those parents may well affect the reputation of their child's school in doing so. I do however see harm in holding onto offers from schools in all four corners of London when there are genuinely local kids waiting for a place who don't have the luxury of choice right now. I would bet that the acceptance level of 100% before offer holders morning is as much of a surprise to CLSG as it is to everyone on this thread (including myself).

Agreed ami, the CLSG deposit is "only" a grand so some people will have paid it to hold the place while they make up their minds.

I do wonder if this will have a knock on effect on other schools, with people accepting offers to be on the safe side. Bloody annoying really and horrible for the OPs DD.

And the school will pocket the deposits happily!

Personally i think it is outrageous practice. If they are so constrained by space that they physically cannot put on a bulge class they they shouldn't over offer and they should use the waitlist to fill the places.
Their behaviour favours:

• those in the know / those with advice from prep school
• those not seriously considering state schools
• those who can comfortably afford to lose their deposit.

Many will have just paid the deposit in a panic in response to the acceptance % emails. I bet many will withdraw.

It takes waiting for the state option out of the equation, unless you are happy to lose the deposit (which is clearly an option that some will choose).

Just adds crazy pressure to an already pressured process and really doesn't show the school in good light. Its a cruel thing to remove an offer from a child. Plenty will not have been in a position to act on the panic emails in a few hours. They should honour their offers like everyone else.

And emailing everyone just fuels the panic ensuring that 65% to 100% happens in a morning. Ridiculous.