Renting in catchment area and owning outside it

I think that's the right decision Cauliflower. Your son's education is more important than bricks and mortar.

Good luck with the application process.

If it’s DHFS, there were several children this year who did not get in after being at catchment Schools. Local Primary Schools are good at warning parents that there is no automatic progression but most parents ignore and then wonder why they don’t get the secondary place.
The DHFS head would admit everyone but the LA is keeping numbers firmly capped. In that situation, they’ll be checking rentals carefully and other parents will be quick to report in hopes of getting their own children places.

"And honestly - he won’t be removed from school in the early weeks of school. He’ll either get in or he won’t"

In a neighbouring borough to me 3 kids were removed directly from the playground in the middle of the school day.

OP, why ever didn't you sell and buy earlier?

OP - please don't base your school choice on your DS being with his "lifelong" (that's 10 year's long then ...) friends.

When DD moved to secondary school there were about 15 friends who she'd have been very happy to have had in her class? Guess how many were? yes, precisely zero. About 3 or 4 of the friends share some lessons with her; most she scarcely sees at all at school.

DS was similarly put into a class with no close friends.

If i'd gone to huge lengths to move, especially from a house I loved, purely to keep my DC with friends, I would have been very annoyed indeed.

@admissions

If they would not have got a place then they are legally given the right to appeal to get a place at the school - though I have not had anybody who had the cheek to do that.

I do, they won the appeal and kept the school place...this was some years ago now and was part of a huge scandal which made the Borough tighten up their admissions wording.

@Leesa65 - and me.
I don't know why you started this thread OP.

I also am aware of LAs who just say this is what is available.

I think I must live in one of these. I was definitely thinking of examples where families had no right to the place from their permanent address. Thanks for the clarification

cantkeepawayforever, the situation if the poster does have the place removed after it has been given to them is slightly different than you say. Firstly the LA is required to consider the application again as if it was from the address of their deemed permanent home. If they would have got a place then they can keep it. If they would not have got a place then they are legally given the right to appeal to get a place at the school - though I have not had anybody who had the cheek to do that.
Assuming that the appeal fails then the situation that then exists is a bit "grey" because there is nothing in the code over this scenario. I know LAs who do check whether they would have got in their second and third preferences. I also am aware of LAs who just say this is what is available. Given the poster is in a very difficult position having been sussed out, it would be a brave or pig-headed person who went to court to get clarity on this point.

We are moving to the catchment area of my son’s current primary school in order for him to continue his education with his peers at the secondary school within that area

Translated - we have totally cheated the admissions system and are so desperate, we are prepared to spend thousands of pounds getting a school places.

As regards proof of address, so long as you're living there at the time you apply, most LAs will accept whatever proof you produce. They know the score and can do very little about it. The issue here is that 3/4s of schools are either academies or church schools, who may have their own take on admissions - have you actually sussed out the admissions policy of the school itself ?

Sorry, X-post

Possibly also worth pointing out that if your application is judged to be fraudulent after places are allocated, you don't get the place you 'would have done' on allocation day instead (e.g. your second choice).

IME, you are treated as a late applicant - or an in-year applicant if the place is removed mid-term - and can only get a place in any under subscribed school which has a place available at that point. That can be miles away, and not one of your choices.

So choosing to commit fraud is not as 'risk free' as most assume: 'Oh, it's OK, they'll just give me my second choice anyway, so it's worth a try'. If the fraud is detected after allocation, you are in a MUCH worse position than if you had not attempted the fraud in the first place.

You are setting your son up for an enormous disappointment
*either by promising him a place and not delivering upon it
*even worse if you have bought the uniform and then get kicked into or touch by having it withdrawn the week before (I know of this happening)

• or the aboslute worst scenario of having your child pulled from the school in the first couple of months.

The start of secondary school is an extremely challenging and emotionally sensitive time for all children. Not only are you teaching your son to lie to get what he wants but you are running the risk of not having some control over what schools you would like him to attend in your actual home address catchment.

If you get rumbled (which I am confident you will be - as I said they expect you living at the address for probably the entire duration of year 7 at a minimum) then LEA will pull him from the school and send him wherever there is a place available (which will probably be the failing school far away - as they will be the only ones with spaces).

Don't risk this and think about what life lessons you are teaching your son.

And honestly - he won’t be removed from school in the early weeks of school. He’ll either get in or he won’t

Another one saying don't be so complacent. In many LEAs there are so many fraudulent applications that they are taking a very hard line, in order to send signals to anyone else contemplating it.

Op’s insistence that honestly, he won’t be removed from school in the early weeks shows that in common with most people who think they’re the first to have thought of this brilliant wheeze; she hasn’t the remotest clue how the system actually works.
Her poor kid will be the one paying the price, unfortunately.

And honestly - he won’t be removed from school in the early weeks of school. He’ll either get in or he won’t

That simply is not true. If the local authority conclude that your application was fraudulent or deliberately misleading the place can be withdrawn after your child starts at the school. Being open and giving full disclosure is no guarantee. The local authority can still change its mind. I've seen it happen.

People like you really annoy me.

In the borough of Richmond - the LEA literature is explicit that if you own and rent a property simultaneously then they always take the address of the property you own. Richmond was in the Evening Standard about 5 years as being the borough with the highest number of misleading applications compared to any other in London. (Probably due to the good variety of secondary and primary schools). They are so stringent that expect you to be renting a minimum of 6 months prior to the application and for at least 1 year afterwards. I do know of children having school places withdrawn even during the first couple of months of the start of the year. In fact we moved from Teddington (sold house) and moved to another area within the Richmond borough (bought house) to follow the catchment area and we had the Dept of Education phone us up to verify we had sold our previous property etc and we had to provide the deeds etc confirming of the sale and purchase of the properties. i would not risk it.

And honestly - he won’t be removed from school in the early weeks of school. He’ll either get in or he won’t.

It isn't as simple as that. IME, there seem to be 3 points when admissions fraud, or behaviour which looks like admissions fraud, are picked up:

1. On application, or while applications are scrutinised. This is becoming more common, as councils get more aware of it.

However, there are two more:

1. On the public allocation of places. Parents not getting their child in to the desired school take a look at the children who have got in, and say 'Hmm, that doesn't look quite right, because I know...' and they ring the local authority, who withdraw the place.

1. On arrival at secondary, or during the first term. This is often by an extension of 2, but it can be that addresses shared by primary schools or the admissions authority with the secondary school don't match the actual address on starting, or various other red flags 'behind the scenes' (councils are definitely more canny about checking things like ending of short term rentals near the school between allocation and arrival etc).

Obviously, nobody 'sees' the first one - the place is simply not allocated. Both 2 and 3 are very visible, and thus I very am aware that both happen, even to families who successfully get through the application and allocation stage.

Exactly. And another thing to remember is that, because they have to be as fair and objective as possible and open to scrutiny at appeal, admission arrangements are very much about what you do, not what you say you intend to do. That's why (depending to some extent on the requirements in each LEA about proof of address and changing address) renting in catchment while hanging onto a home elsewhere can be problematic. It's all very well someone saying that they intend to stay in the area indefinitely and won't be going back to the house they own elsewhere but, to someone sitting in the town hall, that looks just the same as someone who's rented a bedsit in the catchment of Leafy Comp for 6 months before heading back to their home on the other side of town. Hence some LEAs wanting evidence that the former house is being sold etc.

Look, whether or not you agree with the posters here or not what it boils down to is what's more important to you.

Keeping your house and running the risk of having a place taken away from your son because the local authority have had to crack down on admissions, or making absolutely sure your son gets a place in the desired school.

FWIW we were in a very similar position and took the sell the house and buy in catchment option. We really didn't want to sell our house as we had spent over a decade renovating it. I really thought we would miss the house, but we don't miss it at all in fact I really wish we had bitten the bullet and moved into catchment earlier.

You’ve already been given plenty of good advice, although you seem somewhat reluctant to take it.

The simple answer to “what do I need to do, to convince the LEA ...” is to get their requirements in writing and then follow them. Some LEAs will (for example) expect you to sell your old house, while others will accept a long term rental agreement on it, so it’s important to be clear about what’s required.

On a separate point, if you have evidence from a health care professional of your child’s separation anxiety, that may place you in the medical/social category for admissions (if this school has one) and so higher up the oversubscription criteria.

OP, just to say, I agree with you entirely. Having been accused the fraud myself I get how frustrating this situation is - all I can say is that I now understand the reason for the rules, the cut off dates, the scrutiny etc. the LA have a hard job allocating places and situations like this just complicate things. The LA need some parameters to work within.

You are not doing anything wrong, it is all perfectly legitimate. The problem is that others can and will see the "other side" and assume that you are cheating, especially if their child did not get a place at the school.
As you say, be totally open with the LA, make sure that in any conversation that you have with them that you either get them to confirm in writing or that you write saying "thank you for the conversation, this is what I understood you to say". That at least gives you a time line of conversations which give you more credibility if there comes a time when the LA is questioning the validity of the address used.

Ridiculous comments from people I'm afraid.
Good luck to you op who honestly wouldn't go all out to get the best for their own children?