I thought schools couldn’t insist on expensive logo uniform

[Costofeveryt]

It’s secondary so maybe it’s different ?

They insist on PE items that are ridiculously expensive and if a child wears different they get detentions and punishment ?? So we have to spend about £75 for the logo PE kit ? Can’t wear plain t shirts or joggers ?? Is that right ? I can get a full plain set for about £25 in a supermarket why are children being punished of their parents can’t afford logo stuff

Use fb marketplace to get them second hand.

But even of I could locate the right size it’s still not the point is it when it will still be cheaper to get supermarket basic uniform which I thought was meant to be allowed ?

They shouldn't

@prh47bridge - I seem to remember your posting that the guidance is now statutory, meaning a school must have unusually good reasons to depart from it.

I'm dreading secondary for my kids. That's absolutely ridiculous.

Can you speak to any other parents about this? Or contact the governors? If enough parents refuse to cooperate, they'll have to relent.

Our school brought in a new pe kit (so no second hand) : £135 for 5 items and a pair of socks. All compulsory.

It’s insanity!

The guidance does say that branded items should be kept to a minimum and that there should not be different items for different sports.

It would seem that there are schools that are breaching that guidance. The governing body should have explored cost effective options and suppliers and I’d suggest looking at the DFE paper and approaching the school with that information.

Our primary school insists on logo's for school trips for safety reasons (I guess if a child gets lost?) Other than that they don't have to wear them.

It's so wrong to give children detention for this reason. I'm 30 and remember someone getting into trouble for this at school, even after she told the pe teacher "my mum can't afford it", I've remembered it for years as so unfair.

Yes they can my kids school demands this as well and the other day I couldn’t find his PE top as I only bought one as they were so expensive if he didn’t go in with it he gets 1 hour detention

We are a state primary and they have branded PE polo, shorts and jumper, in addition to their branded WHITE polo shirts and jumpers. Of course you can't manage with just one of each, and small children and white tops mean they need regular replacement. It's outrageous.

Ds has already gone through the knees of both his new pairs of school trousers in one half term - £28 a pair and they have to have the school logo on. I don’t know why plain black trousers won’t do.
our pe pack was £90 bought from a totally different supplier on a different industrial estate where they don’t even have changing rooms to try anything on so I just paid the £6 to have it delivered - it didn’t fit so had to send it back (at a cost of course!) and get a different size.
Shorts/tshirt/joggers should suffice, breathable light loose material for moving in that can be worn anywhere any time. Why has he now got a set of clothes that are worn for an hour a week for a maximum of 38 weeks of the year?! Waste of money or what?!

I don't have personal experience of this, but I think it's outrageous in the current cost of living crisis.

There are parents struggling to feed their children properly - of course they can't afford ridiculous prices for uniform.

My grandson goes to one of the most academic schools in the UK. It's private and fees are high, but even they realize that uniforms can be expensive.

The only obligatory part of the uniform is a school badge. Everything else can be bought anywhere as long as it's the right colour.

If one school can do it, they should all be able to.

My kids school removed a lot of the PE kit requirements this year (its just a t shirt now, everything else is plain navy). My money is on the skirt next... they ate more expensive than the blazer, so i reckon they will go plain grey in the next few years. They have a second hand shop too.

It can be done. Lots of schools do it!

It is so annoying isn't it? DD's school had logos on sports kit and their name embroidered on, so no passing on either.

I feel your pain. Primary school is so cheap compared to secondary. Have 3 DC in secondary now and their uniform costs a fortune. Their PE kits are about £70 each every year and the blazers £40 each. DD’s wear trousers because I can get them 3 pairs for the same price as one school logo skirt.

My daughters have gone from a state primary with everything logo'd except shirts and PE bottoms to a state secondary with everything logo'd except shirts. Both are in the top schools in the county and have notions about themselves. Uniform costs a fortune.

I agree and I emailed dd's school about it and got some waffle in reply that it had been decided at school council. Yes, the students had decided that their parents must buy them logoed PE kit 🙄

Everyone saying that their school does it - have you challenged it using the DfE guidance ?

Can you buy school badges to sew on items needing logo?
Dcs school used to sell them for £3.50 (ish).

@meditrina is correct that there is statutory guidance on this. There are two sets of guidance from the government - non-statutory guidance issued this year and statutory guidance issued two years ago. Schools often think that this is only guidance, so they are free to ignore it. That is correct for the non-statutory guidance, but not for the statutory guidance. The courts have been clear that statutory guidance is as close to law as it is possible to get without actually being law. Schools are required to stick to it but can depart in a particular case when there are good, legally admissible reasons for doing so. Even then, they must stick as close to the guidance as they can.

You can find the statutory guidance at Cost of school uniforms - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Unfortunately, if this school is in breach (and it sounds as if they may be), the only way to enforce it is to take them to court. The first step, however, is to make a formal complaint and be clear to the governors about the importance of statutory guidance. Refer to R vs Islington Borough Council ex parte Rixon [1996]. This set the precedent for the way the courts regard statutory guidance. Whilst this particular case concerned social services, the decision of this court has been followed by the courts ever since. The judgement in this case stated, "Parliament... has required local authorities to follow the path charted by the secretary of state’s guidance, with liberty to deviate from it where the local authority judges on admissible grounds that there is good reason to do so, but without freedom to take a substantially different course"