To be declare to School Admissions Dept that we are renting temporarily in catchment?

[Broderieanglaise]

We are renting in catchment because we genuinely can't find a house to buy. We have the intention and funds to buy within catchment, there just isn't anything coming onto the market and there hasn't been since the beginning of the summer holidays. Literally not a single 3-4 bedroom house within the admittedly very tiny catchment area of the school.

The school admissions brochure states if we own a house elsewhere, then any other address will be considered as temporary. But if we sell our other house (which is 45 mins away and next to some excellent state schools already), then we'll lose out on capital appreciation. In other words if we're out of the property game for 12 months or more we're likely to find we can't get back on at the same level in our new area. House prices went up 15% in our area last year and the same is predicted this year.

So am I being unreasonable in asking the admissions dept to allow our application? Am I likely to get a clear answer from them before putting in my application?

pearlsaplenty I disagree. Its not suspicious at all if you read all the OPs posts about why they want to move. 45 minds each way is crap. I know because we do it. We can't afford to live near the school but fortunately as it is not oversubscribed we got DS in anyway. This sort of situation enrages me. Its "policy" versus actual common sense and talking to people. If the OP could have a face to face meeting with someone at the LEA who has the authority to make an individual decision it would be fine I suspect, unfortunately that will be v difficult so she may just get told repeatedly "no" because the tick boxes don't come out right. Its the sort of thing that encourages people to lie and makes it worse for everyone.

fairy it is suspicious because the school op wants is oversubscribed and has particular policies in place to prevent people from moving into the area temporarily in order to get a

....place. So I would assume the school would spend more time looking into housing arrangements than an less popular school would.

It also sounds from the op that she has only moved in very recently...
This means she'll be required to provide council tax bills from her last home too, which may trigger further investigation.

What age are your DCs? You say they are already in school at your old location -?

Would it be so bad to take a financial hit in order to secure your future at a place you want to live?

If you are planning to rent it out in the future, can I suggest you cover your back by getting signed up with a letting agent this week, even if they won't be able to start marketing the place for a few more weeks.

You can then get them to write you a letter confirming that they have been appointed as the agents to let the house on a standard 12 month assured short tenancy, for a rent of £XX a month, and they will start marketing the property on YY date, following completion of the works you are having done to the house.

If there is then any issue, you can show this letter of proof that you won't be living there.

Also, am I right in understanding that you own your mum's house and this other house?

So that means you have previous form for not living in houses you own, and can prove this?
AND it means you can state which address is your permanent address, and give your rental property?

I repeat what I said yesterday... This all seems genuine and I can't see why you are beating yourself up over this. Selling an appreciating property (which is therefore an investment) is frankly nuts, and suggestions that you should in order to prove you are 'worthy' of a state school place are bonkers

I'm not sure that demonstrating that you've rented your own house out on a 12 month lease; while having a 12 month lease on your current rental property looks any better in op's circumstances, sparechange
It's the classic way to live in the catchment area without committing to living there long term; and it's been done many, many times before.

It is also the classic way to relocate to a new area when you can't find the house you want to buy straight away.

OP doesn't say where she lives, but given that a 6 mile journey takes 45 mins+, I think we can safely assume it is a big city.

If that big city is London, it is currently neigh on impossible to move if you are in any sort of chain. I moved earlier this year, and was told by the agent to move into rented after selling my house, as buyers currently won't even look at offers from anyone in a chain. I received 5 offers for my place above the asking price, in part because we were in the catchment for a great primary school and in part because it was the first house in a while to come on the market. Every single one of those was a family who had sold their place, then moved into rented while they looked.

Given the price differential between houses in catchments vs outside is often easily six figures, it is obviously going to happen (and probably more often) but the massive scrutinastion of anyone who lives in rented sits really uneasily with me. If OP had bought a small flat while they househunted, she wouldn't be getting this level of suspicion, but it could be just as temporary a move as a year in rented.

It LOOKS suspicious but attempted fraud isn't ACTUALLY what is happening. I think it is perfectly reasonable not to kiss goodbye to tens of thousands of pounds of equity which might be later spent for uni education rather than sacrifice it now. The OP IS NOT moving for the school she is moving for the area and again it comes down to someone at the LEA being prepared to interview and make an assessment.

We are in London and most of our friends rent houses while still owning a flat while they look for suitable properties and apply for schools. It's the done thing here given the market, it's completely crazy. No one we know has had any issue regarding the renting/ owning thing although unlike your situation OP the property they own and the property they rent are in the LEA but perhaps not within the same school catchment area given how tiny these are currently.

Just out of interest, I know you are holding onto your property because it is likely to increase in value but is this not the case for the new area too? If so, surely prices in the new area will increase too meaning any crease over this year will be eaten up in the increase in your new area too?

The LEA will be looking at things that can be demonstrated - such as disposing of the old property. They will not be evaluating stated intentions - for, unfortunately for OP, what she is saying is indistinguishable from how a cheat would portay it.

tiggy
But the OP owns 2 houses and lives in neither.
Which of the 3 LEAs do you believe should be fulfilling the legal obligation of providing a state school place to OP's children?

She's not showing many signs of putting down roots in the catchment area either, sparechange. What other means of assessment can they use?

fairy there's absolutely nothing wrong with holding onto a property in order for it to appreciate in value. Unfortunately for the OP she's trying to do it in an LA that takes a hard line on fraud at the time that she's applying for a reception place. What the OP is doing looks exactly like fraud. We only have the word of the OP that it isn't and that, quite rightly, won't be good enough for the LA.

I'm not sure how much of a help or hinderence the fact that her other children are in a school near the old house is. How much of an effort have you made to get them into a closer school? Are they on the waiting list for all nearby schools and have you appealed for them?

YABU. You are suffering illusions of entitlement. As well as the factual regulatory context outlined as always meticulously by tiggy it won't take much digging to find out that the issue of people renting temporary accommodation to get into the catchment of sought after schools (it is getting to the point of any school in London) is a big issue. Just visit the education threads. Councils are tightening the regulations up to make the process fair, it may not seem fair to you but in the context of so much manipulation of the system they have to draw some lines in the sand irrespective of people's word. We even have a local Councillor taking her own administration to court because she considers herself entitled to get a place at a sought after school as a result of a temporary address, instead of a place at the less sought after school her home address (which she still owns and pays Council tax on) is in catchment for, and therefore to be exempt from the rules. In London you had children being taxied considerably further than six miles and 45 minutes to sought after schools that parents had gained places at through renting temporary addresses whilst parents who lived a five minute walk away were left with no school place at all or one they couldn't access. In Camden now there are children who were unable to follow their friends into primary school because Camden were not stringent in applying checks and after the ensuing scandal, it isn't fair for children to be deprived of places once there, but what message does that give to children and what sort of community will divided and resentful parents make for them? Of course with the parents in your new community, especially if they have longstanding friends in the community who would be left out of catchment if you were successful, you start at a disadvantage. I don't doubt your plans but you can't live your life in a bubble of entitlement. Many parents are left compromising on school places, join the queue. Once your children are in a genuine long term address near the school you can join the waiting list.....

Tiggy and Shooting, the OP has said that their house is next to an excellent primary, one her older children already attend. They are moving to the catchment for this school because this is the area they want to live in long term.

I presume her children will be on the waiting list for this school already. The school will know what school they are at and will know it is outstanding.

Why the assumption of fraud by rental?

Because so many people have done exactly what the OP is doing with the sole purpose of defrauding the system. There is nothing here that would mark the OP out as a genuine applicant other than her word. I'm not sure being on the waiting list will be enough. It's not unheard of for parents to make a fraudulent application for a younger sibling to bump elder siblings up the waiting list. The LA will likely be aware of that.

The LA aren't at fault here. The blame is mainly on the parents who have previously tried to play the system and have forced them to take this stance.

Clay Thank you, exactly my point. It may not be fair but it is no less fair than for all the people denied school places because people have rented temporarily to get places and the Councils have had to set guidelines to stop that happening.

Would the suggestion that rental house in OP's name and house in husband's name not work?
I'll never be in a position to own my own house, interesting thread to read though