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?

Thank you for explaining Tiggy thought it couldn't be that simple. I know my parents moved house to be near a good school, very long time ago now, I guess the pressures are so much greater these days.
I keep thinking must be a way round this for the OP.

Perhaps it's a question of who you know?
My BIL is a teacher and I was surprised that my nephew won't get a place at his sought after school automatically because he works there.
Is really the only way round this to sell the house? Bet that won't guarantee a place at this school though will it?

Yes, YABU for all the reasons that tiggytape outlines.

Tell them the truth and see what they say am sure you aren't the first to be in this position.

I would think that removing names from deeds to cover up the situation is not going to help at all. It might not cross the fine line between being in an innocent situation that looks like fraud and actually committing fraud but it's going to be very difficult to convince the LA or an appeals panel that you are in an innocent situation if you've lied to them.

I still don't really understand why the OP has moved already. Given the short distances involved, I think most people would stay in their own house until they saw something they wanted to buy in the new area. Why waste money on a rental property while your own house sits empty? And why make your children do an apparently long commute if they don't actually need to? Clearly, the commute to school between the two areas is not too bad, as the OP is making her kids do just that at the moment.

OP, if not for the school places, why have you already moved? I don't really get it.

OP, are your children both in the same year?

I still don't really understand why the OP has moved already. Given the short distances involved, I think most people would stay in their own house until they saw something they wanted to buy in the new area. Why waste money on a rental property while your own house sits empty? And why make your children do an apparently long commute if they don't actually need to? Clearly, the commute to school between the two areas is not too bad, as the OP is making her kids do just that at the moment. OP, if not for the school places, why have you already moved? I don't really get it.

Everything ^ she said!

It seems to me that what this boils down to is, is the OP determined to hang onto her house, in the hope of getting a better eventual price for it, even though this is likely to cost her a place in her desired school? The advice from the LEA seems pretty unambiguous.

I agree with Jinsei, whatever the OP's reasons for moving, certainly to an outsider ( or to the LEA) it looks like she has moved to be in catchment for a particular school. Otherwise, why not just wait until you do find a house you want. Especially considering the small distance involved.

Or, more to the point, to the LEA it may look as if she has pretended to move into catchment!

I don't think the OP is denying that's why she moved - lots of people do move for that reason and that's fine, the issue is whether the move is permanent. Right now, the appearance is that it's not.

Lots have people have mentioned about having bills registered to your rental address, actually when we did some digging the most common thing checked by the council was which address you are registered with at the doctors.

We were in the catchment of a good comp, but waited til I knew DS has passed the 11+ to move nearer to the grammar school to be sure of a place.WE rented a house for 6 months but moved in their lock stock and barrel, leaving the old house empty but up for rental
The council checked the electoral roll, fuel bills and NHS card.
The rule is that councils have to have admission rules which are transparent and objective, and instances where they are having to weigh up probabilities and try to assess peoples motivations and intentions is not objective and would be unlikely to stand up at a tribunal or judicial review

Our local council tried to enforce this rule a few years ago and found they couldn't legally do it, so unless legally, things have changed...

'they will waive that rule where there is clear need for them to do so'

..and who decides what a 'clear need' is
parents divorced, parents separated, trial separation, mother fleeing from DV?
Parents transfered to another office, parents seconded to another office, shorter commute?
Parents renting out the previous house on a 6 month let, as a holiday let, having work done on the house in preparation for sale/let?
Too many grey areas for this rule to be objectively applied.

I dont get how they can enforce this, what of a man whose Ex Wife is living in the FMH and is still on the mortgage but has resident children from that marriage (dh had one of his living with us for years while on exes mortgage - divorce took over 3 years to come through because of complications with finances).

What about a woman who cannot get her exh husband to take her from mortgage.

tiggy

Our council was trying to enforce it. It was already part of their written criteria (clearly stated as in your example) and to cut a long story short, at various council meetings in which it was in their interest to enforce it, legal advice said it was unlawful. This was 3 or 4 years ago.

tiggy that doesn't say rented - who are they to say a rented property is a temp address?

If you are in negative equity, financial difficulties, have lost your job or a million other reasons you may rent out yours and move to rented.

It's unenforceable and the whole point of the schools admissions criteria is there are no loopholes.

So Tiggy, explain how Hackney allocates places to children where a couple split up and the resident parents moves into rented accomodation on the other side of the borough with the children, while the NRP stays in the former marital home and either can't or won't sell it?

Are you actually suggesting it would be totally reasonable for a parent to have to make a 1.5 hour round trip to do the school run, just so the council can make sure a few parents don't try and cheat the system.

It is absurd that you can think this is a justifiable position because it might weed out a few people trying to abuse the system