to surprised that this sort of cheating for a secondary school place still goes on?

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

I thought the schools were generally supposed to be more on top of this sort of scam:

Family outside catchment of highly desirable school let out their house, move to a rented house within catchment for two years to go through admission process and get their first dd into the school, then move back to their original family home. Now their next three dd's will go to that school even though they all now live outside of the catchment!

A feel a certain sort of contempt for people who would do this, and am really surprised that schools still turn a blind eye.

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

It sure does Rafals .

Mumsnetters with younger children in tricky catchment areas seriously have no idea what is about to hit them!

[HeddaLettuce]

Why do I get the feeling that if you'd posted this in primary ed you'd have got a totally different response?

You probably would, but thats a whole different crowd of people.

Mind you it does go some way to showing the number of people who don't quite understand what is legal when it comes to school place fraud and what isn't

For one thing, school admissions rules are not the law, and breaking them is not illegal. And you're underestimating the majority of us that simply don't give a fuck. Or think its the system thats at fault, not the people doing their best for their kids as they see it.

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

Ok then t4nut, I have sour grapes and you are incapable of reading a thread. Let's settle for that.

[toots111]

We missed out on a place for our eldest at the very local end of the road school. We have lived here for years before the school got outstanding and super popular. We are 3rd on the waiting list. I personally know three families who rented next to the school to get in and have subsequently moved, even before term starts. I'm furious about it generally but more furious when these parents ask me where we got and then say 'oh such a shame they didn't get into xxxx'.

[toots111]

Also don't believe there should be sibling priority for secondary schools. 11 year olds can get themselves to school or be dropped off early to hang round the shops or sit in a cafe or go to the library or something if a parent really needs to drive them and drop a sibling off somewhere else. In London kids travel for miles to secondaries.

[Floggingmolly]

Why don't you report them, toots? They're probably part of the majority who simply don't give a fuck, just like Hedda. At our school they'd have been removed from the register immediately.
And disgruntled parents who missed out on a place would queue down the street to report them. Including me, if I was one of those affected.
Some of us still give a fuck...

[HeddaLettuce]

Well clearly they are the minority that do give a fuck, because you need to give a fuck to move house to get a school place. You need to give lots of fucks, in fact.

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

For one thing, school admissions rules are not the law, and breaking them is not illegal.

The school Admissions Code does have the full force of the law. And as I said before parents fraudulently applying for places can and have been prosecuted and fined/received community service.

Toots, just report them. A lot of LAs still rely on other parents whistleblowing. If they haven't done anything wrong they will keep their place. If they have the place will be removed and you will either move up the list or be given a place.

[DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen]

I'm half tempted to start a thread on people me who have their children christened so they can attend a church school. That would give you something to froth about

[totalrecall1]

Oh dear op you really have got yourself worked up haven't you? And you are ranting. I didn't say other people didn't care, just that these clearly do more than most. Good luck to them

[claraschu]

The people who I know who did this couldn't afford to buy a house near the good school, as everything is so expensive, so they rented for 3 years, then moved back to their cheaper house further away.

Lots of people on lower incomes can't afford to buy a house near a very very good school. Renting might give poorer parents a shot at getting their kids into an (otherwise out of reach) outstanding school.

[LyndaNotLinda]

It's fraud but then as Dame points out, lots of people pretend to be religious to get their children into faith schools which is equally morally reprehensible behaviour but is seen as perfectly socially acceptable.

[Brokenbiscuit]

Some schools are now introducing a "siblings within catchment" into their admissions criteria; with "siblings outside catchment" coming in a long way behind...

I think that is the only fair way tbh. I get that it's difficult having to send kids to two different schools but that's surely the risk you take if you choose to move out of catchment or send your kids to a school that isn't their local one. I do think kids in catchment should come first.

[DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen]

Is it actual fraud though,it's not illegal ,is it? You couldn't get arrested for it,could you? I can't imagine the police turning up at your doorstep demanding to know why you're renting your house out.

[Kpo58]

I can see that it's a good idea to remove sibling priority from secondary schools in areas with public transport, eg in London, but it wouldn't be practical for parents who live in rural location with the nearest schools being 10 miles apart in opposite directions.

[t4nut]

Its not fraud and its completely compliant with the admissions code.

Its sour grapes.

[HeddaLettuce]

The school Admissions Code does have the full force of the law. And as I said before parents fraudulently applying for places can and have been prosecuted and fined/received community service

Bullshit. Nobody has ever been fined for moving house for years to be in a catchment. They lived in that house, they applied, they got in. No foul there.

[ParkingLottie]

Bibbity, I agree with you. I know two families who have done this, and it's stupid, anyway. One of them already had 2 good comp choices from their own home but fell for mc competitiveness to get to the Holy Grail school (where the eldest has fallen into the well known drugs culture of the school and fine quite badly) , the other family have loads of money and preferred not to move permanently from their address closer to the centre and by a tube.

Families in what should be the genuine catchment for the school have far fewer options nearby.

[AnyTheWiser]

The difficulty also comes with reporting and a child hypothetically losing their place in a school they have transitioned into, and are settled in. It isn't the child's fault the parents have chosen to defraud the admissions authority, punishing the child feels ethically wrong to me.
I know personally of several cases of fraud this way, but I cannot bring myself to report and punish a child who has had no part in the deception.

[ParkingLottie]

You don't have to 'pretend to be religious ' to get into a faith school, you just have to attend church. If the admissions policy says 'regular attendance' that's what it means. You could attend every week , tell the vicar that you don't believe in God every week , sign the attendance book and get your school place .

I am not advocating that, just pointing it out.

[dowhatnow]

Our LA tried to tighten up this rule but found they were acting illegally. So now they've encouraged schools to put

Siblings within catchment
Catchment
Siblings out of catchment
Others

[Wombat44]

I've never heard of a secondary (or even primary) school prioritising out-of-catchment siblings over children living in catchment. That doesn't make sense at secondary, when most children travel to school unaccompanied so you don't have issues about parents having to co ordinate school drop offs.

[LyndaNotLinda]

Maybe where you live ParkingLottie. Where I am, the vicar makes a personal recommendation - or not - to the school. So I would imagine if you loudly proclaimed you were suffering a dull church attendance every week just to get your child into school and were an devout atheist, I very much doubt your child would get a place.

[unexpsoc]

Gosh. This escalated quickly. I think there are some purposeful wind up merchants on here.

The simple fact is that if you have the financial resources to move and do so, when you know that others don't have them you are abusing your position to the detriment of other people's children.

That is only morally wrong if you care about all children getting opportunities. If your base morality is "I will look after me and mine, let everyone else look after theirs" then what you are doing is not immoral TO YOU.

The system is broken, and the problem is the wide variation of school standards leads to people who are able to gaming the system at the cost of those who can't. It's incredible the number of posters who simply accept this as a fact of life. You really are drinking the Kool-Aid.

What I think is repugnant is those posters who say "well, you do this if you care about your children". The corollary of that is "you didn't do well enough in life so your children will now suffer and it is because you didn't care enough". What unbelievable arrogance and ignorance that portrays.

[Andrewofgg]

Sibling priority is pragmatic commons sense. It reduces school running and all the parking rows that that causes. I agree that it should not apply if the family are a long way off, but on the other hand that might just make the families concerned move out for three years, not two. Once the chjild is in, the child is in.

An ex-HT friend told me that the parents who do this sort of thing are the sort teachers want: they make education the first priority. Who is surprised if some of them look the other way?