Is this admission fraud? AIBU to report it?

[grammarmom]

Here's the situation.

We live in a grammar school catchment area that gets smaller every year. When we bought our house several years ago, it was very comfortably within the catchment for an excellent local grammar (very high in the league tables), and oh boy was it reflected in the price. Now we're right on the boundary. Among the thirty or so houses around us, some children got in last year and some didn't, literally a difference of a few yards.

Another child on our street, who is in the same class as my DC, only just passed the 11+ (a few points above the pass threshold). We live on the same road, but they are about 50 yards further from the school gate. Based on last year's distances, my child would likely get a place while theirs wouldn't.

Over the weekend, during a sleepover, the child mentioned that her mother has now rented a house much closer to the school to secure a higher priority for admission. The tenancy was apparently signed one day before the cut-off date, making it "legal" for admission purposes. She still owns their original home, but the story being presented is that relatives who were previously "homeless" will now live there free of charge, and all bills and utilities have been transferred into those relatives' names (I strongly suspect that the mother will in fact pay these bills as those relatives are penniless).

She's even moved the children's belongings to the rented property and makes them spend nights there (they hate it). There's no doubt that once the school place is obtained, they will move right back.

This effectively pushes my child down the priority list and means they may now miss out.

Would this constitute admissions fraud? It feels incredibly unfair that someone with £40k to spare for rent can effectively buy their way into a top grammar school, especially when their child didn't perform particularly well in the exam (despite being tutored for hours every day).

Should I report this? I have no more detail apart from what this child told me (and they obviously weren't too sure about some aspects of it due to age).

Did the child tell you that? Refugees don't get visas.

You shouldn't have questioned the child to make her reveal incriminating information. That is morally pretty objectionable.

Apologies. Just read the updates and realised im wrong about the visa. You still shouldn't questioned the child op.

I hope your dd gets into the school but I wouldn't report the other family. You don't know if they will have any impact on your dd's chances.

@ChristmasCrumblings pretty much every single thing the OP has said so far has been morally objectionable

I guess if they offered places purely based on highest score there would be none of this.

Agreed. If they're from the Ukraine they'll have 5years during which time they'll have the option to apply for indefinite right to remain status. It could be that OPs friend is literally giving them a leg up with helping with somewhere to live whilst they go through the process and find jobs etc.

They'll also have had to provide evidence of sponsorship (OPs friend is possibly doing that - although we don't know). But she has provided suitable accommodation that doesn't require her having to be a guarantor. In fact if she'd rented the property next to the school for them they'd probably have been declined if they don't have jobs yet. Someone else paying for it or not.

So whilst it may look on surface value as a win-win situation for her. It's likely to be costing her a fortune, and if she gets the rather small benefit of her kid getting a better school place, then so what?

She's paying to fund a family who otherwise would be reliant on the UK gov for housing costs. And essentially if OP kicks up a fuss and she moves back to her house. As another poster stated then someone else swoops into the rental, with a child who could take another spot pushing her child further back in the line.

she just did the house move better then you ….

YABU. All is fair in love and school admissions, unfortunately.

Yes, but then you might get children from the council estate two miles away getting higher scores, and people.woildnt like that either.

Just as an fyi, what also happens in Bucks is that a fairly large number of children get through after a selection review. I.e their scores were fairly close to the magic number of 121. A selection review asks the headteacher of the child’s primary school to ‘grade’ the child (from 1 - 4) and basically ‘recommends’ them (or doesn’t) for a place at a grammar school- on aptitude and ability. A 1:1 score is an unconditional recommendation with no reservations. My own (summer born youngest son) got into his grammar school after this. We also don’t live in Bucks; we live just over the border (but not that far away- a 20 minute car journey). If my son had ‘passed’ the previous year he wouldn’t have got a place (as they reduced the distance criteria that year due to over subscription). I’d totally made peace with the whole thing. The other option of school would have been fine. But he hasn’t struggled at grammar school. The score can be a fairly random result. (I also teach in the same area).

They didn’t “struggle to pass it” - if they did, it wouldn’t be relevant if they were in the catchment area or not.

I for one am willing on the other mum!

although she doesn’t need any help. She’s done everything by the book! Albeit, on the dark side!

either way, her child is going to that school.
@grammarmom yours is not..

So perhaps you need to edit your username to @ notgrammarmom

it would in all likelihood be worse ...... the highest scores are often the most tutored which gives those that can afford it an advantage.

Equalising the playing field is the solution, if that were possible.

It amazing how many people see Admissions fraud as victimless. Its likely not going to be OP vs Cheater... its going to be some other child not getting the place. Who may not be from a rich family, or even had a tutor. Who may get no school offer altogether.

If you ever had to explain to a child that they have no school place you would feel differently. They blame themselves, thinking they did something wrong.

Owning a house and living in it is "gaming the system".

I’ll see if I can block out the school name to avoid outing myself.

Personally it’s a not a risk I’d want to take. You’re relying on their opinion and if they ask for proof she’s sold the other house a few miles down the road, she hasn’t. Anyway, it’s all hypothetical as I don’t think this is the school in question.

A few families did the it get in to the primary my DC went to. Crazy as it was just a regular state primary (yes, with a good reputation and involved parent cohort). I didn’t know the families before my DC started and when I found out I was quite shocked.
One used their parents’ address which was a stones throw away and the other rented easily within the catchment.
We were borderline but thankfully got in (coincidence as had moved way before kids so didn’t even think about schools).
What these parents do it unethical but if not illegal there’s not much you can do about it.

Given that the catchment area is shrinking every year, it sounds like your child may well not achieve a place irrespective of what happens in relation to your former friend's child. Time to think about Plan B?

Why? The family has genuinely moved into the rented house.

How does it make sense for you to have paid extra to buy a house in in the area? Surely exactly the same argument applies to you?!!

A temporary move into rented accommodation while you own a property elsewhere and intend to move back to that property once you have secured a place at your preferred school is classed as admissions fraud regardless of whether you actually move into the rented property. Many LAs will check and, on finding that the family owns a house, will use that address and ignore the rented address. If the LA fail to spot it and the child gets a place this way, the place can be taken away when they find out, even after the child has started attending the school.

I wonder how the vote would go if the OP did the same as this women and asked if she was being unreasonable renting a house near a school at great expense.......

The response would invariably be that she was unreasonable and using her wealth to cheat the system.

It's always the same on here, why is hard work and "success" considered negative?

Any decent parent should try to do the best for their children which invariably involves sacrifices. It is 100% normal when buying a house to consider local schools if you have children / plan to have children. It is accepted it can change but you do what you think is for the best at that time.

Renting a house slightly closer for a short period to secure a place isn't the same at all - it is a blatant attempt to cheat the system.

I agree that everyone's circumstances are different and not everyone can afford to live in the catchment of a good school however that's a much wider issue that is not easily resolved.

I think both OP and her (now) ex friend have played a similar game. Arguably, OP made a riskier move buying a house there several years in advance of sending her child to secondary, since there was always the risk that the boundaries would change. Her ex pal waited until closer to the time.

I can't see what is remotely fair about a system that prioritises younger siblings of current pupils over other children living within the catchment area. What if you're an only child? What if your elder sibling has severe learning disabilities and could no more have passed the 11+ than fly to the moon? How is that fair that such a child should miss out on a place at a good school?

Yet OP doesn't seem to have any issue with such unfairness because it would benefit her family.

There are 2 of us in our 4 bed house.

Is that OK with you?
I'm amazed how much an 11 year old knows about family finances. They don't need to know stuff like that. When I was 11 I had no idea. I just went to school, did my homework and hung out with my friends. My parents didn't discuss things with me.