state schools in london. did you rent in the catchment or know people who did?

[cheapandchic]

I have realised that where my home is positioned I most likely have no chance at getting into any of the schools that I want. I do not want to send my child to the school nearest me.

is it worth letting my house and moving closer? has anyone done this? how far in advanced to you have to do it? can you move out once that are in?

Its been said before, but OP's problem is one which she will solve by permanently moving (even if in her case "permanent" is 2-3 years). Anyone chosing a house will do so on the basis of goods schools/parks/shops/travel to work and so on. And if she is reassessing where she is in year 5 of primary, say, as not all her criteria are being met: fine - as long as it then becomes a permanent move. Nothing at all wrong with that.

That is a world away from renting short-term just to get into a catchment with no intent to then stay within that community and then moving out again. That is likely to be illegal (for reasons set out above) as well as utterly shameful and immoral.

The problem is both the permanent move and the temporary move potentially displace someone out of the catchment .....

I don't think that can be true about them not considering a rental your real home if you own a place. I know at least three people who rent homes, but own as well. That's because they simply can't afford to buy the sort of house they need, so they've bought what they could afford, and are renting it out to cover the mortgage. At least this way they're on the property ladder. In two of these cases the homes they own are near to where they rent for convenience - in the same area.

Surely this is something that's going to happen more and more? People want to buy to invest for the future, but can't (especially in London) buy someplace they can actually live with a family. So they buy a flat, then as they start a family, rent and rent out their old flat.

Not all do but I can name LAs that specifically state that they will use the address of the home you own rather than the rented property in this situation. Whether these LAs are being reasonable is an interesting question but that is their current policy.

Which LA's?

Wow, I'm amazed (naive?!) at the number of people who think cheating is justifiable if it is in the name of looking after one's children/education. Understandable, sometimes, yes - but justifiable?!

Do we then teach those same children that its ok to cheat if its about the ends justifying the means?

Or do we teach them to challenge systems that don't work for them, to get involved and try and make whatever schools/things are accessible to them better?

Its not that I don't understand the stress, or the desire to do it. And in cases like the ones GoldenBear mentions, I understand it far more than in those where parents have more options.

But its still cheating, and those who really lose out are never going to be the ones who have more in the first place, are they

I think the whole thing is just a huge luck of the draw anyway. Not many couples are sufficiently clued up to look at local schools before they have children. People move around for different reasons and pregnancy followed by their child's early years will coincide with one of those moves. For a long time we didn't intend to have children and schools were just not on our horizon when considering a move.

I suspect there are very few middle class parents who would stick their neck out and 'just send their child to the local school' if it was failing. Satisfaction on this moral point tends to coincide with having a local school that they are happy with for their child.

In my opinion a lottery among those living within a reasonable catchment is the fairest way to sort out places, once children in care, statements and siblings have been allocated.

Oh, and scrapping ratings on Ofsted reports.

Elibean- I am sorry but it is not cheating! Choosing to live near a good school is not cheating anything! And of course it has nothing to do with telling children its ok to cheat.

As someone mentioned before. Sometimes you choose a property near a park for your dog or near a tube that makes your commute easier, or near your mother who is ill, or near a good school for your kids. This is not cheating and I cannot believe anyone thinks this is morally wrong! And sometimes renting out the property you own is the best financially for your family. This is London all sorts of circumstances come into play.

Either way, I am just super stressed about the school situation...I had no idea it would be this complicated.

I think what the OP is thinking of doing is completely immoral. Around here if you are in a rented property and own a home within 30 miles they will accept the home furthest away for admission purposes.

i am curious about the rules if you own two homes, one in catchment and one not and move back to the catchment home in Yr 5 renting out the other property.

I think if you own two homes in London you are likely to have your children in private school! Seriously, I think it would be more difficult for the LA to prove you didn't live there. There are also tax implications if you sell one and you didn't use it as your main residence which would be punitive.

I know someone whodid this. They rented their house out a year before October admissions started and moved to catchment of their first choice school. The daughter got in - started reception in 2011 - but they feel they still need to stay in new rental for at least another year before contemplating moving back to our road...

Huge problem in Southgate Green, in North London, where Walker Primary School's offers of places have gone down to radius of 0.17miles this year. Local Authority (Enfield) appears to accept that a rental contract, plus associated bills etc is sufficient proof of residence. Pretty much all the places are being allocated to people renting right next to the school and long term (genuine?!) residents have little hope of a place and, for a large part of the area, no alternative school, good or otherwise. Talk now of "bulge" classes ie extra 30 pupils for 1 year only (although no sign next year will be any better) but this puts the burden on a school already very short of space.