Guest post: "My son wasn't offered a primary school place"

[MumsnetGuestPosts]

No offer possible.

Unfortunately it is not possible to offer a place for your child at any of the schools you stated as a preference in your application.

The email came in at 7.45pm, after a day of texts from relieved friends who had got their school offer, and growing panic at the multiplying 'WE GOT IN' statuses on Facebook.

Rewind three months to this time two years ago and we had just submitted our primary school application form for our son Buster. We'd diligently visited and included six schools all within a mile of our house, and all with great reputations. While a lot of people seemed to be a bit panicky about not getting a place, I was confident in the system – and with so many good schools near us, and all our neighbours at our most local school, I thought we didn't have anything to worry about.

When we got the news, my husband Doug was working away. I phoned him immediately, shouting at him that he must have cocked up the forms. He hadn't. The main issue for our closest school was that of 60 places, 42 were taken up by siblings and a further six went to church places. That left 12 places, so the catchment was a tiny 399 metres.

There's thought to be quite a lot of mystery around how schools allocate places, but most of the time it's pretty straightforward: most councils have criteria for looked after children and those with special needs, then siblings are prioritised, church places allocated (if they have them) and then it's down to location. Despite this, it's easy to get caught up in the hysteria as people around you start attending church or temporarily move to an area to improve their chances of getting in to the best school.

I was surprised at how emotional I felt about it. I resented the people now talking to their kids about big school, getting excited about uniforms and moving on with their lives. There were a couple of heartbreaking moments when Buster walked past our local school and said 'I'm going there mum'. I felt utterly useless.

So, we started our campaign for a school place. Alongside 22 families without places, we met and fought with the council, drafting documents supporting a bulge class in an existing school. The issue for us was that two new free schools were scheduled to open, neither of which we'd applied to because of their locations – and why should we, with so many great schools on our doorstep?

However the council wouldn't budge, because despite the fact that the provision wasn't 'ideal', it was there (albeit in the wrong location), and apart from our group of parents, it didn't feel like there was anyone else championing the cause. By July, it was clear we weren't going to get a place at any of the schools on our list, so we started talking to one of the free schools.

As it turns out, Buster is having what is probably the best possible start to education that he could have. He has no idea that most primary schools aren't a Portakabin in a car park. The staff are fantastic and the school, fully aware that the circumstances weren't ideal for most, have done everything they can to make everyone ok with the situation, getting families involved in transforming the concrete play area.

Instead of being one in a few hundred pupils, he's one in 13. They do things that wouldn't be feasible with more children: go on welly walks, make use of the local park, go to swimming lessons. He started to read and write in the first term and the class have really bonded. After the first few weeks settling in, he has regularly said to us 'I love my school'.

I've learned that ultimately the staff, children and their families are what make a school, but I understand that in the end we've been lucky – this wouldn't be the case for everyone. The system is wrong. For example, the sibling policy needs looking at; something isn't right if someone who has moved out of the area retains a school place for future siblings which means that people who actually live and work in that local community can't get in and have to travel to another community.

There is also huge contradiction with two areas of policy; the pressure to build housing versus an increasing demand to build schools. The two compete with each other for space and invariably schools lose out.

The biggest issue is that these fundamental concerns are fairly fleeting for most. Those of us who have borne the brunt of it end up making the best of a bad situation and moving on. So who is fighting to improve the system?

I find the clogging up of the roads the most annoying thing, afussyphase. Plus the fact that unpopular schools become a self-fulfilling prophecy as people move to get away from them. They get fewer parents who are committed to supporting their children's education and fewer children who are likely to be supported enough to do really well. So the results look bad compared to other schools and the parents who have a choice move away and it all funds the ludicrous housing bubble and we end up with schools that aren't really competing on a level playing field. And the ones at the bottom of the slope become ever more unpopular despite doing a better than good job (some of them, anyway).

It certainly would where I am, melli. People specifically buy eg one bedroom flats at a premium near the popular schools and sell to move to a two or three bedroomed property near an unpopular school once the first child is in. It does honestly happen. If they knew that they would lose sibling priority for the younger children (who are generally already in existence by the time they move), I think it would make a big difference. It is a particularly mad area, though.

I like the Aus system.

They legally have to give you a spot in the catchment area. Which means some schools seem to be half porta cabin but at least you're at our local school.

The more popular ones also have the rule that moving from the area means losing your place. As tenancy is pretty well protected here it's not a big deal.

I didn't mean to doubt that it happens. It is common sense from those people's point of view: why pay a premium for an advantage you don't need? What I mean is that you would just delay your move out of catchment until after your final child had got their school place. Unless you are proposing that when you move out of catchment at any stage, you lose your school place?

sadly I would be writing letters and taking a much harder stance. if you move you loose your place and your children move on to another school, including sibling who were previously in the school.

Some of this is just benefiting the richest though. Why do we think that being able to afford the premium to live near a good state school and then stay there should be rewarded more? It's just then an extension of the private school system surely?

I live a mile away from ds1 school. It's a 4 form entry fairly new school and bjzarely for an outstanding school in London wasn't full this year. That will change by the time ds2 needs to attend and there will probably be a small catchment which we will inevitably be outside if we stay here. Why should a family with more money to buy a house right next to it in future be more entitled to a place than ds2 who will have dropped his brother off there every day for 4 years with me and seen that as "school" ?

As it happens I'm going to move...probably closer to school but that's not the point.

The strange thing about all this is that successive governments have spent so much energy giving parents 'choice', (academies, free schools, support for church schools) yet still many parents and pupils end up being told by the LA:

"you didn't choose it, but it's a school - walls, roof, teachers - what more do you want?!"

Once you take into account pressure on spaces and the logistics getting there, do many people have a real choice of more than 1 or 2 schools?

The situation in Scotland feels completely different (we have lots of cousins and friends in the English system). I am registering DD3 for school today. There is no choice of school. I register her at the catchment school for my address, having provided 2 proofs of address. There is no sibling rule and if we moved area the general expectation would be that the DC would move school. There are only a couple of state funded schools in Scotland not under local authority control. As I understand it local authorities have a responsibility for assessing and providing adequate school provision when approving new house building.

It is possible to put in a placing request for a school outside of your catchment area but this is the exception rather than the norm and such requests are only considered once local needs have been met.

Class sizes for Y1 and Y2 are limited to 25 but are larger for older year groups. This has made composite classes and changes to classes more common in some schools.

I actively chose to return home to Scotland rather than England because I think it is far better for DC to be educated with their local peer group and while I understand the reasoning behind choice I think it is far better to have consistent good schooling for everyone close to home.

I think the problem with lack of schools in London and surrounding areas has been a long time in the making. I lived in London at the time of the Poll Tax and I remember discussion about not building schools to have lower tax.

My adult daughter was given notice on her tenancy as the area her flat was in, very close to a desirable local primary, shot up in value and her landlord wanted to capitalise on that. She now has a 30 minute walk to school so walks 2 hrs a day to do the school run. I sincerely hope the sibling rule applies when her toddler starts school, as it would be literally impossible to drop off and pick up at another primary school too. We are not a wealthy family, don't have the money to run cars, so rely on public transport (even that is expensive here) and walking. It is not my daughter's fault that her child's school is so desirable, it was just the closest to the flat she could afford 4 years ago. It's not her fault she has been priced out of the area by an influx of families leaving London. She is not doing 2 hrs per day of school run to hang on to a desirable school place, as trying to minimise disruption for her 6 year old who loves her school, is doing exceptionally well there, and has settled into a good friendship group. It's the same school my daughter and her brother attended years ago, before the wealthy Londoners descended, when it was 'just' a local primary. Although it has the same outstanding Ofsted reports as ever, I'm not sure I would send my youngest there even if she could follow her siblings, which I doubt as they are 20 years apart. I take exception to the elitest, entitled, frankly snobby attitude of a large group of the parents these days, who only moved to our previously scruffy affordable suburb for a good school place or 4. It used to be a friendly, welcoming, bohemian area and the school reflected that. Now, not so much. I'm sure from the point of view of the PTA, it's great that the majority of the parents have high powered London based careers. I'm sure having the editors of some high end fashion magazines is great for the school newsletter. Bit irritating for all the families who have lived here longer than 5 minutes and can't use local schools anymore though, when we can't afford to educate privately.

What I mean is that you would just delay your move out of catchment until after your final child had got their school place.

I think in that case, it would require quite a sacrifice (money, space etc) in order to do it. So actually people would be put off to some extent in the first place. If they know they have to keep up the expensive payments on the smaller flat for three or four or five, even six years instead of one or two, maybe it's not quite such a great solution.

I think the issue is you have to choose your applications carefully- look at past admissions rates for all schools you can reasonable get to, and also look at failing schools which may be due massive investment.

The o/p applied to 6 nearest, all excellent, and therefore all competitive, schools.

I applied for;

1. outstanding, not a chance but worth a punt.
2. closest good school
3. close, OK school, probably get in
4. Ok school, 99% chance getting in, reasonable journey
5. close failing school, definitely get in, with new head drafted (3 years later was outstanding)

I applied to

1: the school that DS would probably get into because last year the furthest child lived 430 metres away and we lived 400 metres away.

the rest: various other schools, just for the sake of filling in the form. He had no hope of getting into any of them.

Plenty of people who lived c. 500m from the school got no place at all that year. About 50% of the local primaries are church schools and unless you are sitting in the relevant church every Sunday you will not get a place.

My eldest got in to our local school and hoped to get my middle child in too. He spent his Reception year in the nursery half days as no space became available. They offered me a place a mile and a half away but I don't drive and can't be in 2 places at once! There is no financial help or any support system in place to help get 1 child to 1 school and, now my youngest is at the same school as my eldest, 2 to the other. I am home schooling my middle child as he may be top of the waiting list, it changes if someone moves closer etc so sibling connection doesn't always count for anything where I am. My local MP couldn't have cared any less and then after the election, the new one was the same! Have complained everywhere I can but to no avail. They closed the school just up the road from me a few years ago with another nearby and built the new one with only the spaces to hold the same as both but built in the middle of a baby boom! Council and government are useless because I just know that in 3-4 years, they will build houses on the new school site! Awful situation and it's getting worse for me and my family. What else could I do though? The system is totally wrong.

Oy! less slagging off of Londoners please! Plenty of bits of London were 'normal' 20 years ago but are now populated by super wealthy basement building 'incomers'!

Micah, that's fine if you have that kind of choice. Lots don't - where I am, for example, there is no school within reasonable distance that we're even 50% sure of getting into, failing or not. A quite bad Ofsted for one local school managed to extend the catchment from 250m to 400m for a couple of years. It's back around 200m now.

The kind of options you have are enviable.

One of our local schools had terrible problems with people renting in catchment with child number 1 and then moving somewhere cheaper. The school solved the problem by giving priority to in catchment siblings. Yes some will then.have children at different schools but it was such a problem that 80% of the scholarship was our of catchment and it was making local rental and property prices ridiculous. This, in my view is a more sensible policy that would render most of the fraud pointless.

The o/p applied to 6 nearest, all excellent, and therefore all competitive, schools.

Where she is, there probably isn't a chance of applying for an undersubscribed school as back up (apart from the aforementioned free school which was obviously an unknown quantity at the time). There probably isn't a chance of applying for a failing school. I think she lives not far from me and there is no school within a couple of miles of my home (many catchments around 500m or less) that isn't at least good as Ofsted judges them and also (and crucially) full up.

There is competition over the schools that local opinion judges to be the best. But the other schools are all full too.

The poor OP would probably get side-swiped by a change to the siblings rule. The school her #1 child got into will probably be a bit more popular/established in 3 years time. If they take away the siblings rule, how is she going to get (theoretical) #2 child being so far away etc? Careful what you wish OP!

Wow, I had no idea, that's insane... how can LEAs etc not have enough places for children in their area?? I'm really shocked but actually don't know how it can happend, hos can ypu not know how many people are in the town/area.... sorry v naive question.....

We're bloody lucky where we are....

^Today 21:25 mellicauli

The poor OP would probably get side-swiped by a change to the siblings rule. The school her #1 child got into will probably be a bit more popular/established in 3 years time. If they take away the siblings rule, how is she going to get (theoretical) #2 child being so far away etc? Careful what you wish OP!^

There are ways to deal with this - eg sibling priority for siblings where the family is still at the original address, alongside catchment.

I'm really shocked but actually don't know how it can happend, hos can ypu not know how many people are in the town/area.... sorry v naive question.....

A fair one. One of the big recent problems is taking the power to open new schools away from LAs while the duty to provide places remains with them.

Locally, the LA spent three years identifying a provider for a free school near us, which was supposed to open in 2015 within a few hundred meters of us. Ultimately, all the preferred locations (including those backed by the local MP and council) were knocked back by the government who finally allocated premises on the other side of the borough. It won't open until 2017, and the council is back to square 1 in creating new school provision where it's actually needed. In the borough we are 200 places short every year.

You might be near me, Jassy, or if you aren't it is just the same here. We regularly get stories in the local press about 175 children without a place for reception etc after the first round of allocations. As far as I know, people do get placed in the end, but often v inconveniently in terms of location and it relies on people going private at vast cost because they didn't get their preferred school. The ones who go private to avoid unpopular schools therefore free up places for the ones who didn't get placed.

The population here (London) is both very very dense and very fluid. People move in and out all the time. DD's class is probably about two thirds composed of children who've been there from reception. The other third have changed regularly. In addition, there are tons of buildings going up - more and more flats which will be populated by people who will want school places for their children. They move in and out and they have children of different ages and it's not that easy to know absolutely how many places you need.

And, as I said before, there is a real problem related to people moving away once they have garnered their school place at a cost that would be unsustainable for the whole of the child's education. This impacts on schools, but also parking and house prices (insane round here, my 2 up 2 down tiny house is worth nearly a million quid - more than three times what we paid for it). And those things do have a knock on effect on quality of life for a lot of people, too. I have lived here all my life - moving away would take all my family support networks and ability to have some kind of reasonable life. But I see why people do it, especially when they have several children (I only have one).

I think, btw, that there are maybe one or two primary schools in the borough out of forty or something not good or above as rated by Ofsted. This clearly means that people want to live here and send their kids to school here so adding to the pressure on places.

We also have absolutely tons of expats, only here for a year or two, who also want school places for their children.

I think I'm a big further out than you - outer borough in SW London. But the experience is depressingly familiar. Schools are all anyone has talked about at kids' parties for the past three months. Everyone is just completely paranoid about it, and understandably so.

I agree that the system seems to depend on many people feeling forced to go private, which of course has happened a bit less since the recession.

Secondary is even more of a problem - not enough places and the secondaries are very ordinary while the primaries are mostly great. Private secondaries are all selective (and £££).