father wins high court case against £60 fine for taking his DD out of school

[var123]

I couldn't see this anywhere else, so apologies if there is another thread.

The news this afternoon is that a father who took his DD out of school to go to Disney World in Florida has won a case against his LEA and school who tried to fine him for it.

I think this will change things, especially as flights are so expensive this summer in particular.

The increase in workload caused by absentees pales into teeny insignificance compared with the amount of workload caused by ill-advised government interference,

Presumably, that's because a small minority of parents take their DCs out of school at the moment. Imagine if regulation was lifted and all parents could do what Mr Platt did and each DC is out of the classroom for 2 holidays a year?

Factor in absences for illness and exceptional circumstances as well, and it would be a rare week when a teacher wasn't helping at least one child with last weeks work - and some weeks, half the class may be catching up. What happens to those who don't go on holiday?

Maybe the government should reduce the number of hours/days that State education has to deliver and that alongside the set holidays, parents have a number of days they can choose to take when they like. Expectations and outcomes could be adjusted to reflect a short school year.

But what happens when one parent argues that they need two extra days because it's the holiday of a lifetime? Or that it's cheaper to come back midweek than at the weekend? It'll happen, of course it will.

DH is a HT who disagrees completely with fining families for taking term time holidays and tries his best not to do it, particularly when he knows there are reasons why they can't go during school holidays. He is of the opinion that family time together is important and the world will not end if a child misses a week or two of school. He managed not to fine anyone (I think HTs have to send forms to the LA wrt UAs so he just didn't fill the forms in) for most of the 2014/15 academic year but then got a bollocking from some bot in the LA who basically told him he had to. So now he tries to circumvent it by giving parents advice on keeping the absence below the threshold for triggering a fine. He also authorises it for things like family weddings, funerals, Grandma's 90th birthday celebrations at the other end of the country because he knows those things are important.
I don't think he's unique at all in his attitude but he has his hands tied by a ridiculous system that won't let him be kind or understanding to those who need it most.

I don't think he's unique at all in his attitude but he has his hands tied by a ridiculous system that won't let him be kind or understanding to those who need it most.

Is he a member of a union? It was the HT unions which called for the DfE guidelines to be strengthened and for HT to be held less responsible for the decisions.

It's clear that the Senior Leaders of schools disagree over this issue, so it can't be left in their hands The High Court could have set clear clarification as to how to interpret the legislation but chose not to, so someone has to ensure the system is consistent - who else but the government can do that?

He is, but for the legal protections it offers, more than their policies. He didn't go to the annual conference because he didn't agree with a lot of the agenda.

drarry you see the problem then? That many of your DHs colleagues disagree with his POV and they voted to put pressure on the Government to change the guidance to its current from?

And, those colleagues probably feel as strongly about him failing to submit the required forms to the LA as he does about them issuing fines to families who otherwise wouldn't have a holiday.

A decision has to be made as to what is acceptable, and it must be applied consistently. I'm sure local HT were unimpressed if parents were removing DCs from their school in favour of your DHs school because your DH wasn't following the rules that had been agreed. If he felt that strongly, surely attending conferences and voting against proposals that he disagrees with is a better response, than just deciding to flout the rules put in place at the request of his colleagues?

And 50% of head teachers would like to see a return to the old system, according to the NAHT. Please don't make out teachers / heads universally want this - it is a blatant lie.

In a survey of over 1,400 members in UK schools, school leaders’ union NAHT found that:
• 68% found the current guidance problematic when making decisions to grant absence

• 90% would welcome more detailed guidance on what constitutes exceptional circumstances
• 88% thought there should be 'reasonable' restrictions on term time absences
• 88% thought that requests for absence should be required to be backed by proof of need

Members were split 50/50 on whether they would want to grant absence for a family holiday during term time.

Please don't make out teachers / heads universally want this - it is a blatant lie.

I'm not, that's exactly my point. There is no consistency amongst HT - some are prepared to disregard statutory requirements, whereas as others have interpreted the legislation in a far more draconian way.

It's a mess. It was supported by the HT unions initially, but now it's in place, and the impact is known, the support is less. But there is no universal agreement.

And the High Court chose not to provide the clarity that everyone was seeking,

So, the only option is for the Government to change legislation so that there is no ambiguity. At the moment, the Government in power strongly supports attendance and so they will legislation accordingly. If the government changes, then so may the legislation.

Also, can you please show me where Heads requested this change and wanted it brought in...?

My understanding was that the change in law arose from the 2012 Charlie Taylor report. So what you're saying conflicts with my memory of events. Will be happy to be proven wrong though ... The teacher in me hates citing false facts .

It was during the subsequent consultation on Charlie Taylor's report that unions expressed their support of his recommendations - or at least, that's what was reported to the Sec of State and I can't find any info that suggests the Unions disagreed with that:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/232975/charlieetaylortoosecretaryoffstateattendanceereview_implementation.pdf

I'm really interested (and anxious) to see where this will go over the next weeks and months.
I've seen countless parents on Facebook cheering and saying they are going to now book holiday, and lots say they are going to 'appeal' fines (I'm not sure if this is possible if they've already been paid?).

What does it actually mean now Jon Platt has won in the high court, for everyday people? Will this put parents who plead not guilty after non-payment in a better position?

And will it affect those who are penalty noticed for unauthorised absence rather than holiday (bearing in mind this could be for 4 UA missed days in a ten week period and attendance could be over 90%)?

lots say they are going to 'appeal' fines (I'm not sure if this is possible if they've already been paid?).

The cynic in me suspects that Jon Platts company is well placed to make money out of any opportunity to do so; particularly as the PPI market is in sight.

*end of the PPI market

Yes, but the Charlie Taylor letter only says:

"teachers' associations particularly welcomed the recommendation to strengthen the rules on term time holidays, agreeing that these can be very disruptive to pupils' education."

That's not the same as your claim:

That many of your DHs colleagues disagree with his POV and they voted to put pressure on the Government to change the guidance to its current from?

That's what I want to see - evidence that Heads asked the Govt for this change to be brought in, as has been claimed many times on this thread. Because that is really not my memory of things at all.

Looks like I was right. Jon Platt has released a statement this morning outlining how he intends to profit from LAs, by setting up a company which will take on cases for parents on a no-win, no-fee basis.

Where's the profit in that for him personally? Genuine question.

Thanks for the link btw - really interesting.

liney. He's proposing setting up a company that will deal with the cases on a no-win, no-fee basis. Hence, a proportion of any costs awarded will be paid to the company he would own, as a fee.

He currently owns a PPI Claims company on the same basis, which must be doing quite well, given his lifestyle

His explanation of his own case is informative.

I personally think it's going to be a good thing if some LAs back off from prosecuting the parents of children with SEN and medical issues. And it does happen. It happened to a close friend of mine. The magistrates refused to look at the medical evidence and just accepted the LA's statement that a certain % threshold figure hadn't been reached therefore a crime had been committed.

It left the family in a much, much worse place than they had been in before.

19 days in one year = equivalent of missing a whole year of school during your childhood, now tell me that isn't wrong.

A good solution would be to have 100% attendance compulsory at academies and attendance by choice at council run schools. We would see which system works out better and adjust accordingly.

JeremyCorbyn - it would take years for the results to become available and then there would still be arguments about selection bias ("pushy" parents choosing x, better teachers at y, middle class kids tend to be in z areas)..!

I don't think every parent would take their dc out of school,many of us work in education so not possible plus when mine were small I wanted to go away in the long Summer holiday as it broke it up

Imagine if regulation was lifted and all parents could do what Mr Platt did and each DC is out of the classroom for 2 holidays a year?

Well, it's possible but highly unlikely because most parents do care very much about their children's education and value their time at school (a view not incompatible with also believing in the value of travel BTW).

2014/2015 - overall absence rate = 4.6%

2012/2013 - the school year before rules were tightened the overall absence rate = 5.2%

So people didn't go nuts taking loads of holidays in term time before the fines, why would they start now?

We lived in Germany and there they stagger the summer holidays according to region so the whole nation does not go on holiday for the same 6 weeks. However they do not have extensive exams such as GCSEs. Only in the final year of secondary do SOME students take the exams which hopefully they will pass to gain an ABITUR for university entry

You also could not take your kids out of school willy-nilly without repercussions. If your child was sick they needed a doctor's note for more than 2-3 days absence. Parents needed permission to take holidays in term-time. I know some parents would lie and say their kids had lice because they were not allowed back to school until they had the all clear. It was an easy way to take a sneaky week or long weekend.