Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Primary education

Join our Primary Education forum to discuss starting school and helping your child get the most out of it.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Rules about fraudulent address in school admissions.

48 replies

Phenikz · 18/04/2011 11:56

We are in a close knit rural area. We didn't get a place at our local catchment area school because some parents from outside the catchment area moved out of their "substantial" family homes into dilapidated flats next door to the school... We are 0.6 miles from the school but didn't get a place because of distance. Last year children were admitted from a distance of up to 1.54 miles. So now what? Everybody rush into those flats? If I new I would move too

Could anyone advise what is the law, the rules and any precedents, which could help to decide, and eventually demonstrate, whether those parents should not be offered the place because their real residence is outside the catchment area?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

JudgeRinderSays · 09/02/2015 17:34

we moved into a rented property in catchment purely with the intention of getting DS1 into grammar school. Someobody complained but the LEA said as long as we were actually living there, intention was irrelevant.We had to submit NHS card , checked electoral roll, utility bills etc

prh47bridge · 09/02/2015 17:48

In many LAs you wouldn't get away with that today, particularly if you still owned a property.

Somemumsodd · 09/02/2015 19:33

Elf that seems dreadfully unfair on DD surely? A long commute and she won't be able to do many weekend clubs, meet ups etc with local friends. I wouldn't ever do that to mine

JudgeRinderSays · 11/02/2015 14:18

So prh47bridge are you saying that in some LEAs, some unelected officer gets to sit there acting as judge jury and executioner trying to discern what a person's intentions were in moving house
Surely there should be a clear set of rules based on facts not intent.

Floggingmolly · 11/02/2015 14:26

Your intentions in moving house are your own affair, Judge. It's only when you move back to your original property with all possible speed after being allocated a place that your motives become open to interpretation.

prh47bridge · 11/02/2015 17:42

Some LAs have clear rules stating that if the parents own a property but live in a rented property they will use the address of the property the family owns for admissions purposes.

Some LAs have blacklists of rented accommodation they know is regularly used by parents trying to get their children into popular schools and will look suspiciously at any application from those addresses.

And of course LAs can (and mostly do) investigate reports of fraudulent applications.

The LA makes the rules. They determine what is acceptable. They investigate cases of suspected fraudulent applications and make their decisions based on the evidence available to them.

If the LA considers their application to be fraudulent parents are entitled to appeal to an independent appeal panel. The central question for the appeal panel in such cases is whether or not the LA has acted unreasonably.

JudgeRinderSays · 11/02/2015 19:27

but why should it make a difference why people have moved.It should just be the fact they have.
So what if a mother and child have moved into a flat they say because she has split with her partner.
What if a family have moved out of their home and they say they are going to have it done up to let out?
Or they say they have moved to be nearer aging parents?
How does the officer decide who is acting fraudulently and who isn't.It sounds very open to corruption to me!

prh47bridge · 11/02/2015 19:55

The rules are that you cannot make a fraudulent or misleading application. If you rent a property temporarily in order to get a school place but continue to own a property elsewhere in the area the LA is entitled to regard your application as fraudulent or misleading.

If a mother and child move into a flat because they say she has split with her partner an LA is entitled to look askance at it if the flat just happens to be near a popular school, especially if the mother has taken a short term let. If the mother is allowed to use that address then moves back in with the father as soon as they have got a place for their child the LA is entitled to withdraw the place on the grounds that the move was fraudulent.

If a family move out of their home and say they are going to have it done up to let out the LA is likely to use the address of the house they own and ignore the rented address. If they had actually let it out on a long term lease the LA may take a different view but some would still insist on using the address of the house they own.

If they say they have moved to be nearer aging parents the same rules apply. If they are renting and they still own a home the LA is likely to use the address of the house they own and ignore the rented property.

Decisions are not made by a single person. Those who have to make a decision look at the evidence available and arrive at a conclusion. It is generally not difficult to distinguish between genuine moves and those designed to get a school place. LAs occasionally get it wrong but not very often. And not open to corruption at all since you don't know who is involved in making the decision so you would have to bribe a large number of people and hope that none of them reported you to the police.

tiggytape · 11/02/2015 22:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsSamples · 12/06/2015 14:28

I have been reading this thread with interest. My daughter failed to get a place on national offer day at our local first school. We found out we missed out by only 11 metres and were 2nd on the waiting list. I returned from holiday last week to discover that a family with twin girls livin further away had used a fraudulent address to gain their two places at the same school. Someone knew and contacted the LA to inform them and they have since lost their places. Meanwhile two days prior to that happening a late applicant who has just moved to the area has been added to the waiting list ahead of my daughter due to them living slightly closer than us. I am absolutely furious that someone has lied and taken my daughters school place; we would have got in if they hadn't lied. I am more furious that due to the length of time it took to investigate that we may now not be given that place back. I have contacted LA who are saying very little and now my local MP who has said she will look into it. Anything else I can do? Any advice much appreciated. I feel my daughter has been the victim of several counts of injustice.

christinarossetti · 12/06/2015 14:35

One of the experts will be along soon MrsSamples, it may be that you have a good chance at appealing this decision, given the circumstances.

titchy · 12/06/2015 16:19

If two places have been withdrawn and you are number two on wait list surely you'll be offered a place? In the meantime tell them you want to appeal based on maladministration - that should focus them a bit. Oh and get EVERYTHING in writing.

Mopmay · 12/06/2015 19:11

Samples I would appeal this big style.

Mopmay · 12/06/2015 19:14

Samples I assume they were admitted as no 30/31. (Twin rule). Two left but then only one replaces them. They clearly therefore could take 31....

YonicScrewdriver · 12/06/2015 19:20

They cannot admit 31 if the previous pupil was an excepted pupil.

PP missed out because at the moment the twins' places were removed, she was number 3 on the list not 2.

titchy · 12/06/2015 19:31

She said she was no 2 when the places were removed, but yes if the twins were numbers 30 and 31 then removing both would indeed only leave one place as a pp said. In fact that's likely given the address is clearly one of the furthest away.

YonicScrewdriver · 12/06/2015 19:33

" We found out we missed out by only 11 metres and were 2nd on the waiting list. I returned from holiday last week to discover that a family with twin girls livin further away had used a fraudulent address to gain their two places at the same school. Someone knew and contacted the LA to inform them and they have since lost their places. Meanwhile two days prior to that happening a late applicant who has just moved to the area has been added to the waiting list ahead of my daughter due to them living slightly closer than us. "

The late applicant lived closer meaning they were at number 2 when the places were withdrawn.

titchy · 12/06/2015 19:44

Oh yes you're right yonic - she was 2nd but went down to third very recently so the withdrawn places went to wait list 1 and 2. I'm no expert but would have thought that the withdrawn places should have been offered to 1 and 2 on offers day, not 1 and 2 now. LEA is probably trying to work out the exact timelines to be certain. An appeal should force the right paper trail to be produced though.

Mopmay · 12/06/2015 19:52

I more meant that as they could physically accept 31 before, maybe she can use this to counter objections? I'd appeal on mismanagement.

As for cheats - I totally despise them and would report.
Elf - your poor daughter being 30 miles from her school !!

YonicScrewdriver · 12/06/2015 19:58

Mop, ICS exceptions don't work like that, though.

She may have a case for appeal because of the fraud but generally waiting list goes in the order that it was the moment the space came available; the offers day order is not preserved.

mariejo · 12/06/2015 21:12

In the appeal, I would argue very strongly that if the allocations had been done properly (ie discounting the fraudulent application for twins) then my child would have got the final place at the time of the initial allocation - the other one would have gone to the child who was 1st on the waiting list. The only potential issue is if the twins were originally 30 and 31 (ie the furthest away on distance) then only one place would be available for reallocation. You need to know whether the twins were in that situation - I suspect not as two places have been reallocated. I have chaired an appeal for a similar case in this situation and the appellant did win the appeal.

prh47bridge · 12/06/2015 21:23

MrsSamples could try an appeal on the argument that the LA should have spotted the fraud earlier and, had they done so, her daughter would have got the place. There is also the argument that, even if the LA couldn't have spotted the fraud earlier, the place should go to the child who lost out due to the fraud. Whilst the Admissions Code doesn't say that an appeal panel may be sympathetic.

admission · 12/06/2015 21:23

You need to appeal.The fact that there is now proof that 2 places were fraudulent achieved means that two pupils were disadvantaged at the time of the initial allocations. From what you say that would appear to be you if you were second on the waiting list.

I would immediately go to the LA admission office and say in writing (do everything in writing / email so you have a record) that you understand that two pupils have lost their places due to fraud and that you believe that your daughter has been disadvantaged and you want her place at the school. I have no doubt that the LA will doing nothing until pushed, so you do need to insist. I would at the same time put in an appeal for the school saying that you believe that due to fraud that your daughter has been disadvantaged and see what then happens. It is quite likely that the LA will insist on this going to appeal.

I also need to say that it is possible if the twins were 30 and 31 in the class that you have not been disadvantaged but if they were in the 30 initial allocation then certainly somebody has been disadvantaged.

Flip

1 2