School cheats

[frillysockmum]

I was wondering how many over subscribed schools do extra checks after allocations day. We got 1st choice as did about 75% of dds friends but we have several friends who narrowly missed out on distance and I am so sad for them. At the same time 2 people (not effected by it) have told me that they know some one who has cheated this year ie used some one else's address. It makes me so angry - how do we get the school to make extra checks?!?!

I'm going to put my neck on the line here and agree with schoolcheat that the application should ask for confirmation of address by the school start date, not some nine months before at the point of application. It seriously disadvantages people who dare to move house anytime between December and the next September.

and that can disadvatage families who have lived in the catchment all of their lives.

I'm not sure there is an answer that would satisfy everyone

Jewelfairies

That would never work as people could say they were moving and not actually move. I would imagine very few move at that time so only a small amount of children are affected.

mrz catchment area is catchment area, whether you have lived there for 13 years or three hours before school starts. The key is that the child continues to live at that address throughout the school year. I also don't think it is fair for people to secure the school place and then move halfway across town for whatever reason, but keeping the place.

Zingy123 Clearly they would have to prove that they are actually physically living at the address listed on the application and provide rental contract or evidence of having bought. Otherwise they would not keep the place.

I think it would be fairer.

So you think it's fair that a child who has lived there all their life should miss out because a family move a metre closer to the school at the beginning of term?

Our school does a home visit shortly before the kids start in reception. During the visit they ask to see some kind of proof that we live at the address.

mrz well, would you think it is fair if they move nine months early the day before the application form is due, and they then quite legally get the place? That's what's happening all across the country, but not everyone is as well organised or house purchases fall through and take longer. So yes, as long as someone is at the address stated on the first day of school and continues to live there I think this is fine. What is not fine is using an address for the purpose of getting the place e.g. a grandparents address or a flat rented briefly for the sole purpose of getting a school place at a certain school. That's fraud. Moving house to be in a nice catchment area is not.

tiggytape I take your point. I'm not anywhere near London and in our part of the country the application process is pretty sedate at the best of times and schools are not so hideously oversubscribed.

no but at the moment giving an address you don't actually live in at the time of application is fraud ... and if you are the parent of the child who has lived in catchment all their life isn't going to see your suggestion as any fairer than you see the current system. As I said not sure there is an answer that would keep everyone happy.

We actually had that situation with a family tiggytape ... they "fraudently" used the address of the house they were buying and were offered a place only for the sale to apparently fall through ...the child attended for 7 years and they never ever moved into catchment.

mrz I would have been pretty tough on that family in that example. I'm surprised they kept the place.

They had been at school for a term before it came to light only because they applied for a nursery place from their actual address.

My gripe is that the people I know who lost places are long term residents in an expensive area (partly due to several great schools plus lots of other factors). They have lost out to people who use false addresses e.g friends or parents, whilst living in much cheaper areas over a mile or more away etc. We suffer a big mortgage to live where we do - we too could have had a much bigger house in a area further away but chose to stay put as we are happy here. All people want is a decent school they can walk to, be near friends etc etc - being forced to accept a school miles away is not fair on those who are victims of cheats

Sounds like you have money, and are therefore entitled to get what you want.

I just wished to engage with a system that is very difficult for minority groups, and obtain what I pay my taxes for (a state school place), and I get called a cheat.

The system stinks, and the only people on here who are happy with it are those that can buy what they want.

To have been able to 'live in the catchment for years', I would have had to get a council house, and sit on benefits. I took an alternative, paying UK taxes, but rendered me unable to apply by the rules. I did the moral, and right thing. Thinking you deserve a particular thing more than someone else because you have more money stinks.

You get me wrong. We don't have much money but make huge sacrifices to stay in the area. Life would be much easier if we did not have to work all hours and live very frugally.

The primary school I failed to get DS into asked for his birth certificate,my council tax bill, a utilities bill and my phone bill. I stupidly sent a phone bill that was not within the last 3 months and the office rang me, I then took the up to date one in.So I fail to see how anyone could have cheated this system.The crap school I got allocated required no form of identification whatsoever.

Even living frugally, you don't have a right to buy preferential access to state education of your choice.

All people want is a decent school they can walk to, be near friends etc etc - being forced to accept a school miles away is not fair on those who are victims of cheats bad educational planning by those in positions of power.

I work all hours. I live frugally. I had huge problems accessing state education for my DD. Were the application contested, I think they would have found it hard to strictly say it was fraudulent, as I could not have filled in in any other way, and accessed state education.

Locally, at a very oversubscribed secondary, several checks are done. An investigation (not an automatic withdrawal of place, but an investigation) is triggered not only by the 'normal' red flags at application time of having an address known for fraudulent applications; recent moves (many of which are of course fine, but an investigation is done) etc, but also if a change of addess is discovered or notified (all school-related paperwork is sent by post, and occasionally, at random, delivered by hand) at the time of entry or within the first year of school.

The main check done after those later moves (because moving is not fraudulent of itself, but it is if it is a return to the child's permanent home ot of the catchment) is whether the address moved back to is one the family has historically lived in, and if so, then the place is removed unless the place would have been given with that as the stated address IYSWIM.

Schoolcheat
"All people want is a decent school they can walk to, be near friends etc etc - being forced to accept a school miles away is not fair on those who are victims of cheats bad educational planning by those in positions of power.

ASs the result of your action, at l;east one child has become your victim exactly as you state.

By law, your child would not have been left without a state place. Not the one you liked, but that is not one you were legally entitled to in any case.

Schoolcheat,

The moral high ground you assert that you occupy - what is it? What did you do? Misrepresented your address? if you had given your correct address, then you would have been given a state place elsewhere that you were entirtled to.

There is no situation in which a fraudulent application is correct because 'otherwise there would be no place for my child'. Youy would have been given a place - after some time, maybe. In a less brilliant school, very possibly. Perhaps even as an extra pupil under the FAP if no other place could be found. But it is simply not true that failing to apply fraudulently would have given you no place whatsoever.

They weren't a victim. By the first day of school, DD was in criteria 2, so far above the majority, actually. What I put put her in criteria 2 at application. Had I not done that, we would have not been allocated a school place for the start of reception. I haven't gone fully into the circumstances, in order to not out myself, but no, I don't feel guilty that DD, as a criteria 2 child, got a place above a criteria 5 or 6 child who you call a victim. I think DD would have been a greater 'victim', and I have to fight for her.

It is the system which sucks, not the parents trying to access that system. England has a strange lottery system, and people thrive on blaming each other, rather than blaming those in power, who can actually change things. All the bitching is unproductive. How many of you griping here actually campaign to MPs etc for better access to local schools?