School admissions fraud article

[CarlaJones]

I thought people might be interested in this article about school admissions "detectives" catching out people cheating the system and there's also going to be a Panorama programme about it that's mentioned in the article.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34014556

I'm deliberating whether to report someone who I think is planning to use the grandparents address. We are likely to be on the cusp - ie it's borderline as to whether we will get a place (actually this is secondary not primary) so they could make all the difference - and to be honest, even if it didn't affect us, it still feels unfair. Yet why do I feel guilty for considering this?! It's the right thing to do surely. I feel like if I am going to do it I should probably do it before offers are announced, as then it's not a case of letting the boy down, once he's been given a place - instead just that if they do find that they've cheated, then he won't get the place in the first place.

This system seems seems very unfair for those who cannot afford to move into a catchment area :-( especially in areas of London where you in effect either 'pay' for state education upfront in one lump sum by buying a more expensive house in a catchment area or you pay school fees at private.

....but then it's very hard to think of a system that would be fair! And pressure on school places is getting so crazy now. Very sad for all those DC's who miss out.

What is also extremely unfair is i) the number of faith schools whose admissions are dependent on your religious beliefs (I still don't really get how that is not discriminatory) and ii) the vast number of all girls schools in the capital and lack of provision for boys. I don't want to send my kids to a private school but I also don't want to send them the rough/crap local comp. I work full time and pay around 4k in tax a month and have done for the last 20 years so it feels pretty unfair.

"How would the system work for people who own a property but decide to rent it out in order to move in to a catchment area with the genuine intention of residing in the catchment area for the minimum period of time? (Is there a minimum amount of time, or are you supposed to live in the catchment area for the entire time the child attends the school?) if you were upfront with the admissions team about your intention to do this, what could they do, given it is within the rules?"

But that is school admissions fraud, isn't it? Moving into the catchment for a year or so and then moving back to the owned house. How else would you describe school admissions fraud? - lying about your address? I can't imagine people get away with that anywhere now!

Mintyy, well, it's only fraud if it is against the rules and you are dishonest with the admissions department. I imagine it is possible to do something like that legitimately with honest reasons for doing so, and some would argue that there is nothing wrong with people moving to a catchment area whilst owning a house elsewhere and then needing to move out again for genuine reasons..... But clearly there are far too many people who exploit the system and that is very unfair on those who miss out.

Just as with the benefits system, it is nearly impossible to catch the dishonest ones without preventing genuine applicants with unusual family circumstances missing out.

As far as I can tell (and anyone who lives in London / other affected areas please feel free to correct me) the biggest problem is that more than ever before there are a very large number of affluent families who can afford to find the best school and legitimately pay £300k extra for a house within the catchment area while less well off families live in the less desirable areas and send DC to less desirable schools.

As someone said "London has a rich problem"!

Tiggytape, exactly, there is no totally fair system.

The biggest problem isn't rich people using their wealth to make free choices. The biggest problem is the shortage of really good schools.

I live somewhere (Paris) where schools are much cheaper than in London. Accommodation is cheaper too. There is a chronic shortage of places in really good schools nonetheless. IMO (and I am lucky enough to get to talk to people really in the know about the economics of education) teacher supply is the major issue facing education and it is going to get a hell of a lot worse.

I disagree sussex mum. Desirable areas still have social housing and other types of housing so being slightly better off does not always work in our favour. I actually think I might be better off working part time and moving to a flat next to a good school than working full time and living in a nicer area but outside the catchment area of a good secondary. And what might be "rich" in other parts of the country is not rich in London. I earn a six figure salary but have a large mortgage and my childcare costs are still 1k per month. After tax, mortgage, bills, childcare etc, I end up using credit cards to live at the end of every month.

Mintyv it is only fraud if against the admission rules and these vary from place to place. It should be allowed to move from an owned house to rent in another area which for some reason you can't or don't wish to buy at that point in time. However what of cause is the problem is that it is not fair for children local to schools that loose out on places because people move in and then move back to a place they were in before. It would be too much hassle and expensive for local councils to monitor that so it seems that they either take a stance where you cannot apply from a new address in catchment at all or you can and as long as you have the evidence at time of application no more questions asked. They both have problems. The former punishes people that actually legitimately want to move to a new area. The later laves the system open to abuse by those that don't genuinely want to move to an area.

I agree with candy crush that religious priority is discriminatory and should be scrapped. There is a lot of fraud to get into the religious schools in terms of people finding God to get into schools.

Mintyv it is only fraud if against the admission rules and these vary from place to place

That is not true. As I pointed out up thread, what is described (moving into catchment to get a place with the intention of moving out again as soon as possible) is always admission fraud. The rules set by the LA are irrelevant. It is, however, true that some LAs are hotter than others at detecting and taking action on fraud.

prh47bridge just wondering why it is still fraud if the rules for specific LAs don't forbid it. After all as is the case in some LAs the admission rule says you have to live at the address at a certain date and only require proof of current address and only mention in their brochure that you cannot use family or temporary address then surely if you fulfil their criteria you are not committing fraud?

maidename - I am puzzled as to how you think moving into catchment to get a place with the intention of moving out again as soon as possible complies with the LA's statement that you cannot use a temporary address. That is a very clear case of using a temporary address to get a school place. But the answer to your question is that it is always fraud to make an intentionally misleading application regardless of whether or not the LA's rules specifically prohibit your actions.

@prh47bridge
define temporary? How do LA's define temporary? That is the crux of it.

This is like Tax Avoidance vs Tax Evasion argument; both arguably immoral but the first is legal and the second is not.

@CandyCrush77
I read what you said above and yes, the lack of provision for boys must be difficult. Would you want your DC to attend a faith school if they were not of that faith? Or would you just like to have the option?

I hope you don't mind me asking, but what are your reasons for not wanting to go private? I would hazard a guess from the amount of tax you pay that the reasons may not be financial? (And I'm not being critical of that attitude btw, I'm just interested.

I totally understand how it's possible to be on six figures and not be rich in London - when you think a decent 2 bed flat can be £2k a month and nurseries can be £120 a day..... There's a thread about this where someone talks about being on £120k and their family of 3 live in a 1 bed flat..... But that's another issue!

I'm surprised you think council housing is so plentiful in catchment areas of good schools? Given a lot of the good schools have catchment areas of 600yards, is it that likely there will be a council estate within it or that the property will be affordable for anyone on housing benefit?

@ bobochic:
Yes, I totally agree that the absolute number of places available is a problem, but it is made worse by everyone in a borough wanting to attend the same two schools because they are the only good ones!

@tiggytape

WTF! the system works like that!! Its appalling that a DCs future rests on a system that is that open to abuse!? But we have courts and a proper legal system to get away from exactly this sort of thing!!!

to think that you could lose a school place because some grumpy individual in admissions doesn't like the sound of you!?

I think it sounds utterly reasonable and there is not enough investigation into this type of fraud, sadly. The "abuse" of the system comes from pushy parents with plenty of money, not the other way round.

As Tiggy says, if you have a legitimate reason for a temporary move into a good school catchment, then it must be fairly easy to prove?

Can I jump in and ask a question?

If parents are divorced/separated, can the address go on either parent, or must it be the RP (the one who gets child benefit/CTC).

I know several cases where the child lives with mum, well out of catchment, but has got a place in a highly desirable school using dad's (in catchment) address- usually a rented flat.

P1Kachoo, I am not completely adverse to going private if we had to but my main reasons against are: 1) can't afford it without massively impoverishing ourselves and even then might not be possible and I would not like the stress of having to pay a huge amount for 5-7 years (I am way way off being able to afford it comfortably but would be a case of selling the house, downsizing and other massive cuts backs and 2) I am doubtful that I will be able to get my DSCs into a private school given that most are selective! Both DSs are bright but I know the competition is fierce. The safer way would seem to be to move.

Well exactly p1kachoo what is temporary? If you talk to the council where I live they say the rules are you pay the council tax in a property and have a tenancy agreement of at least a year. So if it is not against the rules I don't think it can be called fraudulent. If there are so many people confused about the rules and numerous threads on mumsnet asking about it, then the rules are not clear and should be made so. I had to come on here and ask to make sure I was not doing anything wrong. prh47bridge and others were kind enough to help me but really I should not have to seek help from people I don't know on the internet to understand the system.
When people start having kids it tends to be a point in life where they might want/need to reconsider their living arrangements thinking of size, nice places to live with kids, schools, distance to family etc. So it is not surprising a lot of people move to areas that might fulfil some of these needs. Myself included. People are not necessarily thinking about or even know the issues surrounding the school problem until they enter into that world (and start reading mumsnet). Although it seems people like to vilify people that move around, people are not sitting there thinking of how to keep other peoples children out of schools. A bit like if you want and apply for a job you are not really thinking of a person who might have been in the company for a long time who would like the job and loses out. Of course it might be unfair for that person and a good company should perhaps protect and invest in its employee as the LA should maybe better protect their residents. And many are doing that. I do think better, simpler clearer rules would make the situation better for everybody..