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

Tiggytape & Minty:

I see what you're saying about the flexibly / lack of bureaucracy allowing frauds to be caught more quickly, but me personal opinion is that it's unfair precisely because a great deal of it is down to the discretion of the admissions department. Would you like it if your taxes were decided by an individual using their discretion and no set rules? I wouldn't! To me a fairer system is one where rules have to be applied equally to all people.

CandyCrush77:
Hm, tricky. Unfortunate situation - I had the same problem but only with 1 child. The London system is crazily selective! Very different from the rest of the country. I did find some minimally selective private schools but they weren't very good schools for a variety of reasons. Ended doing the move into commuter belt to get a good school. Educationally it was a great move. Hopefully you'll find a solution that works for you!

Maidenname

Yes, it is an odd system! I do feel clearer rules would make it easier for everyone. I just feel so sorry for anyone in an area where this is an issue - I know of a DC with learning difficulties who has ended up at an OFSTED Requires Improvement school which is really rough with lots of violence. Heartbreaking!

Dc with learning difficulties are often far better off in schools with poor OFSTED reports and s challenging intake, simply because they are so experienced in dealing with children with needs.

And you can't compare to the tax system where you can reduce the amount you pay. The thing being measured is the allocation of any school. Those that cheat and are found out don't risk their child's ability to access an education, they'll still be allocated a school regardless.

And yes some schools have better OFSTEDs than others, but LEAs can't take that into consideration in any case.

I don't think children with SEN are better off in a school with a poor ofsted at all. Quite the opposite. One with a challenging intake and a good or outstanding maybe, but not a poor one.

The added complication is that different councils have different rules so what is seen as cheating/fraudulent in one might not in another. People have said that you are not allowed to move and rent out your home but you have to have sold it. This is not the case in some areas. In the council where I live you can move from and rent out your former home without selling it. The council just has to see proof that you are not living there. So a rental agreement with tenants living there. In addition to clearer rules there should also really be consistency across councils shouldn't there?

I don't fully understand why so many people are finding it hard to comprehend that renting for a short term, whatever the qualifying period as defined by the LA that the school is located in, with the sole intention of gaining a school place at a school that they would not otherwise be entitled to a place at, is not permitted. It really doesn't take a genius to understand this.

If you rent on a short term basis, with the sole intention of gaining a school place at a school where your intended perminent address of residence will not qualify, you are commiting fraud. How easy it is to prove fraud is a different matter and one which is addressed in different ways by LAs.

I think the onus should be on the property owner to demonstrate a need to own/rent multiple properties (especially when only a few miles apart) not on the LA to argue why they should not.

I think that cheating very much still goes on because, whilst mumsnet and some other forums have you think things are investigated thoroughly etc, I think that depends largely on LEA. It certainly does not happen everywhere.

Here in Lancashire I know tons of people who have lied and it's so annoying. I know they definitely do not check addresses against any records or council tax etc. they ask for council tax but I know far too many who have done it to know they can't possibly be checking. We had one parent lying at dds school and even after parents provided them with the parents actual address, nothing was done for months (during which they were given a place).

After much protesting on results day by siblings who eventually got separated (out of catchment), their place was withdrawn only to be reinstated at appeal!!

These checks may be done elsewhere but no school near me even asks for proof of address which is why so many have got and will continue to get away with it.

As for renting for the purpose of a place, I've heard head teachers suggesting that near me!

Unfortunately there are always maverick head teachers who seem to delight in making such suggestions. But just like the other favourite, if you do not put us down as first choice you will not get a place, the reality is that they will be found out and have their hand slapped. And by the way nobody gets a choice it is an ability to express a preference

we were investigated for suspect admission fraud. It was quite funny actually. We live out of catchment for the school that dd moves to in year 5. Ds went to the nursery. Last year we applied for his place to start in September just gone. Someone had presumed that we must have lied because we applied whilst living out of catchment. In fact we didn't lie we just put that school down as first choice because we like the school.

Sibling rule didn't apply as dd was moving to secondary at the same time. I think the parent thought we had given a false address. We hadn't so there wasn't really anything to prove. We got a place, because the school was under subscribed.

I know it was a parent as she kept asking questions about wether we thought we would get a place and asking if anyone had been in touch to ask further questions. In the end she didn't get a place because her application was late, (so all spare place were allocated to on time applications) although a place did become available later.

I would report people if I definitley knew they were lying. But I wouldn't if I just suspected.

Dds secondary is also out of catchment and we had to appeal to get her place, which was one of the most horrendous thing I have been through. And again a neighbour who appealed and failed to get stopped my in the street asking 'so what lie did you tell to get her in?'. I told her I didn't lie and dd had some problems that meant that school was the best place for her. Again people assuming that our situation must be the result of lying and fraud. I think she expected me to give her a magic formula to get in.

From my experience I can't help wonder if people think admission fraud happens more often than people think and people forget that not all circumstances are the same and they don't know enough about people's private life's to make that call.

I think that cheating very much still goes on

Of course it does. LAs will never catch all cheats. But they catch a lot more than people think.

Lancashire do check against Council Tax records but, as with other LAs conducting such checks, this is only an indicator. A mismatch will trigger further investigation rather than immediately being treated as fraudulent.

Regarding the case you talk about, the fact the place was reinstated at appeal shows that, rightly or wrongly, the appeal panel were convinced that either the application was not fraudulent or the child would still have got a place if the correct address had been used.

It is true that Lancashire was somewhat complacent about fraudulent applications until recently. In 2012 they made the unlikely claim that they did not have any problems with fraudulent applications. They now take it more seriously. Unlike some LAs they don't demand proof of address with your application but may ask for this if they decide to investigate you. They do investigate a number of applications every year resulting in some applications being treated as fraudulent and some offers are withdrawn every year. However, I suspect they are not as vigilant as some other LAs.

This is the most hardcore admissions screening statement I've come across.

The school in question is insanely over-subscribed, in fairness. I've no doubt some people are dedicated enough to jump through even those hoops to ensure their child gets in, but the school does, quite rightly, make it as difficult as it possibly can for parents to play the system.