Help! DC's primary school place withdrawn by council

[RidiculousFruitcake]

Background: I have recently separated from ex due to his violent behaviour and am going through divorce. Before I discovered his violent nature we moved house specially for DC's primary school application. The tenancy was from March 2015 for two years.

In April DC received primary school offer and I was very happy as DC got into a sought after school. However yesterday afternoon I received an email from council admissions saying they are withdrawing the offer as they received an anonymous tip off that DC and I don't live in the address we used for the application.

I was forced out of the family house (the house I rented together with ex and address for the application) as my ex assaulted me in November and then he changed lock to the house to stop me going back. He then took me to court for child arrangement issues in December. Long story short there were a few weeks when DC didn't see exactly due to complications but from March DC has been having regular contact with ex at the family house.

During all this time I wasn't living at family house I have paid rent/council tax/utility bills so DC can use the address for school application.

After we heard the primary school offer, ex has given notice to landlord of moving out of it, partly because we can't afford to rent it anymore and partly because landlord has sold the house. Ex moved out end of May. I have checked with council and it is OK to move once offer was made.

Council said in the email that, basically they has investigated and discovered that DC and I don't live in the address in the application forms since November so...

This is very upsetting and I have been thinking about it all night couldn't sleep. I feel that DC is being penalised for something completely out of our control i.e. I was subject to domestic violence.

I think I'm going to appeal - do you think DC stands a chance to get into the school? I'd be grateful for any advice!

Sorry, I should have been clearer what I meant. You are all saying (correctly) that the place has been withdrawn correctly because strictly speaking the OP did not comply with the admissions requirements. I am saying that in her circumstances this is hardly surprising, and therefore telling her that she has committed fraud is way over the top.

It requires a lot of work to get your head round admissions policies and rules at the best of times. The OP was not in the best of times. She experienced DV and her relationship came to an end. She and the children's father spent weeks arguing about what would happen to the children. In the middle of all of this she managed to get the school application in. All I am saying is that it's hardly surprising that she didn't stop to reflect that it was no longer OK to put that address down because on one arbitrary date, through no fault of the children or the OP, they were no longer living in the place they'd lived in for most of the preceding two years.

If the deadline had been eight weeks earlier, it would have been fine. If it had been eight weeks later and the childcare arrangements had turned out a bit differently, it would also have been fine. As far as she was concerned, in January that was still their home in one sense and the children might well have ended up spending half the week there.

Rules are rules and have to be applied - I get that, although I do think the school admissions system in England is insanely complicated and stressful. I'm just saying in her circumstances I feel very sorry for her. She's got a lot on her plate and now has to sort this mess out. Cut her a bit of slack.

I think you have misread Gasp the Op lived there from March 2015 to November 2015 not two years. The way the Op is worded she knew exactly what she was doing. I do have sympathy for her awful home situation but it's not fair on others who miss out because of cases like this. My Dd missed out on her school place and started at another school. We eventually got a place at Christmas after a fraud case was identified. This meant my Dd having to start a new school, make new friends, the cost of a whole new uniform all because someone had lied.

I never said she has committed fraud, and I don't think she has. She was just misinformed and in the unfortunate situation.
But still, giving her a false hope isn't going to help OP.
I see you are lovely person, and I admire you, but harsh comment maybe be better sometimes?

Yes, apols, I did misread that. But I still say that while there are cases where people lie to get a school place, this isn't necessarily one of them. It's very easy indeed to make a mistake or not to understand the procedure, especially when you're under great stress, maybe not sleeping well, and therefore not thinking totally clearly.

My children are adults now and I am so glad to have no more to do with school admissions. It would make life an awful lot easier in England if the system was more like the one in Scotland or the US and people just automatically sent their children to the nearest school (for the most part).

Agreed wonderdog. I had interpreted it (perhaps wrongly?) that at the time she made the application she was living at the house and to her knowledge would be on the specific date in January given. But that in the period of time prior to the application process closing she experienced dv, was locked out of the house and had to find somewhere else.

It's deeply insensitive to label this as fraud. Had she stayed until the 15th January or whatever the arbitrary date is, exposing her child to further dv before moving out, then seemingly that would have been fine and not fraud. Show some compassion people.

OP I wish you all the best and hope that things brighten up for you soon.

I'm really sorry you've been through this, but you did know the rules (hence renting that house in the first place) and this sentence tells us that you knew that not living in the house would make your DC ineligible for a place at the school:

"During all this time I wasn't living at family house I have paid rent/council tax/utility bills so DC can use the address for school application."

You can't just pay for a house rental and utilities to keep a place. Your child has to actually be there and the reason for not being there isn't part of the consideration.

You did commit fraud and tbh, while I can understand you wanting to limit the impact of your situation on your DD, I think you knew full well that it was not playing by the rules.

Everyone seems to be making the assumption that the op made her application after she'd moved out. Just because the deadline was Jan that doesn't mean she didn't apply until then. Our applications are open online from Sept until Jan. So the op may have applied 2mths before she left the family home.

Indeed, longchalk. And it's probably quite likely the child had no other primary residence in that period (OP may have stayed with various relatives etc) - in other circumstances the flat which was rented for two years could well have been viewed as primary residence. I don't think she was trying to get round the rules though she may have been vaguely aware that council tax bills are one of the checking items and thinking paying them was the right approach.

No, Longchalk, the rules are very clear that if you move residence after application but before allocation, you must inform the Local Authority. There are certain deadline dates after which they won't take the moves into account, but November certainly isn't one of them!!

Well I am sorry to hear about the abuse OP. But I can't see that the council have incorrectly applied the criteria. From their point of view you weren't resident there, hence a fraudulent application. It's a shit situation but I don't see it winning an appeal.

I'm not sure that matters. What matters is where the child is living on deadline day not when the application is made. If you move before deadline it is your responsibility to inform the LA otherwise you run the risk of having your application withdrawn because the information you have provided being false.

And the child has to have been living somewhere between November and April - you'd be very hard pressed to convince the LA that you had means to pay for a residence you weren't living at, but couldn't afford to secure a stable address for your child. That address should have been given as the updated residence.

Op

You need to apply ASAP for some other schools and, as this is a mistake rather than deliberate fraud, ask to be put on the waiting list for this school from your new address. You may need to do a fresh application form, other posters are more expert, but at the moment I assume you have no school place as you aren't on any other lists.

All I am saying is that it's hardly surprising that she didn't stop to reflect that it was no longer OK to put that address down because on one arbitrary date, through no fault of the children or the OP, they were no longer living in the place they'd lived in for most of the preceding two years.

but she did know. She clearly states she carried on paying the bills specifically for the school application. She did stop to reflect and made a decision. Unfortunately it wasn't the correct one.

Rafa, I don't think it matters with respect to the outcome - the LA is correct - but with respect to the kind of language being used about the OP.

Yes, it was her responsibility to make the change but I can imagine this slipping through the cracks if you did the form early then were served notice, let alone in the situation OP was in.

For a friend of mine it worked the other way: her house burned doŵn and she was in rented at the time of the application whilst it was restored. Intuitively, her primary address was her owned house, but the rental address was the right one to use for school, which she did. I can see why a home with your name on a two year rental contract might feel like your primary residence still, especially if you might still be considering counselling etx.

I don't think you are obliged to reset your address if you move between jan and April, though some councils let you and give you a bit better priority than other late applications.

That surely can't be true, Detestable? Moving before the allocation is made is against the rules, it means you have applied from an address you are no longer resident at at the time the place is allocated.
You can certainly have your place withdrawn for that.

Really sorry to hear about the abuse and I hope that you are getting the support you need. However, I don't think that the DV is relevant to the school application. You say in your opening post that you rented in the area specifically to get a school place. You also say that the landlord is selling the house and you would therefore have been moving anyway.

I'm sorry but I believe that the council are correct to withdraw the place. Did they offer an alternative school or have you no offers? I would try to focus on making sure that your child has a place and try to move on from this. I wish you well.

"You also say that the landlord is selling the house and you would therefore have been moving anyway."
Without the DV, the only residence from March 15 to may 16 would have been this flat. The sale should not have impacted the place.

Molly, my LA say it is address at time of application. After all, you don't get to be "on time" for your new area if you move before allocation!

My understanding is that if you rent expressly for the purpose of gaining a school place and then move out then the LA can withdraw the place. Is this not the case?

No. It depends on the wording of the admissions policy. I know a family who made a calculated decision to rent a house right next door to the secondary school of their choice. They moved there in September of year 6. Their son commuted 3 or 4 miles back to his old primary school by bus that year. Before he started at his secondary school his family had moved back to our area, so when he started year 7 he commuted the other way. All perfectly legitimate.

PS In their case they did not own a house. They left a rented flat to go to the house and only bought a house when they moved back.

If it was their one and only home, and they weren't actually paying rent or mortgage and / or living elsewhere at the same time then that was perfectly legitimate.
In op's case though; they were renting purely to be in catchment but they ended up living elsewhere. Through a series of unfortunate events, so to speak, but that's still how the council will see it.

Clarins, no. The key thing is that you don't own a property somewhere else that could reasonably be considered your main address (100s miles away probably OK). If you are a renter, it's perfectly OK to rent for a while in one place and then move, else it would discriminate against renters, your motivations aren't relevant, the fact of your address and sole residency at various points in the admission cycle are relevant.

Thanks for that gasp, flog and detest. Really hope you get sorted OP.

I wasn't disagreeing with the fact that the op was no longer living in the property at the time of allocation. I was just saying that it was unfair for other posters to suggest she had commited fraud and used an address on her application after she had moved out. I was just pointing out that she may not have moved out at the time she made the application.
Op, if you're still reading, could you possibly argue that you viewed the property as still being yours and planned to move back in once your ex had left which is why you continued to pay the council tax and rent.