Divorce and school application

[Trek28]

I am going through a difficult divorce and need to make an application for our daughter’s school place, as she is due to start school in September 2024. The application needs to be made by the 16th January 2024. I am looking for advice from people who have been in this same situation.

Over the last 4 months I have tried to get a dialogue going over a school application, I have put forward a list of schools in our hometown on more than one occasion and given reasons why I would like our daughter to go to one of those schools. This list includes a school which we both agreed our daughter would attend before our relationship broke down.

Communication is very difficult; I never see my ex-wife and she will only communicate through her solicitor. She has not cooperated over schools and has only yesterday sent a solicitor’s letter giving her intentions.

Her letter says that she intends to go and live “longer term” with her mother and stepfather who live 20 miles away. They also live under a different local authority. My ex-wife has put forward a list of three schools all within 1.5 miles of this address. She is asking for my agreement on these schools and my agreement that she can put down her mother and stepfather’s address as the address for the school application.

I don’t understand how my ex-wife can do this and use her mother’s address for a school application. We currently have a court order in place that gives us 50:50 custody of our daughter and 50:50 use of the family home. We each spend 50% of the time with our daughter and have use of the family home while we are with her. My wife is today living in the family home, she pays her share of the mortgage, the bills and council tax and all her documents are registered at that address.

Does anyone know if this is possible?

@prh47bridge I think we've scared the OP away, so probably best to end it there. If I see you on other threads though, I might pop up again to point out the issues with your positions in the spirit of open debate.

You've assimilated an unshakeable idea that the ex is engaged in a fraudulent activity on a particular reading of the facts, without considering any alternative explanations, and with no recognition of the limits of the material before you. And you make unequivocal allegations of dishonesty without a proper evidential basis. I wouldn't mind if you were an ordinary Mumsnetter, but you claim to be a solicitor and are clearly trying to cultivate a following to polish a halo for you. You are seeking recognition and praise as a family law expert, offering free advice on which you encourage reliance and action. If you are a solicitor, you should know better!

everything said here by prh is not legal advice or biased comment

It is all set out in the schools application process, which you can see via your local authority.
Any thread on school applications will include the same.

It is not a comment on what should or should not be done but a comment on how the system works.

I was just coming on to say similar, but then saw that prh had posted.
prh deals with school admissions all the time, and is generally recognised on mn as knowing what they are talking about.

Standard school application process - the address you use has to be an address which is the main residence of the child, or in case of 50/50 is the address of one of the parents. You have to be resident at that address at time of application. If you are not it is considered to be a fraudulent application etc. Addresses are usually checked at some point during the application process, often initially by cross reference with the electoral roll.

The school application process has very strict and well documented boundaries in place.

There is very little room for movement for example when buying a house and the sale hasn't gone through, you cannot use that house in your application process (although there is variation between LA as to when in the process you can use it, some allow after exchange and some not until you have moved in)

If it is found that your application is fraudulent, the LA can remove your school place, even several weeks into the new school term after the child has started. This is usually the case in areas where there is a waiting list for that school, so your fraudulent application prevents another child getting their place.

This is entirely different from what may or may not be correct/possible/wise for the OP and his ex under family law.

@steppemum go down thread where @prh47bridge is giving legal advice about single issue Court applications in the Family Court and making recommendations for action by the OP as a litigant in person. That is legal advice. The point isn't as simple as reciting school's regulations. It interplays with facts, not all of which are available in this thread. Lawyers are not meant (as a matter of professional ethics) to allege dishonesty without evidence, but @prh47bridge merrily calls the ex a fraudster as a basis for his advice, without any evidence (the OP's allegation isn't enough on its own).

I invited @prh47bridge to agree with me that what the OP needs is independent legal advice, not competing voices on MN.

@prh47bridge is yet to confirm his agreement to that suggestion.

kiddosbedtimealready

I have been back and read all of them.
There is no legal advice or misrepresentation.
What prh has said is consistent. If you can't decide, this is the process. etc.

On the other hand you are shouting constantly that the school places thing is BS.

It isn't. However innocently done, the ex cannot apply from an address that she doesn't live at and the OP can't support an application that is fraudulent.

You seem to be unable to understand that.

@steppemum OP and Ex are divorcing. They agree they must leave and sell the Marital Home. Ex will, in time, buy a new home near her support network in her Mum's home town. DD most likely to live there as main residence in due course (reality, but some will disagree). It is November. School applications not due until mid January. Ex has written to Op via solicitors in good time to discuss the upcoming school applications. She is signalling to him in express terms that she will live longer term in the other town, at her mum's address first, so she wants OP to accept that and agree to use the Mum's address for the school applications (as, spoiler alert, ex likely does not intend for her or DD to be in the former Marital Home at that point in January when they make the school application, so the divorce can progress to conclusion). I don't know if the ex can move DD without OP's permission, or whether she needs a Court Order if he digs in, but that is where its going (before January I would think given that the lawyers are writing about it now and clearly thinking on it). So it is in my view BS to fixate on the alleged fraudulence of the ex's proposal, and, I would say dangerously close to being used in @prh47bridge's advice as a procedural device to delay the divorce and the vacating of the former marital home. Now OP is on here looking for general support, so I am saying to him, don't be the exDH who tries to control an exDW through clever argument and legal process.

And I say again, what OP needs is independent legal advice, not self-appointed saints on MN doing harm in the name of good because they think they have the best and only viewpoint.

No, I am not using the fraudulence (real, not alleged) of the ex's proposal to delay the divorce or the vacating of the FMH. I am setting out the consequences for OP and his daughter if she makes a fraudulent application.

OP is after advice on school admissions. I am an expert in this field. There are other experts on this thread agreeing with me. You clearly have little or no knowledge of school admissions and have given very poor advice which has frequently completely missed the point.

OP does not need independent legal advice on school admissions. Most lawyers don't have a clue and give very poor advice on this subject. On his divorce, yes. On stopping his ex moving their daughter, if that is what he wants, yes. On school admissions, which is what he has asked about here, no. He needs advice from people who understand school admissions inside out.

To be honest I've had some terrible advice from lawyers on things they should know about. A lot of time and money wasted. We've been through multiple different lawyers over the last few years because of bad advice and incompetence in dealing with property, inheritance, co-habitation, child custody, parental alienation. 2 different lawyers actually made our situation worse by issuing letters with incorrect information. My DH is self-representing in a civil court case next month because he felt seeking independent legal advice was a waste of time and money.

Plenty of people offer legal advice despite not being lawyers on MN, usually based on their own personal experience. Obviously acting on the advice of a random on a forum has it's risks but so does going to some lawyers.

@prh47bridge If the ex DW moves to her mum's in November/December with the DD, assume she does it lawfully and that is her main residence at that point pending sale of the old house and buying a new one near her mum, is she still an outrageous fraudster for wanting to give schools local to that address in an application in January to the LA? Or is she just a mum going about her business, doing her best for DD (who will most likely end up living with her as main carer) in the middle of a divorce.

I'm pressing you on this because frankly, there is an undercurrent of misogyny in your persistent characterisation of her as a fraudster, and encouragement of Court applications to make life hard for her.

You clearly have your fans on here, but I'm calling you out on it.

I have never described her as an "outrageous fraudster". The use of the term "fraudulent application" for an application using an incorrect address comes from the Admissions Code. No misogyny involved. That is yet another straw man from you (and yet another ad hominem attack). I have said the same about ex-husbands who have proposed making fraudulent applications for places.

The question for the application is not where OP's ex lives. That is irrelevant. It is where OP's daughter lives at the time of application.

Currently, OP's daughter lives permanently in the FMH. If that were to change but she was still spending her time 50/50 with both parents, most LAs would insist on the application coming from the address of the parent who receives Child Benefit. OP tells us that is currently the mother, but it is being transferred to him. He also tells us that the current living arrangement (50/50 with each parent but with the daughter permanently residing in the FMH) is mandated by CAO, so his ex should go back to court to get the order varied if she wants to change this.

OP's specific question is whether his ex-wife can use her parent's house as the address for applying for school places whilst their child's registered address is the FMH. The answer, as I have said, is no. That would be a fraudulent application.

Even if OP's ex has moved with her child to live with her parents by mid-January, that is where the child is living for the majority of the time and she is not in breach of any court orders in making such a move, she would still face a further problem in that most LAs now insist that, if a parent owns or part owns a house, that address must be used when applying for a school place even if they don't live there. So, unless her parents' LA is not one of them, an application using their address would still be fraudulent unless the FMH has been sold or OP has bought her out by then, which is highly unlikely.

If, by January 15th, the child is still living in the FMH or spending the majority of her time there (as OP believes will be the case), or, indeed, should be living there under the provisions of the CAO, any application must come from that address. If OP's ex still owns a share in the FMH on January 15th, it is highly likely that any application must come from that address.

It is possible that OP's ex might be able to arrange things so that an application in mid-January from her parents' address would not be fraudulent. However, even if she manages it, given the way these things work, there is a good chance the LA would still regard her application as fraudulent, leaving her and OP having to appeal for school places.

Trying to sort out school applications when parents are separated is often difficult. Even more so when they are in the middle of divorce. The system isn't always helpful in this situation. I have, sadly, advised parents who thought they were doing the right thing for their child, but who had unwittingly made fraudulent applications. At secondary school level it is sometimes possible to help them sort this out and at least get them into a better school (or one closer to home) than the school allocated. At primary school, however, in most cases there is nothing that can be done.

@prh47bridge You're dodging my point. What if DD is living with Ex at Ex's mums when she makes the application. Is ex still a fraudster in your eyes. I'll drop the use of the word outrageous, but you are pretty adamant that ex is engaged in a dishonest scheme. You really don't want to see how her behaviour could be lawful do you.

Misogyny takes many forms, and trying to control a woman's ability to leave a marital home with her child is one of them. You are complicit in that here.

@prh47bridge And I'm calling double BS on the idea that an LA wouldn't take into legitimate account the fact of the divorce and expectation that the former marital home must be sold, when asserting the ex's mum's address on an application truthfully as a main residence. You're scare mongering on that point. It's BS that they would be as ridiculous / dogmatic over the ownership point of a former marital home as you suggest.

Do you think there is something inherently unreasonable with the ex's proposals? You seem quite invested in finding ways to defeat them.

Tell me you've never done a school application without telling me that you've never done a school application...

@dolma Are you saying this happened to you? That you were divorcing your exh and the LA denied your school application for a DC on the grounds that you were still on the deeds as a woman for the former marital home, that you and DC had left. Genuinely interested to know if that was your personal experience.

I think from my knowledge, it can work on a discretionary basis.

I am not dodging your point. I stated quite clearly that, if DD is living with ex at her parents when she applies, is not in breach of any court orders regarding where DD must live and no longer owns a share of the FMH, it would not be a fraudulent application. However, it is unlikely that she can achieve all of that in time.

Note that I have never called her a fraudster. That is your word, not mine.

Yet more ad hominem attacks. You can't control yourself can you.

You can call double BS as much as you like, but you are yet again wrong. I can point to many cases where it has happened. I am not scaremongering. Would you like me to introduce you to some women who have been on the receiving end of LA's behaving in this way?

Unfortunately, many LAs have experience of partners claiming to separate shortly before applications are due, wanting the LA to use mother or father's new address and then magically getting back together in the FMH after places are awarded. That is one of the reasons many LAs insist on using the address of any home the parents own, regardless of where they are actually living. They will not take into account a future address or any expectation that the FMH will be sold. All that matters is the actual situation at the time, not what might happen in future.

I am not invested in finding ways to defeat the ex's proposals. I am simply pointing out the way school admissions actually work. That is something in which I have over a decade of experience advising parents. How many parents have you advised on school admissions and admission appeals? How many admission appeals have you attended? How many have you won? How many cases have you taken to the ESFA or the LGO? How many objections have you had upheld by the Schools Adjudicator?

It can do, but often LAs won't exercise any discretion in this situation. It is easier to defend their position at any appeals if they have been consistent, and, sadly, many have encountered parents falsely claiming that their marriage has broken down and the FMH is about to be sold in an attempt to fiddle the system.

What planet are you on? Even the least legally minded of us knows that putting an incorrect address down on a school application form - where it states very clearly in all LAs on how to complete the forms correctly - is a recipe for disaster!
Having worked in education all my life, I’ve had many dealings with school admissions across 3 LAs. All it takes is for an admissions officer to check the address of who’s in receipt of Child Benefit, or the electoral register, to see who lives where. Any doubt then the applicant had to provide actual proof af their address.
In this case, one of the parents wants to lie, the other one doesn’t.
You truly know sod all about school applications do you?

The LA would want to see clear evidence that the home is about to be sold - such as contract details. Sadly, far too many parents attempt to commit fraud with regard to addresses in order to get their child into a specific school.

He's not trying to control her any more than she's trying to control him. She's basically saying either move to live near my parents, which is further away from your support system and job so you'll have to change that to or you'll lose your 50:50 custody.

@Laurdo I appreciate the response but respectfully disagree. The arrangements have to change. 50/50 on decisions now equals deadlock and OP says they've been to Court a few times already. Court will not want that indefinitely, so the interim orders while nesting need updating. One parent, most likely the mother, will become main carer with freedom to make decisions within a reasonable scope (of which this is one). OP has no real connections to his current town and no support network. He isn't thinking about this logically as emotionally compromised and perhaps doesn't really appreciate the necessity/usefulness of family support for single parents. The ex is thinking about that (as will be her lawyers who are setting it up for a showdown on all issues if the OP does not agree this issue). OP may not want change, but change is coming, and it remains true that men who seek to control ex's through legal process methods are engaging in misogyny. Whether that's to prolong nesting, or to keep the woman distant from those who would love and support them. It isn't just a legal question. And OP should not conflate what he wants with what is really best for DD (a happy free mother, a support network , a school local to those things, and an involved father ceding a little convenience to allow the former to be a great Dad). Also, if OP poisons the well now, it won't end there, as the whole thing is up for grabs again with a school move in reception year when the divorce and child care issues get back to the Court. Why bring that on yourself? OP should let it go.

@kiddosbedtimealready. Your posts are actually coming across as really aggressive. Your obsessive adding to php name makes me feel like you are on a personal vendetta

Yes the op has a choice to make right now. For his daughters sake I hope he fights for her to stay in her life. Doesn't simply say oh OK because his x wife feels like doing something that is not considering the needs of their child. You come across as if you think simply because she is female she gets the child and ypu also come across as if you dislike 50 50 strongly.

I agree with @Dolma. You don't appear to have any understanding of how to do a school application. I do know people who have lost their place due to a similar situation. In their situation the dad didn't even object but it was still considered a fraudulent application .

You are repeatedly misreading what people are saying and I think deliberately so as it serves your narrow-minded view best. As someone who have had a lot of support from php. PatriciaHolm admission and panel member when I had my own school problem. People like you worry me deeply. Wrong information is so dangerous. I also worry if people persistently tag like you do mn will loose what frankly is an invaluable source of solid information from those posters. It's not about point scoring you can disagree in a dignified manner you come across as if you have no idea on how to take on another perspective

In this case try to separate out what you feel is the right thing to so. With what the law says. As that's what this comes down to. The 50 50. And where the child is to live does need to be worked out yes. However considering they haven't even got the house on the market yet it won't be done by January. As there is an order where child resides at FMH. This makes it pretty simple that is the address to use on the application. Pretty much what php has said all the way through.

Later on yes they need to resolve where how and who. However you not agreeing with 50 50 or the wife not wanting it doesn't automatically mean it won't happen.

@Enko you are right. I am guilty as charged for being aggressive in this thread. I am demonstrating to OP why it's a bad idea to go legal over the issues as this is how his ex's lawyers will respond and it's better to be sensible and agree something. The legal system is adversarial in nature.

OP has agency and can ignore me if he wants.

I've said what I've said about @prh47bridge running an unregulated legal advice clinic on these threads, and advising on contentious courses of action without client identification or proper instructions. You can take it or leave it if you want.

I just think it is odd for a someone to cultivate a following based on proclaimed expertise, and to be so invested in maintaining that online following.

You may see it as ad hom attack, but I see it as basic accountability.