Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Rented flat to get a place in a 2ndary in good catchment - would you tell on them?

76 replies

SecondhandRose · 21/08/2006 19:48

A friend of mine is really cross as a friend of hers rented a flat in a good area to use it as an address to get her child into an excellent local 2ndary school. They paid £900 a month plus bills for the flat but didn't live there.

Her child has now got a place in this school and mine friend is even more cross. To top it all her husband has a cash job, claims he earns £12K a year and then claims benefits when in reality he earns much more and is not entitled to the benefits.

So the moral dilemma is shall I tell the school for my friend who doesn't feel she can tell the school but is so cross with her friend she feels someone should.

OP posts:
StrawberryMoon · 27/09/2006 14:33

i wouldnt say a thing, they obv care that mucha about their childrens education to pay extortionate erent rates in order to get him/her in

DominiConnor · 27/09/2006 14:34

I wouldn't tell on the school bit.
The system is crap, and I see it as my duty as a parent to reduce the impact of our witless education system on my kids.
Why should a kid in a poor area get a worse education than one in a rich one ?

But this is a very different thing from stealing from the benefits system. I'd tell on that.

anniediv · 27/09/2006 14:35

AviG, think your post needs to be in 'media requests'?

StrawberryMoon · 27/09/2006 14:37

my answer was re school adminssion, didnt read full thread?!

pipsqueak · 27/09/2006 17:11

i think your friend should disclose this to the LEA /admission authority because they have manipulated teh system and thereby denied someone who is entitled to a place. this sort of attitude needs to be challenged imo.

DominiConnor · 28/09/2006 09:45

As a parent I see "manipulating the system" as my job.
When a system is corrput and harms children, it does not deserve respect or assistance.

You really think that the catchments for school admissions were drawn up for the benefit of kids ?

batters · 28/09/2006 10:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

shimmy21 · 28/09/2006 10:51

Should we inform on people who don't really believe in God but who go to church to get their kids in to the Co of E school too?

What about people who rent in the catchment area and actually live in the house for 6 months. Is that OK?

What about people who have a temporary marital separation so that daddy's new flat is near the school and then get back together when the kid gets in? Should we police their marriages to see if it's a real separation?

Informing on people sounds a bit fascist to me

DominiConnor · 28/09/2006 12:53

Good and heard question about people faking religion for getting a school place.
First of all you'd have to know that, which is not always easy. People often mistake me for an atheist, so I'd be the last to judge on that.

But if you did know, then by my interpretation of the eithics you'd be bound to tell.

As for working the system, I think there's a difference between sharing something you know, and actively spying on people.

I can see how "informant" has a very negative tone.
But for nearly all of us, there is a level of wrongdoing we'd certainly feel we had to inform on. The variable is of course where ?

Is it a matter of ethics whether you inform on a given act, or whether you can be bothered ?
If my neighbour uses a hosepipe during a ban, is there a moral judgement, or one where I cut him some slack because I don't want the hassle ?

mumof3teens · 28/09/2006 13:00

People do this all the time at my DCs school. The school made an example of one boy after finding out that his parents had bought a (v small) house in the catchment and didn't actually live in it. He had to leave.

DominiConnor · 28/09/2006 13:06

If I understand Batters question, I suppose the answer is "it depends".
My parents resolutely did not abuse the system, and I never forgave them for it.

My first ethical principle to apply is does it affect the sum total of human happiness ?
Can't see that it does, since it's basically swapping one randomly chosen child for another.

Next, I ask whether child A "deserves" it more than B. That may or may not be true, but there's no way of telling who child B is.

Next I ask, am I challenging legitimate authority ?
I don't recgnise corrupt and inefficient local education outfits as legitimate. I have made no personal commitment to support their activities, nor have I incurred any personal obligation to them, or allowed them to believe that such an obligation exists. Indeed, my minor interactions with them have typically been adversarial.
The rules are for their bureaucratic convenience, and have no significant input for the good of children.
The process of educational decisions is less democratic than the averge African ministry of state security.

In short, one is not corrputing an honourable and efficient process, but dealing with an broken machine.
Part of my work is IT.
Sometimes I have to tell bits of software things that aren't true in order to get them to work.
I might say "this is not a piece of text, it's a number.
I don't see this as immoral, any more than the gang of bullies we lable as local authorities.

A good ethical test is symmetry.
Would your local council bend the rules in order to get something from you ?
As we see in matters of taxation, parking fines etc we see that not only do they do this, but hire highly skilled contractors to do it for them.

desperateSCOUSEwife · 28/09/2006 13:07

no
just keep out of it
as it will only come back on you

Glassofwine · 28/09/2006 13:15

i know of a primary school where children were pulled out after a few days because of this - there were about 7 in total! Think of it reception aged! Who was wrong the school or the parents?

bluejelly · 28/09/2006 13:22

Keep out of the school thing if I were you, but benefits cheating is literally stealing money from the state. I'd think about grassing them up on that issue...

bluejelly · 28/09/2006 13:22

Sure PC cod will be along to make arrests shortly...

pipsqueak · 28/09/2006 22:36

i see this as parental corruption rather than LEA corruption . if you are rich enough to rent a house and not move in you get the place and as i said in previous post deny a place to someone who is entiteld and may have to go to a school away from all their friends as a result. I am honestly shocked at how many people think this is OK!

DominiConnor · 29/09/2006 10:48

But why are they entitled pipsqueak ?

You pay your taxes to the same people, but for their convenience they draw some line.

I don't see any ethical difference between moving house to get a school place, and renting a flat.

The pulling of kids out of school is exactly the sort of bullying behaviour you expect from local authorities. Sadly in this country we have a democratic deficit.
People vote for councils based upon their feelings about the national party, and so there is no comeback for their behaviour or incompetence.

PcCOD · 29/09/2006 10:49

id grass purely out of envy

smug gits

donnie · 29/09/2006 10:56

I would also tell the school. Cheating is wrong!

busybusymum · 29/09/2006 11:01

If the school is heavily oversubscribed they may do further checks on the addresses the families live at anyway.

I watched a programme on TV a while ago about this, except it was an infants school and the Head teacher actually called around at the addresses of anyone who she thought (or had been told about).

She called at times when families are usually in and if there was no one in on serveral visits they were called in to her office to explain and had their school places taken away!

The HT also asked neighbours and would inspect the flat/house to ensure it looked lived in enough!

Frieda · 29/09/2006 11:31

Obiously this is really wrong, but sadly I think it goes on a lot. Where we used to live there were several kids whose parents pulled strings (for want of a better expression) to get them into preferred schools - at the expense of children who perhaps lived closer, but their parents weren't as scheming. And I think the school sometimes colluded in this too ? at least two children in ds's class lived outside the catchment area and didn't have siblings at the school or - as far as I'm aware - special social needs that meant they should go to a school deemed as the more middle class one in the area. And I know of families who lived closer and were turned down for a place.

The trouble is, it's not just random children, as DominiConnor suggests, it means that the school is no longer the local school it was intended to be, but a school for the children of parents who know how to play the system.

As for the benefits fraud, that is obviously wrong, too - means there's less to go round for those who really need it.

Actually, I think you should tell if you know it's true (ie not just hearsay). Although I don't know whether I'd be brave enough to .

DominiConnor · 29/09/2006 21:13

Freida has a point, but all systems can be played, all you can hope to do is keep the bar up.

As for the intent of a "local" school, I see that, but why is it a legitimate goal ?

pipsqueak · 29/09/2006 21:54

i appreciate teh catchment area line is arbitrary but at least it is fair and objective! without it you will end up with a free for all with the bolshie and rich parents riding roughshod over every one else to get their dcs into what are perceived to be the succesful schools and everyone else having to travel miles becasue thier local school is full..surely that is the least preferable alternative?

Frieda · 29/09/2006 21:58

Interesting question, DC, to which I'm not really sure I know the answer. But the fact is, the aim of comprehensive schools with a local catchment area is that they serve the community they are in rather than just exist as part of an unfair two-tier "selective" system that, in practice, means the middle class kids go to the "better" school, while the others are condemned to sink schools that are further away.

DominiConnor · 30/09/2006 14:30

I'm certainly up for kids getting to nearby schools, but that sadly is an ideal far from what we see.
It is far from guarnateed that kids get the chance to go to the nearest schools.

Sadly I don't share the optimistic view that the borders are "objective". I've seen too much gerrymandering and special treatments to think that local authorities can even grasp the concept of objectivity, much less implement it.

I see it far more as a case of keeping the council house kids away from thei children.