Private school fees

[EllaBel]

We can't afford them but we want to. How can it be done? Is it true that advertised fees are a 'guide' and that the true fees are established in conversation and schools can be open to this sort of case by case approach? We have four children. Sibling discounts are suggested but are they really applied to any great degree? How is 'middle class' (no trolling please I am generalising) England/Wales affording private schools?

The thing that gets me is the 'were not rich' type comments as if to justify working hard or being successful.

Anyone who earns £100k pa which is 4 times the 'inflated' (not true) Uk average wage is statistically 'very well off'.

This is an example of people being so far removed from life.

The article presented by 'Minifingers' highlights the abject failure of the comprehensive system in getting children in to '100k' professions.

I actually think the idea of the comprehensive system was to reduce 'socio mobility' to protect the 'private/public' families . It has been very successful in achieving its aims...

jonesthegirl I don't think people dislike others because their children go to grammar schools but if we were to return to a fully selective system then 80% of us would have no choice but to send our kids to secondary moderns. There would be no escaping across the border to the next county once your child has been "selected" for the secondary modern.
We are perfectly entitled to say (politely) that we think that would be a bad thing just as you or anyone else are entitled to say that it would be a good thing.

penthouse I think very many people live as you do, but on a salary of around 1/4 of yours, which is still a pretty reasonable income.

We will have sent three privately by the time we are done on a combined salary of around 90k. We've done it this way:
state primary until year 5 or 6
private on scholarships (two 25% off fees, one extremely talented sportsperson with 50% fees) until end of year 11
outstanding state 6th form for 12 and 13

We have an extremely low mortgage and have stayed in our first house. We have undertaken absolutely no house improvements and the first thing I will do when second child goes to state 6th form is get our windows replaced!! We havent had a holiday in four years.
We chose a school where my children's talents were very much valued and wanted (hence the large scholarships).
We drive very old cars.
But we do buy clothes, lots of sports kit, nice food and have evenings out at the cinema etc.

Still not sure whether its all been worth it but the children have come through happy so far.

"I do not know what the solution is but the first and most obvious thing to do would be to abolish the charitable status of private schools so they pay taxes like any other business. "

Under the law as it stands, there is no way to just remove charitable status. Right now, it would mean winding up the charity and disposing of the assets under the existing regulations. This would cause immense strain in the state school system as the places and funding for all the pupils currently in those schools would have to be immediately accommodated in the state system.

I'm not aware of any proposals to change the law to permit (any) charities to transfer their assets into private hands.

According to the "Great British class survey" only the elite can really afford private schooling i.e. 6% of population with an average household net income of 89k (150k gross). Established middle class who form 25% of population & have an average household net income of 47K (70k gross) & savings of 26k might be able to squeeze one child in. However given that only 7% attend private schools therefore one can assume that the overwhelming majority of "established middle class" don't.

To have 2 kids in a south east private school = 40k/yr = 45% of average elite class net income & that's a huge commitment even looking at it from an elite perspective.

Out of curiosity what % of your household net income is going to private school?

We are at 40% but no mortgage and a few years worth of school fees in reserve.

I do not know anything about the technicalities of removing charitable status but this has been suggested on numerous occasions over the last 20 or so years maybe longer. When it looked like the Charities Commission were going to remove the charitable status of schools who were not dishing out bursaries left right and centre (I think about 7-8 years ago but I could be wrong) some heads from some independent schools wrote an article in one of the broad sheets about loosing charitable status. They claimed theyd already sought legal advise on this and they certainly didn't see it as the end of the road for their school by any stretch of the imagination in fact they thought it could be a good thing, removing the pressure to fund bursaries would free up more money for other things and possibly in some cases mean that fees could be slightly reduced. Of course the Charities Commission decided that have a generous bursary pot was not going to be a condition of maintaining charitable status so they never had to find out how and if it would work.

We have one at private and one at state, although DD will be joining DS at the private school in August. It's an Edinburgh day school where fees are a bit over £10k and with extras, we probably pay around £12 pa. We received a very large inheritance and the fees are ring fenced in cash.

Without the inheritance, we would have still been able to afford two sets of school fees assuming I had stayed in work (2 sets of FT middle management salaries at a financial services company). We had a fairly low mortgage - £500pm so fees and mortgage would have taken up £2,500pm which was doable on our salaries.

However, there is no way we would have been able to afford 4 sets of fees without the inheritance.

"just wanting something better and being able to afford to buy it. Same goes for many things in life doesn't it? "

I'm not sure education can be equated to "many things in life" because if the richest and those with particular talents anyway also get a better standard of education that is just unfair. It takes away hope from the majority of society

I'm not sure anyone has ever said that being able to pay for education is fair in fact I agree that it's unfair that a small number have so much but I'm not in the slightest bit convinced that "it takes away hope from the majority of society" that statement to my mind seem rather melodramatic. There are lots of post on MN from those who have not had a paid for education or had their education paid for about how well they or their DC's have done.

It's not particularly technical. When the CC looks in to whether a charity is fulfilling its obligations, if it decides it's not, the only option is to close it.

Schools which are charities remain so because legally they have to, unless/until the law is changed.

It was all thrashed out in legal hearings, when it was determined that the provision of bursaries was one way to support charitable status, but it was neither necessary nor sufficient in itself. The provision of education is a valid charitable aim in English law (I think similar law across whole of UK), though it applies to schools/universities providing a full range (not crammers where you can just buy specific courses).

A potentially tricky bit if you want to change the law is that if education is no longer a valid charitable aim, all charities (not just schools) would have to fund any educational activities from non-charitable donations which would be a major PITA for them (and worst case, they'd have to stop providing them). Compare the reaction to the proposed change that government given funds cannot then be used by charities for government lobbying. If that (small, clear cut) issue is that difficult, imagine how much worse unpicking 'education' would be.

Thank you meditrina for making that clear.

HPFA. Its no surprise i like the grammar school system !.

Comprehensive school took me to 'Super Drug' with 1 Gcse grade D

Grammar School took DD1 to Cambridge.

Go figure ....

jonesthegirl Tue 01-Mar-16 11:12:20 HPFA. Its no surprise i like the grammar school system !.

I suspect the real reason you like grammar schools is because you DD was lucky enought to get into one. I would imagine you would like them a whole lot less if your daughter hadn't got into one.

jones the "outstanding" academy DS1 attended (non selective apart from those in the very MC town town it's based in are guaranteed a place) sends a handful of children to Oxbridge every year and loads to RG universities.

My comprehensive sent/sends a handful of children to Oxbridge each year !

However, it failed me and most of my friends!

Because a comprehensive school sends a few of its most able students to RG universities does not make it a good school.

it liked to 'congratulate' itself in the local paper about the 4 pupils of to Oxford that year.

The school did not work because it failed to properly educate many of their pupils .

This is why comprehensive schools don't work for all but a few pupils.

The country has a 'fully selective' education system any way despite pretending its mostly comprehensive.

7% Private 5% grammar and 10% of children educated in comprehensives that think or aspire to be grammar schools. There you 22% of pupils selected 78% in what are by reality 'modern school'

Going to a private school is like taking an illegal drug for sport- yes they will do well but you never know what is them and what is the drug. However unlike drugs it will never wear off so they are tainted for life

Noone should talk about grammar schools or the grammar system. Instead talk about the secondary modern system. I don't think many people would support a system where the majority have poor expectations,poor funding and outcomes are poor.

Note that people from grammar schools appear to have a fixation with grammar whereas the country (and the world) needs engineers, techonologists and people who are not too elitist to do basic work

As well as the school fees, there are many additional costs involved in sending children to private school. Uniforms cost a lot, many also strongly encourage extra curricular activities which have to be paid for (tennis, music etc) expensive school trips, it all mounts up.

I don't understand what's wrong with schools that have charitable status.
People talk about social mobility, but without schools such as these even fewer people could afford to attend these schools.
I doubt my dd school would survive without the charitable status and no way could we ever afford for her to attend without the gov scheme.
These schools give hope to many the same as grammar schools, good state schools and good private schools.
Surely it's the quality of education that is important, not the type of school.
I really hope my dd is able to be one of the one's who earns high, because her siblings certainly didn't have the opportunity to attend good schools.

eyesbrowse I have absolutely no doubt that in terms of exam results DS2 would have done as well as at the above mentioned academy as I'm hoping he'll do at his independent school. There is simply nothing to "wear off" so he's not tainted for life. I also doubt that even if some care now in a few years no one will care what school he went too. DH went to a big name boys school and he never mentions it and no one asks where he went, he's also not "tainted for life" he's a very capable individual but it was not his school that made capable.

I doubt DS will achieve higher exam results at his private school compared to the local state school. What he will be able to achieve is a range of exam scores in subjects not available at our local state school- e.g. not a single science advanced higher is offered this year at our local school. If that makes him "tainted", then so be it. It's not something I'm terribly worried about.

jones You say that your son got into Cambridge "because" he went to a grammar yet you know that if 4 children go to Oxbridge from a comprehensive it must be "despite" them attending a comprehensive rather than because of it?
So if you'd gone to a grammar and ended up in Superdrug and your son had gone to Cambridge from a comp that would have "proved" that comps are better would it?
Really not following the logic here!

Daughter no 1 not son !.

The point is the comprehensive did not do its job, if it only educated a handful of students to their potential !

DD1 and DD2s the same grammar sends/sent all year 13 pupils to university.

Newlife. Excuse for noting from your previous posts , that you are from a 'deprived' educational town in the North West .

The very sort of town that only has 'fully' comprehensive schools . These schools that everybody in the area go to 'no choice' guess what these fully non selective schools typically achieve 40% GCSE .

They are 'modern' schools. However, parents pupils don't even have the option of a selective school or academic alternative .

My dd school only offer what local comps do, but the results are better than local schools.
However, this isn't really surprising as our local schools are pretty poor.
If anybody from our town makes it to Oxbridge, most years there are a couple across the borough, they are front page news

Jones

yes, completely right. Our older 2 had no opportunities really.
It's strange having dd so settled in the perfect school for her, quite surreal at times.
There are no grammars that would have been practical anyhow.
We do actually have one grammar Urmston, not close at all but our town just falls into catchment.
Parents don't know about it though and those that do, would never consider it as it just wouldn't be practical.
A private school in Bolton, but few could afford it from here.

This is why I'll always get annoyed at those who moan about grammars, private, super selective etc.
Just because our older dc didn't have the opportunities I wouldn't deny another child.
I like it that grammar exist and wish we had one for the bright dc here. Mine wouldn't have passed 11+, well maybe ds2 would, but there are bright children everywhere, so there should be a grammar in every town.

My dh went to a grammar school, you would never guess tbh.