Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Secondary education

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

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

address of convenience

81 replies

UK19989345621 · 14/05/2019 15:24

We have been struggling with the acquisition of address of convenience for local secondary school
They simply refused us because we own another property in 22 miles away and they are saying is viable to travel everyday

We have now appeal next week and I am bit confused what to do

Anyone got any advise please

OP posts:

TeenTimesTwo · 14/05/2019 17:35

No don't take them to court, you haven't a leg to stand on.
Save your money.

AlunWynsKnee · 14/05/2019 17:49

You said earlier "but they are offering other schools in this area which is 10 miles away!" Do you understand what's happened there?

They've taken away the place they believe you got by deception and have then considered your child on distance from your old house and have presumably given the child a place at which ever school had places. Even if you sell your old house and stay in your rented place you might move up the waiting list and get a place at some point but only if people leave.

If you go on the waiting list, which you can, you will be very near the bottom as they'll use your out of area address.

Your only chance is to convince the appeal panel that you do genuinely want to stay in your rental area for years. And you need to be very calm and patient while you try to do that. Getting cross with people like you did with Teen won't help you at all. There's no point in complaining about the 'funny protocol'. All you've got is that you do want to live there and you went about it all wrong and you understand that. If they don't agree with you, you sit on the waiting list and you can appeal every September for the next 5 years to see if they change their mind.

Namechangeforthiscancershit · 14/05/2019 18:08

You would be taking them to Court for following their own rules. It would be a massive waste of your time and effort.

PatriciaHolm · 14/05/2019 18:10

If you sell your property, then the property you are now renting will become your application address and thus you should go up the waiting list for the local school. They will not backdate it and give you your place back but it should increase your chances of a waiting list place.

The only way now to get the place is to win an appeal; to persuade an appeals panel that you have genuinely moved, and the rental address is and was your child's habitual residence at the time of application.

The LA do not have to prove anything, they can decide on the balance of probabilities that you have used an address of convenience. It will be up to the appeals panel to decide if they were correct or not.

Going to court if you don't like the appeal decision is extremely unlikely to work and would just be expensive and time consuming.

I would concentrate on selling the house and getting yourself up local waiting lists.

You can appeal to other local schools too, on the grounds of balance of prejudice of course.

LolaSmiles · 14/05/2019 18:41

It sounds like exactly the sort of situation the rules are designed to prevent.
E.g. family wants school A but isn't in catchment so they rent their owned house out, move into rented during the admissions window and then probably move back into their original house after. It's renting a house for the purpose of school admissions.

Someone moving 200 miles away wouldn't be deemed an address of convenience because it's not convenient and there's no danger of them getting the place and then playing games.

I'm not sure what you think a court would say that's different to the replies on here to be honest.

LIZS · 14/05/2019 18:45

You can go on a waiting list, but in the priority order based on your owned house.

titchy · 14/05/2019 18:48

You've done the EXACT thing they tell you you can't do in their admissions details! Why do you think this rule applies to everyone except you?!

titchy · 14/05/2019 18:50

I want to know on what grounds they can prove I am going back to the old address

They don't have to prove anything. The onus is on you to prove you won't.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 14/05/2019 19:03

one year but my landlord and my tenants willing to extend however the LA rejected these options

Being willing to isn’t the same as actually having signed one though. You’ve done absolutely everything possible to make it look like you’ve submitted a fraudulent application. If you want to start trying to prove you haven’t, then you need to start thinking about how you prove that you haven’t.

You say you’ve moved job as well. When was that and how far away from the new property and old property is it?

runoutofnamechanges · 14/05/2019 19:50

I think PPs are being unsympathetic because 22 miles seems like no distance at all in most parts of the country so it seems like you are moving temporarily to get a better school in the same area. Whereas, what you are doing is what many people do when they children go to school or move to secondary school - leaving London for the home counties and a totally different lifestyle, larger home etc. It's a far "greater relocation" than 22 miles in the same county. To put it in perspective, if you lived in Notting Hill, would you apply to a school in St Albans then move back to Notting Hill once you got the place? It would be an insane commute by public transport and by car the journey could double or triple in time depending on the time of day.

OP, you need to prove that your move is permanent and you are settled eg showing that you quit your job and found a new one in the area, changing GP, dentist etc, change of address for banks, HMRC, leaving clubs etc in the old area and joining new ones etc, proof of any fallen through sales with your old property to show you are genuinely trying to sell.

LolaSmiles · 14/05/2019 19:55

runoutofnamechanges
People are being unsympathetic because the rules are clear and they are designed to prevent people moving into rented housing in their chosen catchment area for the purpose of school admissions.

There's no evidence that this is anything other than a fraudulent application. I'm not saying the OP is planning on moving but there's no evidence that it's not game playing and the rules are there because those with the money and resources are renowned for doing this.

TeenTimesTwo · 14/05/2019 19:58

runout The OP said 25mins by car. Answers are reflecting that.

mrsm43s · 14/05/2019 19:58

OP admits it's 25 min away by car. So very doable for them to move back home. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

runoutofnamechanges · 14/05/2019 20:01

The rules are open to interpretation:

4.2 We will not generally consider an address to be a child’s habitual residence if the applicant owns or rents an alternative property that the child previously lived in. Where an applicant still owns or rents an address at which their child previously lived, they must explain and evidence the permanence of their house move. Renting out an owned property or putting it up for sale would not normally deem it unavailable to the family. A property would normally only be deemed unavailable to the family from the date it is sold but this would not alter the outcome of an application for a school place where the decision has already been made.

That implies that the LA can waive the rules if they believe it to be a genuine permanent relocation - eg no one would question someone in the same situation if they had moved from Cornwall to Nottingham.

If you can show that the commute from your old home would be 2 hours by public transport and find out how long it would take by car during rush hour (I am assuming well over an hour), that would add credence to your argument that this is a genuine move, not just an attempt to game the rules.

RedSkyLastNight · 14/05/2019 20:04

OP has said the distance between the 2 houses is 25 minutes drive though. Which is perfectly possible to drive each day and suggests she's not in a very built up, traffic clogged area. If it was an insane journey, then OP could just point out that no one in their right mind would want to make that journey every day, and she'd win her appeal.

But yes, agree that OP must focus on demonstrating that she has truly moved to the new area and cut ties with the old one. If the tenants in your old house are willing to extend their contract, then why not actually extend it?

runoutofnamechanges · 14/05/2019 20:12

Lola, Teen and MrsM, I admit that I am assuming that the 25 minute drive is likely to be very variable based on London traffic. I would add a 30 minute buffer onto a 25 minute journey during rush hour, maybe even more if I couldn't risk being late.

TeenTimesTwo · 14/05/2019 20:25

Well run I agree the longer the journey, the more arguable the OP's case is. But given that for secondary I think 75mins(?) is not considered unreasonable I still think the OP is on a sticky wicket even if the commute is say 50mins.
The OP really hasn't stated here reasons why they upped and rented just 4 weeks before the admission deadline. If the OP can't explain it to the appeals panel then their appeal will be rejected.

Namechangeforthiscancershit · 14/05/2019 20:38

I commuted around an hour each way for secondary. That wasn't weird in the nineties (I was!)

mrsm43s · 14/05/2019 20:43

The problem is, that based on the info that the OP has given, it certainly sounds as though she has moved in order to get a school place. She's literally said nothing that would give any credence to the idea that moving was for any other reason, and quite a few things (moving just a few weeks before the application deadline, moving 500m from an oversubscribed school etc) that would suggest this was an attempt to manipulate the school admissions process.

In any case, the onus is on the OP to prove that she did not move for a school place, and as she has been repeatedly advised, that is what she needs to do. If she did indeed move for the school place, then it is right and proper that it has been removed from her. The rules are clearly published, and apply to everyone.

Bluntness100 · 14/05/2019 20:51

Gosh op, I'm not sure how you thought this would work. You only had your house on the market for three months, changed your mind, got some tenants in and moved only twenty miles away before the admissions closed and rented a house right by the school you wanted.

If you'd lived there a year or two, fine but this looks like you've simply moved to get your kid into the school.

I understand your desperation, but it was just done too late. I'm sorry.

HarveySchlumpfenburger · 14/05/2019 21:36

runabout if the OP had moved from the other side of the country the LA might have come to a different conclusion. That’s why that second sentence is there. It gives them the leaway to accept an application from a rented address in exceptional circumstances. The burden still rests on the OP to prove that this is a permanent move and the LA are quite clear that the rental contract and the house being put up for sale won’t count as proof.

Given that the distance to the old home seems to be within what most LAs would consider reasonable travel time, the date the house was put onto the market, the date they moved into the rental home and the date of the end of the rental contracts I’d imagine the level of proof needed will be quite high here.

youarenotkiddingme · 14/05/2019 21:45

Can you confirm.

House put on market Apr 2018.

Didn't sell.

Moved Oct 2018 and rented out house.

You moved offices (when?)

Have much closer are you to your office than when you lived at old house.

How far were you to old office from old house. How far are you from new office from new house.

Is your house currently on the market again?

The link 4.2 also says if your property is rented out and you can't move back there.

Original poster

UK19989345621 · 17/05/2019 11:25

Just wanted to thanks anyone who listens to me and advised on this matter

OP posts:

LolaSmiles · 17/05/2019 16:23

OP
Many people have listened and advised. They've just not told you what you want to hear which is the whole arrangement looks very much like the situation the rules are designed to prevent gaming. The onus is on you to prove you're not gaming the system for school admissions and at the moment the LA is highly unlikely to accept your case.

Soontobe60 · 17/05/2019 16:36

I have the perfect solution, OP. If you can quickly sign your house over to me, then you will no longer own it and you may therefore win your appeal. Once you've got the school place you've aimed for, I'll give you back your house. 🤣🤣🤣

Flip

1 2 3 4