Transition from primary to secondary school

I've been in the UK for 9 years now, kids (born here) are in primary school no problem.  But I've recently clued in to the fact that the older one will be applying for secondary schools in a couple of years -- and it works out that the school in our catchment area is pretty undesirable: boys only, behavior problems, etc.  We don't stand a chance of getting him into the good school nearby -- there won't be enough places and we're too far away.

So, we're thinking of moving -- which sucks, because we love our house and neighborhood.  But there it is. 

Now, I find myself wondering about how the rules work, in relation to residence and timing.  What would prevent someone from moving into rented accommodation for a year, in the "right" catchment area -- but continuing to own a house somewhere else -- and then moving back to the owned house after the desired school place has been acquired?  I hasten to add that I'm not sure I can stomach doing this -- it's pretty underhanded.  But the fact is, they don't make you change schools if you move outside the catchment area after the place has been assigned to you (or perhaps after the child has started in the school?). 

It also wouldn't be cheap -- might add at least £10k to rent an additional house.  But then, moving house (selling/buying) would cost at least £15k (and of course private school is £10k per year per child...). 

Just to clarify -- I *am* talking about actually living in the second house in the catchment area -- I know they sometimes use various methods of surveillance to detect those who don't actually live there.  But -- apart from that, are there reasons why this is unlikely to work?  I can hardly be the first person to have thought of it.

This type of fraud is very common, unfortunately. It's wrong to mislead the local authority in this way. Many schools will expel if a false application is discovered by the October half term. Some authorities demand three forms of ID, and like you say, use surveillance, and also, kids talk to each other, and to adults and teachers, and a non-genuine residence will get out sooner or later. It's hardly setting your kids a good example in civic responsibility and ethics.

We have just been through an appeal and our school states that the childs place will be withdrawn if you commit fraud, so its not really a great idea. My childminders son goes to a secondary school quite aways away, he takes the tram there everyday.

We don't stand a chance of getting him into the good school nearby -- there won't be enough places and we're too far away.

How far out of the catchment area are you? It might be worth applying for the good school anyway and seeing if you can get him in - it does happen sometimes.

I got into a secondary school outside of my catchment area and because I had been accepted, my younger brothers were automatically given places there too (we were only 3 miles away from the school, but because it was in the next town over and there was already a secondary school in our town, the catchment for the school I went to didn't extend to where we lived).

Are you religious? A faith school can often have a really wide catchment area. I went to a school several towns over as my dad was a staunch catholic and wanted us to go to a catholic school (I was catholic at 10, by 13, not so much )

Don't forget schools criteria can change from year to year, last year our schools criteria was based on proximity due to under-subscription, this year there were only something like 6 neighbourhood children admitted, and we weren't one of those 6, and we only live 15 doors away from the school, its on our road. Its insanity!!! So we don't have a place at our local school, where my son is now. Go figure!

I would try to move to the new catchment area.  If you do it in advance it will enable your children to adapt to the new place before having to make the shift to secondary school.  If you live far from the secondary school (as several of my friends do) you'll soon find yourself ferrying your children back and forth to friend's houses and after school activities because in all likelihood their friends will live near the school.  My son walks to and from secondary school every day, walks to his friends' houses on the weekend, meets up with his friends after school, makes spontaneous plans to stop at the park, etc, - all of which minimizes the need for me to be a taxi.  It's a huge advantage.

We applied for my daughter to go to a secondary school outside the catchment area and, after an appeal, she was admitted. My son was admitted automatically because she was attending the school.  We'd had to go through the same fol-de-rol for the middle school previously. Other families did the same and were also successful. A lot of hassle but worth it in the end.

Thanks for replies so far.  Just to clarify: we *are* talking about moving.  It's just that we would also then *move back*.  Is this fraud?  Well, I think that would depend on how the legislation is written.  As I understand it, what matters is where one lives at the time of application.  We would live in the catchment at the time of application.

We're not religious, there's no religious school we would want here.  

The school is oversubscribed and we really are too far away to get in.  Because of the way the catchment is drawn, *most* people people *in* the catchment live quite far from the school.  I understand the concern about friends, etc.  And maybe the right thing to do is simply to move and then not move back.  But that is an expensive proposition that puts us in a location we don't really want.  

There's no ideal solution here.  

Is this fraud?  Well, I think that would depend on how the legislation is written.  As I understand it, what matters is where one lives at the time of application.  We would live in the catchment at the time of application.

Maybe, but morally, IMHO, it's deception and using money to get your kid an advantage. It's ugly.

Maybe, but morally, IMHO, it's deception and using money to get your kid an advantage. It's ugly.

Deception, perhaps.  But I'm really not so sure about the notion that there's a problem with "using money to get your kid an advantage".  The "honest" way to do this would be to spend even more money: sell our house & buy another one in the catchment.  As I indicated, this would cost at least £15k, more than the cost of renting a second place for a year.  As it happens, we could afford it, assuming we come up with a similarly priced house.  If it's wrong to spend money for kids' advantage, is it more wrong to spend more money for the same purpose? 

In any event, I don't hear anyone saying that it would be clearly illegal to rent a house in the right catchment area, apply from there, and then move back to the old house once school has started.  It's an interesting prospect.

In any event, I don't hear anyone saying that it would be clearly illegal to rent a house in the right catchment area, apply from there, and then move back to the old house once school has started.  It's an interesting prospect.

This article mentions that renting out a property in the catchment area to get into a good school is considered fraud:

School admissions: more parents facing 'fraud' investigations

The admissions watchdog has already suggested that the use of relatives’ addresses – normally grandparents with the same surname – is among the most common scam by parents attempting to play the system.

Other families have been found renting homes close to the best schools or even swapping houses with friends.

From this article from The Times:

Parents who cheat at school

Here are some of the scams used:

Renting of an address within the catchment area to act as a document drop;

Saying your child lives with a relative within the catchment area;

Renting a hotel room within the catchment area;

Claiming sibling links to “new” partner's/cohabitee's children already at oversubscribed schools.

And from another Times article:

Parents who cheat to get child into a good school may face court

Playing the system

• Use a relative’s address The grandparents’ is a popular choice — particularly if they have the same name, as utility bills can be used as evidence of residence

• Short-term rental or tenancy agreement Stump up for a property near the school just for the duration of the application period

• Falsely reporting marriage breakdown The mother moves to a small one-bed flat within the school catchment area before being “reconciled” with her husband once the children are at the desired school

• Genuine separation or divorce But the child actually lives with the other parent . . .

• Tenant’s address You do own the property but it is rented out to tenants. You pretend that you are living there

• Unexpected move Use an address on the application form and then move out without telling the school

• Business address Use your office or another commercial address within the catchment area

• House-swap Switch houses with a friend for a short time

• Unoccupied house Find an empty property and use its address

Thanks for the links.  Here's another interesting quote from the first one:

Of course, strictly speaking, it is not illegal for a family to move into an address near a school during the application process. As long as they live there for that period, it is within the letter of the law (but not the spirit). They can then move back to their old address once the child has started at the school.

As I said, I'm quite confident that I'm not the first to have thought of this.

Is this school really so all-fired wonderful that you would go through all of that to get your kids in?! If you've got the money to acquire another property, why not just send them to a private school?
I used to despair at seeing parents ferrying their kids to schools in opposite directions, passing each other every morning.  X lives in one catchment area but wants their kid in another where Y lives. Y wants their kid to go to school in X's area. And so on. 

Is this school really so all-fired wonderful that you would go through all of that to get your kids in?! If you've got the money to acquire another property, why not just send them to a private school?
I used to despair at seeing parents ferrying their kids to schools in opposite directions, passing each other every morning.  X lives in one catchment area but wants their kid in another where Y lives. Y wants their kid to go to school in X's area. And so on. 

But what you say makes perfect sense, since parents make judgments about what school is right for their kid.  The school in our catchment might be just fine for certain types of kids, but our kid isn't that type of kid.  There's a mismatch between the government policy that says schools should try to excel in certain specializations and the other government policy that says kids have priority for the school in their catchment area.  Beyond that, the school in our area comes with an Ofsted report that refers to "serious behaviour problems".

As for private school -- the amount of money it would cost us to have a second house for a year is the amount of money we would spend on private school each year, per kid.  It's not an option for us.