Belleville/Honeywell first offer distance? Post Reply

[Claphammumoftwo]

I live in virtually the only road in catchment for Honeywell and Belleville (so no axe to grind), but if people think short term rents do not really happen, they are mistaken. There are many properties which come up for rental year on year out, and more people looking for that school place move in. On another point, I do think the situation is become ridiculous - my next door neighbour (who has bought the house not rented) had to move 30m closer to Honeywell because at 190m she would be way out of catchment to get her kids in next year.

[Siyeo]

@katherinehepburn there is no personal issue to grind regarding the size of a persons house. But when people rent close to the school while they either intend to buy else where or have the out of catchment house renovated and stop my children. Who reside no more than a four minute walk from one of the mentioned schools, from attending. Strangely it is this behaviour, not the size of a persons house I and many local people find disgusting. I have many friends on the street and that my children went to nursery with, with children that are at one of said schools, who's children grew up with mine and are now separated from mixing together at school. These parents do not appreciate the fact and the people that rent in this fashion are discussed continuously. The choice of deliberately taking a local child's place for your own ends is not acceptable. I wonder what your view and situation is regarding this matter @audreyhepburn? I have been 100% transparent on my view and position so I trust you will do likewise. What do you think should be done regarding this matter?

[Siyeo]

Also @katherinehepburn I own a terraced house on a btc street that has a tiny mortgage. I probably wouldn't class myself poor either morally or financially

[Siyeo]

What I did do however was buy a house I could afford near a school that my children should be legitimately entitled to attend.

[Siyeo]

@firsttimerSW11. I would have no issue with that as you live locally. It is specifically the people who rent to get their children in to the said schools, with no intention of living locally. It fragments the neighbourhood. The children are prevented from going to school with the friends they have grown up with.

When you buy a house. Surely to god you research the schools nearby if you intend to, or have small children. If the local schools are rubbish, you need to factor in private education. Not think I will have the house at all cost and poach my children's education off a child that should legitimately go to a better school. I don't see how in any aspect people can see this is an ok way to behave. I have tried to look at it from many angles and still can't see it.

[livegreen]

@siyeo. I do not think many would disagree with points in your last post.

That said you seem to be implying that the problem of short term renting for the sole purpose of obtaining a school place, is widespread and the schools, indeed the governors are aware of it and doing nothing about it. Herein lies your problem. You need to provide real evidence and not just heresay. So how many families per year are doing this.
My own experience is that it is a tiny number and almost impossible to prove. How do I know this - the class lists are shared amoungst parents and include addresses to help with organising play dates etc. Most (all) have addresses very close to the school - ie it is their local school too.

I would suggest you need to provide real evidence, prove what you are implying is really happening on a large scale and write to the council and governing bodies, you could publish your evidence here too. Then we could all wait for the responses. good luck.

[Siyeo]

I know the governors, the council, MP and headmistress know about it because a number of local people including myself have discussed it with them.

There were I believe 7 families we knew about, claiming to live nearby when their primary residence was elsewhere this time last year. I live 250m from one of the mentioned schools and was, I think number eight on the list of being offered a place. We have got to the next place to be offered during the course of the year, only to be bumped now to 4th place. The amount of people renting a secondary address to get into the schools is significant and the point is, is the most obvious and first port of call before addressing the sibling issue, which I think should be in line with a post made by Audrey.

Alderbrook is an excellent school but logistically for my wife it is not as easy as the one we can see from out doorstep. Also the issue of fragmenting the immediate neighbourhood is real.

[Siyeo]

@livegreen Please read my post regarding the fact that rules were suggested at one of the schools governors meetings and was vetoed.

[amber2]

Even if the number of renters for places is small in one year it does not make it a non issue.

Also the effect is compound. First child gets in by family renting short term, family move back to original home well outside of catchment before or during reception year. Then the siblings get in over other local residents in subsequent years. And so the catchment gets smaller again and local children are forced to commute further afield.

[livegreen]

@siyeo

I understand your point and have read your claims. Where is the evidence to back them up? If you really knew that a Governor at the school had broken the law to obtain a place fraudulently then name them and their place should be removed, ditto the the other 8 families you mention. I think you are getting confused between rumour, hearsay and facts you can actually prove. The schools and the council can only act on legal issues with facts, if you or anyone is able to prove them places will be withdrawn. Ditto the claim that 3 families applied from 1 rented address - a lot of this is urban myth.

So if you are able to name names with appropriate evidence, there will be movement in the waiting lists and all will be grateful. Otherwise we are hearing anonymous rumour which is fuelling people's fears and doubts, as well as questioning people's integrity and morals.

[KatherineHepburn]

@slyeo, so, you manage to name and shame 7 or so kids. Great. What is the wait list for HW? And that for BV? 50? 60?
The wider problem needs to be addressed. Wix's catchment has shrunk dramatically over the past 4 years, Alderbrook's will too. Highview will no doubt follow. There are whole swathes of the local area and surrounds that are education black holes. We need more schools, more places and soon. Spending all your energy on complaining about what another poster has rightly called urban myths is such a waste. Every year the same arguments come up, why not do something proactive about it? BTC will always be popular with families and kids as will Northside, Shaftesbury, Nightingale Triangle, Clapham South, Wandsworth Common...etc..
Thank goodness for the Bollingbroke Academy, but how long until that will be bursting at the seams as this baby boom progresses to secondary school?

[Wheresmyschool?]

Coming to this late but it needs addressing.

The reason that councils will do nothing against short term renters is because there is nothing wrong with it.

If a family rent a property close to a school on catchment area "day" then they qualify.

It's not wrong, it's not "stealing a place" it's just another option available to parents to secure a place for their child. We may as well complain at parents who buy a house in a catchment area and so "bump" a child who lives further away.

All your anger needs to be addressed to the council and government who are failing to provide enough quality places, not to parents who play within the rules to secure a place for their child.

[amber2]

Where's my school

I am stunned that you say there is nothing wrong with it! Putting the moral argument aside for a minute. It adds more cars on the road, it erodes the local community feel and spirals rents even further around schools making it even harder for legitimately renters.

You rightly said it is 'playing' by the rules but I wouldn't say it is fulfilling the purpose of the rules though. There is a difference.


Katherine is right, there needs to be more schools but the 2 matters are not mutually exclusive.

[Siyeo]

Nothing wrong by the standard of the currently inadequate set of rules that don't govern against people with a total lack of decency and self control. Does everything have to be ruled against before certain people understand it is wrong? In todays climate it would appear so, where we are assailed by more and more rules and laws as it is apparent that some people need decency spelled out to them. The school needs to govern these people, but also these people should control themselves.

@livegreen and @katherinehepburn please look deeper into ********** who lives on Ransden Road near to Balham, but last year got a place in reception for his daughter. He told my wife what he intended to do over coffee. I believe the daughters siblings had left the school and this is the loop hole he chose to exploit at the expense of more local children. I don't think it is right to name anyone else for you to believe now that this subject has been well researched and is not hearsay and other families are known of and openly discussed by local parents.

I agree there is an issue with the number of schools, but if you don't address the basic issue with the rules, given that some people do think that this behaviour is ok. All the new schools will suffer the same problem and fragmentation of the local children. There is a starting point. First the expectation that people should take a morally sound view when getting their child into a local school. Then given that some people in society are unable to do this, that rules are set in place to stop them exploiting the system. Then the sibling issue and within all that the allocation of more schools.

[KatherineHepburn]

No Slyeo, I do not believe in public witch hunts.
If you honestly cannot see that the highest priority is to create more school spaces and that until this happens year on year these issues will be raised again and again then what more can anyone say to you?
This situation will only get worse.