Consultation on admissions for Wandsworth primary schools Post Reply

[VKAC]

Hello ladies, please do respond to the consultation if you think that siblings should have priority only if they live within 800m of a school - please go to Wandsworth council's website and the online submission is quite painless.

[Honeybee]

Agreed - for some reason these threads about the sibling priority consultations don't seem to be showing up on the 'most read' feeds despite some of them being viewed thousands of times! Not sure why that is.

It is easy to respond online and if you have concerns about the current proposals now is the time to voice them, we have less than a month! Wandsworth Council is looking for constructive suggestions as to how the system can be made fairer so this is a chance to have your say.

[breakfastattiffanys]

The link is:
http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/admissionsconsultation

[doubledaddy]

BTC parents need to think carefully about this proposal. There's a danger that this change will not increase HW and BV catchments significantly. Meanwhile, sibling access to an improving Alderbrook and possibly the new BV school will be curtailed. Many BTC parents could be left in a worse position.

[KasiaT]

What is more important would be a crack down on people renting short term close to schools in oorder to get their kids in and then moving away. Not that I have any practical solution how to police that - but worth a thought. If the system allows it you cannot blame people for doing it.

[HappyMumSW11]

Good point KasiaT that i mentioned when i answered the quick consultation survey!

[Tealover]

KasiaT - the council have already tried to address the issue of renting purely to get a school place with the new admissions policy (for admissions for 2015). The wording about permanent vs temporary address has been extended. It has been pasted into another discussion - but I'll paste it again below. Essentially if you own another address you will have to prove why that is not your permanent home - and a rental address you use while you are having renovations done on your permanent home will no longer be accepted.

This was included on a paper Wandsworth issued about the old admissions policy

' This year (2014 entry) Honeywell Infant School, following the example of Graveney School, wrote to all successful applicants offered aplace under the distance criterion seeking confirmation ofthe details oftheir address. This exercise highlighted a significant proportion of those applicants had moved into the area in the months preceding the closing date for applications although no places were withdrawn as a result'

I don't know exactly what a 'significant proportion of those applicants' is in terms of numbers, but I know a few who used this loophole.

The new wording below should have an impact on the issue. (Sorry for the formatting)

"The address you give on the application
form must be your child’s permanent
address on the closing date for
applications and this must be the
address where the family normally lives.
Parents are not permitted to use a
temporary address to secure a school
place for the child. A business address, a
childminder’s address, or any address
including a family member’s address
other than the child’s permanent home
will not be accepted. Proof of address
will be sought if there is any doubt about
the validity of the address given and may
be the subject of further investigation.
If a family move into a property
temporarily to increase the chances of
gaining a school place, the council will
use the permanent residence for the
purpose of the application. If the family
own a property but are living at and apply
from a different address, the council will
assume that the second address is
temporary and that the property they own
is where the child ordinarily lives. Where
the owned property is being renovated,
this will still be considered the family’s
permanent address. Evidence will
otherwise be required that the property
has been disposed of. If a family own
more than one property, the council will
request further evidence to demonstrate
where they normally live to determine the
address we will use for the child’s
application.
The address will be checked against
information already held by the council
and you will be asked to provide
satisfactory proof if a discrepancy is
found. Where proof of address is
requested it must be provided. If
satisfactory proof is received after 13
February 2015 your application will be
processed after the initial offer of places
has been made on 16 April 2015."

[kiwimummy]

There is definitely a risk that this proposal would have the effect of making school black spots completely insurmountable, particularly for BTC families who didn't get into one of the HW or BV duo. I'm not BTC, but I am pretty adamantly opposed to these proposals as I don't think it's a great idea to do this.

What the policy is designed to do is make families use local schools when they move. But there is no guarantee that the older children would get a place in the local school - so people will end up stuck trying to do two or more drop offs at different places anyway.

It's also a nightmare for families who through a move or simple catchment shrinkage now find themselves more than 800m away. Those families made relied on the policy and may now find themselves stuck with no school options. This would particularly be a problem for low income or housing association families who don't often get a huge say in where they live and could be hugely disruptive to children who are potentially most vulnerable.

Cracking down on short term renters was a good start, but I think these proposals will make the problems worse.

Although they will likely make real estate agents selling houses within 800m of a good school very happy. Just what we need

[KasiaT]

Thank you Tealover, very helpful, I was not aware of these changes.