Belleville/Honeywell first offer distance? Post Reply

[mummyfh]

For anybody on the wait list for Honeywell be advised that you need to add 2 to your current position. The council have offered 92 places out for reception this year and they only have 90 places thus relying on at least 2 people not accepting their place.

[Bama]

And if no one refuses the offer? What happens? Two poor families will be notified that their offer is no more valid?

Does anyone know what is the ratio between siblings/not siblings admitted this year? Thanks

[Siyeo]

I have lived off Broomwood Road for over 20 years and live in sight of one of the preferred state schools in the area. We were offered Alderbrook and have been more than impressed by the attitude of all of its staff. We did have reservations, but we have been quickly put at ease.

In a way we haven't been put at ease with our first choice of school, which continues, along with the council to choose to do nothing about the people that rent close by to the school to get their children accepted and then move outside the catchment area and even the borough at the expense of the local residents. We continually see said schools children traveling by car in the opposite direction on the walk to Alderbrook. This I can only think leads to a fragmented neighbour hood and a ridiculous amount of unnecessary vehicles on the road at drop off time and pick up.

This poor moral judgement of endorsing the short term renters over and above the local people and not supporting the latter, makes it very hard for me to feel happy about sending my children to said local school. I feel loyalty and integrity are vital aspects of a childs character and if these are not being shown from the top, I am happy for my children to have no part of that school and the potential "dog eat dog" attitude that will follow.

[Siyeo]

We have been on the waiting list since last year, although we can see the roof of the school from our doorstep and hear the children playing in the play ground. I have been thoroughly unimpressed by the apathy and lack of moral code shown by the council and by the school as well as of course the short term renters that think it is ok and acceptable behaviour to see local children out of a place because because they can't afford a big enough house in the area. We have been to the Council appeal board, seen the MP. The Wandsworth council even advises you to check on a free map service to check that if you rent you will be within the catchment area. It is totally deemed as acceptable to the point that the catchment area has this year decreased again considerably. It makes absolutely no sense having people who attend the school living so far away, that they need to drive or actually live out of the borough. Stupidly I thought the local state school was meant for the local people. As I have mentioned, I thinks when a total lack of consideration, integrity and loyalty is shown from the the people in charge and the people prepared to step on peoples heads to get what they want are allowed to get away with that behaviour. I would prefer my children to have no part of that establishment, as I do not consider it ok behaviour.

[Northsidedad76]

Siyeo- I find your comments utterly ridiculous. To mock people for not affording large houses next door to the school unlike you is a bit off. You state that renters are morally wrong to put there children in Belleville or Honeywell that then move away. I can't believe you know the circumstance of every renter. In my situation I moved my family to be closer to my sick mother and to be closer to my daily commute from Clapham junction. You can't force people to stay and buy in a 100meter area. I also know if other families that couldn't afford to stay in the area due to expanding families and many move because of this. Many families also come from America, France, Spain etc. and don't want to buy a second house when they have one abroad and are working or renting in the country for some time. Are you suggesting they are not allowed access to the schools? What about the families doing up houses close by but are not allowed to apply from schools from the house they are digging out? What about special needs children that do indeed get driven in? Are they not allowed to go? The rules are very clear and unfortunately the catchments are too small but this is a country wide problem and taking swipes at renters is not the answer. The government needs to address lack of school places and perhaps parents living in 1million properties could make contributions/private!

[papinian]

Northsidedad76: This is not a countrywide problem. It is limited to a few areas of London (and maybe of a handful of other cities as well) with permanently oversubscribed primaries.

Nobody on this thread has suggested excluding children of renters from schools. However, there is good case to be made that if a family with a child already in a school has moved a significant distance away from the school subsequent children should not benefit from sibling preference. There are several primaries in Wandsworth that apply apply such a policy and plenty more in other London boroughs. For example, re Honeywell and Belleville if a family has moved to Wandsworth Common or Tooting or somewhere outside a defined area then sibling preference would not apply.

In addition, as has been noted on this thread, Wandsworth Council has not once taken action re people breaching the rules that are already in place re home addresses for school application purposes. I'm certain that there are a number of breaches every year so it would be nice to see some more policing as well.

[Northsidedad76]

Papian- you are wrong. it has clearly been stated that renters children shouldn't go to local schools. But why should they have to move a settled child if they move to wandsworth common? It is less than a couple of miles away. Most children travel considerably more than that to get to school. London is extremely transient and children can't be constantly uprooted. The sibling rule makes sense.

[Northsidedad76]

Amber2. How do you know the reasons parents moved in the first year of reception? Do you know them personally and know the reasons? I doubt it. So much of this is speculation. I

[papinian]

Papian- you are wrong. it has clearly been stated that renters children shouldn't go to local schools. But why should they have to move a settled child if they move to wandsworth common? It is less than a couple of miles away. Most children travel considerably more than that to get to school. London is extremely transient and children can't be constantly uprooted. The sibling rule makes sense.

I have not suggested that a settled child should be moved. I have said that siblings applying to the school should not get preference.

As a separate point, you say that London is extremely transient and children can't be constantly uprooted,but there's an internal contradiction in that.

[Northsidedad76]

Papian- I replied to you suggesting syeo had implied renters shouldn't get a place. You misunderstood....as always

[amber2]

Northside dad


This is most definitely not speculation.

[Northsidedad76]

So amber2. You know all the renters that left in Belleville reception and have discussed their circumstances. is that what you are saying?

[KatherineHepburn]

There was a post this time last year showing the stats for siblings living outside of catchment - it was minuscule.
However, the siblings policy works and should not be removed, even for those siblings way out of catchment.
Two reasons: firstly many children join schools in later years, the schools need this to happen to fill the places of kids who have left the school for a variety of reasons. Parents will not do this if they are then unable to send any siblings to that same school.
Secondly, the catchment area has changed dramatically over the past 6-8 years, kids who were in catchment when they got their place are officially in catchment no longer, denying their siblings a place would be absurd.
This isn't even taking into account the dramatic property price rise BTC over the past 2 years. This isn't a story of the very rich wanting bigger homes but that of local people with growing families needing more space and no longer being able to afford that in their local area (1.5 million for an unmodernised 3 bed house??). The assumption that by moving 800-1000 odd metres away means that they have to wholesale transplant their kids into another school just won't work. The school may not necessarily have any space. It may well be further away. The family might not be in any catchment at all. It is so very complicated, the only reasoned answer is more schools, or more school places surely?

[audrey]

I am also in support of sibling priority.

But let's make sure that the siblings follow a genuinely gained place. Perhaps the Council needs to step up their checks and enforce that all short-term renters who got a place in April and then move back to their permanent houses (out of catchment) in September should not be allowed to keep their place.

[AbbevilleMummy]

Papinian, this is most definitely a nationwide problem, sadly a lot of people who live BTC live in a bubble and think their problems are so particular to them! I own properties elsewhere and this is a problem in those areas. I have many friends who live in different towns and cities and they all talk about this subject every year. Read the papers, it is common!

Finally, do people really think that the very wealthy are falling over themselves and doing everything they can to get their kids into a state school?! Wake up! All the even moderately wealthy people I know would not even consider state education let lone moving house temporarily to get a place!