This is one mother's entry from a recent chat forum: “Yes, I would lie to get
my child into a good school. I don't really care what people I don't know
might think of me, to be honest! My daughter comes first and I know that ten
years down the line I wouldn't look back and say, oh, I shouldn't have lied,
etc. I would look back and think I did the best for my child.”
This mother is not an isolated case. According to a recent Local Government
Association report, more councils are identifying cheating parents. Out of
31 councils surveyed, 24 reported a rise in cheats. In Richmond upon Thames,
cases detected in 2007-08 rose from 5 to 50. And these cases are just the
tip of the iceberg.
Parents are defrauding the system and other parents in huge numbers in the
scramble for places at the better schools. This week they will find out if
they have prospered as primary school allo- cation letters for half a
million three and four-year-olds come through the letter box.
And while the false address scams and the “I believe” church conversions are
not new, their use is becoming so accepted that some parents even boast of
their prowess at the school gates. And in a system that is inherently
flawed, some are now saying that they are proud to do the best for their
child.
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.
One council's admissions officer said: “Parents are getting more creative.
Children are suddenly pretending to be living with distant relatives near a
popular school, or a family of five is claiming to be living in a single
rented room within a catchment area.”
As private schooling becomes more expensive and improvements to the state
primary sector kick in, aspirational parents are increasingly looking to the
state sector.
Another officer said: “One woman was boasting to everyone how she had beaten
the system. And the fact was that she had, because once the child starts it
is very rare for the child to be removed from the school, even if fraud is
proved.”
Every oversubscribed school has its own address or addresses that admissions
officers recognise every year. The address, usually of a flat, appears on
the school application of a different family every year.
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.
Thousands of parents are also breaking the spirit of the law every year by
pretending to have a faith they do not genuinely possess.
Church schools, of all faiths, tend to sit at the higher end of the school
performance tables and parents are attending Mass, joining the choir and
putting little Sam forward for altar service to get that vital appro-val
from the clergy on the appli- cation form.
Of course, this is a tricky area, if only because the only test of faith that
can be used in these cases is church attendance, which, in the end, proves
nothing.
But there is hardly a parish priest attached to a church school in the South
East of England who does not see congregation numbers rise significantly
during the autumn application process and then fall again after Easter when
places have been allocated.
Some vicars are stricter than others, demanding baptism certificates and
weekly attendance. Some highlight the importance of fundraising and direct
debits. Others are more lax, happy for the school to be another evangelical
tool in the community.
But if finding religion is a more spiritual but less verifiable way of getting
your child into the right school, that does not mean that it always works.
One set of parents in North London diligently attended church for two years to
get their son into a highly regarded primary school. They cultivated the
parish priest, even having him round for dinner. But all their hard work
came to nothing, as he died before signing their application form. Some
might murmur: “God does indeed move in mysterious ways.”
What about policing the catchment area scams? Depending on the type of school,
it is the responsibility either of the head teacher or the local authority.
The Government has asked councils to be more vigilant, but how far that
vigilance extends varies widely.
In one celebrated case a headmaster has employed a private detective to spy on
parents suspected of cheating. Norman Hoare, of the oversubscribed St
George's in Harpenden, Hertfordshire, has also gone on evening “stake-outs”
to check if parents really do live where they say they do.
This month it also emerged that Poole Borough Council had used investigatory
powers introduced on the ground of national security to spy on a couple over
their school application.
The family had applied for their youngest child to go to the same school as
her sibling, Lilliput First School in Poole. A member of the public told the
council, incorrectly, that the family was cheating. An undercover official
made a detailed log of the family's daily activities without their
knowledge, tailing the morning and afternoon school runs and returning in
the evening to watch their house. The case caused outrage.
Most local authorities are obviously keen to talk up their policing methods.
Anne Macavoy, head of admissions at Surrey County Council, says: “We do have a
system in place and we investigate where we have to. We are always tipped
off. People rent flats and we ask for proof of a year's lease and exchange.
We do go round if we are not happy with the documents. We visit to see if
people are not in residence.”
But resources are scarce. Ms Macavoy says: “We are being encouraged to get
people to apply online for schools, but then we have to check documents,
which takes time and money, and there is obviously a conflict there.”
The first line of defence is a basic documents check (council tax bill/utility
bill). Many councils do no more than that, even though admissions officers
know that there are websites that specialise in fake documents.
And in the end, what sanctions do councils have? To withdraw a place for a
child that wasn't going to be available if the scam had not been attempted.
Hardly a punishment for any parent desperate enough for the right start for
their child. Why not, many parents think, try it on? What have we got to
lose?
And whisper it quietly, for the head teachers of oversubscribed schools,
having parents who have cheated their way into the school might not be such
a bad thing. Parents who lie are also parents who are highly motivated.
These are the parents who will join the parent-teacher association and make
sure that their child does his homework, who will make the head teacher's
job easier and improve the school's results.
So are we teaching our children that the best way to get ahead is to cheat and
lie? Yes, we are. And that's what education is all about, isn't it?
‘You have to be ruthless in life sometimes'
CASE STUDY
Angela, 33
I cheated to get my oldest boy into primary school and I would do it again.
The school that I wanted to get him into was the primary school I went to.
It is small, like a village school with just one class in each year. I was
happy there and I wanted him to have the same experience.
I was living with my father when I had my oldest child. Then, when he was 2, I
bought a house but outside the catchment area for the “village” school.
The nearest school to our new home took a lot of council estate children. It
was much bigger, three classes to a year. It was very simple - I just used
my father's address to get my boy into the school of my choice. In fact I
always planned to do this. I knew he was going there and that was it.
I think education is really important. We all want to give our kids the best
possible start and you don't want your children mixing with the wrong sort
of people. So I just feel that you have to stretch the truth sometimes to
get what you want.
You have to grab every opportunity to better yourself that you can. It may be
that a child whose family did live in the catchment area did not get in but
I didn't think about that.
Two more of my children followed to the same school because of the sibling
rule and I was pleased that I beat the system. I just think you have to be
ruthless in life sometimes.
Now we have moved to a new home in a different area and I have a
three-year-old daughter who is facing a different issue. The new home was in
the catchment area for a decent school but we have now been told that the
catchment area has changed. One of the other local schools closed down.
We have been warned that our youngest daughter might not get into the primary
school that the others are at. It is very annoying as the school she might
go to is not very good. If we have to appeal, we will. And failing that, my
husband and I have talked about buying an investment property in the
catchment area and using that as our address.
I do my best to give my children the right principles and the right morals. I
think there is lying and cheating and there is stretching the truth. It is
not as if I lied for any capital gain and of course I would not like my
children to steal. This is different. This is about bettering yourself. And
my children know the difference.
I think you can stretch the truth and still be a good citizen. I would say to
those who want to cheat to get their children into the right school - go
right ahead.
Some personal details have been changed.
What happens if a cheating parent is caught?
Parents who use false addresses break the law under the Fraud Act 2006,
according to the Local Government Association. Where fraud is detected, the
offer of a place is withdrawn but parents have never been prosecuted further.
