Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all, it might be folklore or hearsay but I'm sure I've heard that there's a particular street around the catchment of Charter school (north Dulwich) where people traditionally rent for a period in order to get their child into The Charter School. So they keep their home elsewhere, get their child a place, then move back to their original home. If this is true, anyone know which street this could be? Many thanks
I heard that the school is supposedly in the process of tightening up their procedures to at least attempt stopping this from happening as it's very unfair on those who stay put and then don't get a place because of people who can afford the expense of temporarily renting to play the system!
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Renata,

I'm not sure asking for proof of address will make much difference - if they've rented out their house and are renting close to Charter I imagine they have council tax/utility bills/child benefit for the place they're renting. The only thing Charter could do is look at the electoral roll - most people stay for such a short time in the place they're renting that they don't bother to register their 'new' address.

Renata - it is much more complicated than that! Often people let their existing house outside of the catchment and rent another house much closer to the school for a year or two, get their first child in on distance and then all the rest can follow on the sibling rule. Meanwhile, the family move back to their first house which they've continued to own all along. It happens a lot in this wealthy enclave and the school should do more to get on top of it. Other schools do much better (for instance, not having the automatic sibling priority).
Many other councils seem to be way harsher than Southwark on this. If you still own a property that you lived in at some point in time, many councils assume that's your main residence, so you cannot just rent for a year or so then move back to the family home. Merton and Wandsworth come to mind; their schools seem to be more oversubscribed than ours, but maybe it's time for Southwark to catch up?

Well, families who are rich enough can always afford to sell their place, rent near a good school for a while, then move out. As long as they only have one property at any given time then I don't think there is anything that can be done.


What can be done, and what many schools and councils do ( like those in Wandsorth, Camden and Merton ) is to not accept applications from families who have moved but still own a property they had previously lived in; in these cases the presumption is that the family will move back to the old house after little Johnny gets a place at the school, so applications tend to be processed with the old address, not the new one. I am not sure if any school in Southwark follows this approach but it seems sensible.


You might have also heard about the recent change in the sibling policy in Wandsworth: now siblings get in via the sibling route only if the family still lives in the same address as the one used when the first child was offered a place, or if they moved less than 800 metres away. Arguably this is unfair on families who genuinely rent and who may have been kicked out by greedy landlords, but at the same time I understand the number of families who had moved out but still sent siblings to local schools was so great that the maximum distance in many schools shrank to 200 metres or so.

Agreed DulwichLondoner. But I've seen teachers comment, on another forum, that schools LIKE the well off and middle class families with sharp elbows who'll go to such extraordinary lengths to secure a place. It demonstrates a certain commitment to the school and a prioritising of education within the household, after all.


So many of the so-called comprehensive schools in London find a way to skew their intake; it makes you very cynical when you've been through the system a couple of times.

Yes I remember that row, Charter kids could walk the short cuts via Greendale to get to the Denmark Hill estate but this was not considered as a safe walking route by Charter.


I know of a family who sold their house just off Barry Road, to rent a property near Charter to get their daughter into the school. Both parents had good jobs and were able to afford the rental costs for around a year and kept the house sale money intact to use to purchase another house in different area after the daughter had started at Charter.

Never heard whether daughter got into Charter and where they ended up moving to.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Link to petition if anyone would like to object: Londis Off-License Petition https://chng.it/9X4DwTDRdW
    • The lady is called Janet 
    • He did mention it's share of freehold, I’d be very cautious with that. It can turn into a nightmare if relationships with neighbours break down. My brother had a share of freehold in a flat in West Hampstead, and when he needed to sell, the neighbour refused to sign the transfer of the freehold. What followed was over two years of legal battles, spiralling costs and constant stress. He lost several potential buyers, and the whole sale fell through just as he got a job offer in another city. It was a complete disaster. The neighbour was stubborn and uncooperative, doing everything they could to delay the process. It ended in legal deadlock, and there was very little anyone could do without their cooperation. At that point, the TA6 form becomes the least of your worries; it’s the TR1 form that matters. Without the other freeholder’s signature on that, you’re stuck. After seeing what my brother went through, I’d never touch a share of freehold again. When things go wrong, they can go really wrong. If you have a share of freehold, you need a respectful and reasonable relationship with the others involved; otherwise, it can be costly, stressful and exhausting. Sounds like these neighbours can’t be reasoned with. There’s really no coming back from something like this unless they genuinely apologise and replace the trees and plants they ruined. One small consolation is that people who behave like this are usually miserable behind closed doors. If they were truly happy, they’d just get on with their lives instead of trying to make other people’s lives difficult. And the irony is, they’re being incredibly short-sighted. This kind of behaviour almost always backfires.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...