The Dulwich estate ? modern day reverse Robin Hood ?

[grabot]

>and the only way I'm

>> getting 10K is by buying a balaclava...!

"...the recovery of principal monies interest and other monies as they would have had if they had been first legal

mortgagees of the freehold thereof under a Mortgage "

I guess that means that they reserve the right to foreclose if you don't pay up.

[dulwichfamily]

Regarding the argument that these families 'help' by removing their child's cost from the state system:

Some would say there is another less quantifiable cost to society. Ie removing these privileged and supported kids, with motivated parents, starves the state system of the balance needed in the classroom.

So by creaming this part of society off. You're actually damaging the state system in a subtle but significant way.

[SteveUK1978]

?130k salary for someone running a ?9m t/o (charitable) business is high. Tollgate revenue is up this year though...

[speedbird]

DadOf4 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> good point Grabot.

> Then add another 130k to the ?9M that is being

> "redistributed" .

>

> I'd love to hear somebody from Dulwich estate give

> their side. It could well be that theres more to

> this than meets to eye

Not sure what 'side' you refer to. Do you think that if this weren't a charitable status we would be so lucky as to walk and live amongst one of the greenest areas in London?

I have lived all my life in Dulwich (East, West and Village) and consider myself lucky to live in an area that offers so much. The parks, the fields, the Gallery, the Chapel, the Village itself. Most of those areas are funded by the Dulwich Estate. I have lived in houses years ago that sat on the Estate. High fees, strict building laws, all annoying, but have protected a beautiful area that has remained amazing.

Charitable status? In my opinion, they deserve it for what they have retained in a wonderful area that has so much to offer.

[keane]

It's not just dulwich college that gets the money, the group of Dulwich private schools that receive money from the dulwich estate do so every year - this year they received over ?6 million and yet if u live on the dulwich estate you are given no break down of where this money goes - are they spending it all on assisting poor scholars which was the instruction set down in the original pledge by Edward Alleyn? I very much doubt it. I think they should be made to reveal exactly where the ?6 million was spent and see if it fits in with the charitable aims stated in the original covenant.

Meanwhile Alleyns who barely use the playing fields , running track & two tennis courts on the left hand side as you go down Townley road from Lordship Lane, have repeatedly over a number of years refused to allow children from Heber primary school 5 minutes walk down the road, to use this facilities for supervised (by teachers & parents from Heber) games lessons. Heber has a very small concrete playground & minimal outside space & would really benefit from being able to share these facilities when they are not in use. The MOST alleyns will allow is for Heber to hold their sports day on this field ONCE a year. And yet they have charitable status?! I think they should be hauled over the coals.

[Robert Poste's Child]

I agree with Speedbird. The Estate has in many ways done a fantastic job of preserving and enhancing the area, particularly preserving a variety of green spaces for everyone to enjoy.

My only real grievance is that they don't actively engage and consult with the people they are doing it for, both specific target groups and the local population in general, and as a result they can come across as high-handed and parental. Perhaps largely because of the great work they have done they don't have to compete for tenants, and at times it can feel like they're stuck in the 1950s while the rest of the world has moved forward.

I should add that the Estate does look after its elderly tenants, organising outings and lunches, as well as in terms of rent, and they're good about maintenance and safety.

[keane]

Yes but why do they give ?6 million a year from money paid to them by local

People to private schools? What is it used for.

[Loz]

Educating children would be my first guess.

[keane]

As stated by the op and in my post the money is supposed to be used to help 'poor scholars'.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Fundamentally, a school which charges pupils thousands of pounds a term for their education is not a charity. Can anyone honestly suggest that it is, in the sense that most reasonable people would understand it?

The rest is just spin.

[LondonMix]

Here is how Alleyns explain it

http://www.alleyns.org.uk/section.aspx?id=830

http://www.alleyns.org.uk/page.aspx?id=847

The gist is the fee income collected does not cover the running if the school. They need Estate money just to keep the doors open

I remember reading a third of pupils are on bursaries though not full bursaries. They say they are fundraising to create more 100 percent bursaries via a permanent endowment

[steveo]

A friend of mine got his daughter into Jags then was almost immediately made redundo. The school cheerfully covered her fees for five years.

And to go slightly off topic, one of the things the governors have done is curb the worst excesses of Southwark Council 'planners', which is why its nice around here.

Although they've committed some hideous building crimes themselves, without the governors it would undoubtedly have been worse.

[Earl Aelfheah]

steveo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A friend of mine got his daughter into Jags then

> was almost immediately made redundo. The school

> cheerfully covered her fees for five years.

That's an example of a charitable act. It doesn't make JAGS a charity in the sense that most people would understand it. Many big corporate enterprises undertake charitable acts and donate large amounts of money to good causes, but it's not their primary function.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I don't understand the attempt to paint independent schools as charitable organisations being run in the interests of all, or even more absurdly, the needy. They are run for the benefit of a small minority of often already privileged children. If you pay a large amount of money to give your child a competitive advantage over others (and I wouldn't criticise you for it) then why not be upfront about it. Drop all the chicanery.

[LondonMix]

It seems people have the biggest concern regarding schools? being charities. Private schools are clearly non-profit organisations (just like universities).

What additional benefits (tax or otherwise) is there being a charity vs a non-profit? Are they considered charities because that was how they were originally set up but with no specific advantage?

If there is anyone who works in the 3rd sector that can explain, that would be great.

[Townleygreen]

rahrahrah said "I don't understand the attempt to paint independent schools as charitable organisations being run in the interests of all, or even more absurdly, the needy. They are run for the benefit of a small minority of often already privileged children. If you pay a large amount of money to give your child a competitive advantage over others (and I wouldn't criticise you for it) then why not be upfront about it. Drop all the chicanery."

Not quite. They offer bursaries to those who can't afford the fees, of up to 100%

[Earl Aelfheah]

Again, that's an example of a charitable act. It doesn't make JAGS a charity in the sense that most people would understand it. Many big corporate enterprises undertake charitable acts and donate large amounts of money to good causes, but it's not their primary function.

[apbremer]

It seems to me that there are an awful lot of people with nothing better to do but bang on about matters which are not their business. Get a life.

[LondonMix]

Clearly providing education at no profit isn't what anyone would think of as a business enterprise. The foundation uses the original endowment to subsidize the costs of everyone who attends (as even full fees don?t cover running costs if the schools are to be believed) and they also provide free entry to some based on need.

I think admission ideally would be needs-blind but at the same time, I can?t argue that the work the foundation does is a business in any normal sense either.

It?s a non-profit with the aim of providing subsidized high quality education (at times for free).

That's very different from Coke who might occasionally donate.

[DadOf4]

apbremer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It seems to me that there are an awful lot of

> people with nothing better to do but bang on about

> matters which are not their business. Get a life.

Welcome the the East Dulwich Forum

[Earl Aelfheah]

LondonMix, that's nicely put and the most convincing defence of their charitable status that I've heard. I guess the outcome of their work - the fact that for many, independent schools appear to entrench social inequality is an issue.

Rightly, or wrongly, the perception is that they primarily serve the interests of a fairly narrow and already privileged group of people, which doesn't seem compatible with the 'charity' label.

It's not as though they are voluntary giving help to those in need. They are providing a superior service, mainly to those who can afford it, in order for them to gain a personal advantage.

[Earl Aelfheah]

BTW - I genuinely mean it when I say that I wouldn't criticise any individual for seeking to give their child a 'leg up'. It's just that in my opinion, this is what you are are doing. Wanting your kid to have the best chances in life is honourable. I just don't think it's reasonable to claim that private education is actually motivated by the public interest.

[LondonMix]

I actually don?t disagree with your reservations about independent schools and would support them becoming 100% needs blind with special outreach programs to encourage lower income students to apply via mentorship and tutoring.

That would require more funding than their endowments provide though so the state would have to step in.

I also agree that sending your kids to Alleyn's isn't charitable but its not charitable to recieve the benefits of any charity. Its by definition almost always self-serving.

[stephent]

So bring back grammar schools? :)

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I actually don?t disagree with your reservations

> about independent schools and would support them

> becoming 100% needs blind with special outreach

> programs to encourage lower income students to

> apply via mentorship and tutoring.

>

> That would require more funding than their

> endowments provide though so the state would have

> to step in.

>

>

> I also agree that sending your kids to Alleyn's

> isn't charitable but its not charitable to recieve

> the benefits of any charity. Its by definition

> almost always self-serving.

[LondonMix]

I went to the American equivalent to a grammar school except they didn?t appear to be as biased towards to middle class as UK grammars are. I imagine that?s largely because parents here invest in tutoring and test prep if they can afford to. That?s why I suggest the schools need to encourage low-income families to apply specifically through an outreach program at primary school level that provides test prep etc.