Children's Education and Postings Back to UK
How deep do these 'authorities/admissions bodies' dig? As an ex-scaley-brat, I was often passed a form with a question 'how long have you lived in the UK?' - my answer was always 'since birth'. I always regarded my time with my parents on NATO or RAFG bases as being 'in the UK' 
. Guess 90% of forms are scanned these days and as long as no 'not resident' boxes ticked - on they go to next stage 
. Guess 90% of forms are scanned these days and as long as no 'not resident' boxes ticked - on they go to next stage
This could all be solved by Dept for Education issuing a Circular in unambiguous language to cover the issues involved and sent to all LEAs and self-governing schools, but I am not holding my breath. Letters to MPs would help prompt action.
Thread Starter
Hmmm.
We had the problem almost 10 years ago when we bought a house in the UK whilst on an overseas posting, coinciding with two significant Acts – principally the Serious and Organised Crimes Act 2003 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2003. Both Acts require financial institutions to exercise ‘due diligence’ to ensure that people are who they say they are and that money isn’t being Laundered.
The Mortgage lender (like the local authority) ‘demanded’ that we presented our passports in person, in the UK, before they would proceed. I pointed out that we had already banked with them for eight years and that this should have been sufficient to establish our bone fides. They didn’t see the trap that I had sprung. If they still rejected our application, they themselves were in breach of the new regulations by not ensuring that existing account holders were who they say they were. Added to that appalling customer service, with agents quoting completely ‘made up’ regulations (I then sought the transcriptions of the calls) and I got the mortgage, got an apology and an ex gratia payment for catching them out telling fibs.
On the issue of how deep they dig, if you provide information that they find was subsequently incorrect in an effort to circumvent frankly bonkers legislation, it will open up a world of hurt. In the matter of primary school admission in the first case, Local Authorities are under real pressure to cut expenditure and to be answerable to central Government edicts on a plethora of restrictions, especially to do with benefits and social expenditure at large. The result is that rules are delivered with bluntness and pursued with near missionary zeal (vide rubbish collection and school zoning surveillance operations). Anyway, why should we have to lie when we’ve done nothing wrong?
We had the problem almost 10 years ago when we bought a house in the UK whilst on an overseas posting, coinciding with two significant Acts – principally the Serious and Organised Crimes Act 2003 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2003. Both Acts require financial institutions to exercise ‘due diligence’ to ensure that people are who they say they are and that money isn’t being Laundered.
The Mortgage lender (like the local authority) ‘demanded’ that we presented our passports in person, in the UK, before they would proceed. I pointed out that we had already banked with them for eight years and that this should have been sufficient to establish our bone fides. They didn’t see the trap that I had sprung. If they still rejected our application, they themselves were in breach of the new regulations by not ensuring that existing account holders were who they say they were. Added to that appalling customer service, with agents quoting completely ‘made up’ regulations (I then sought the transcriptions of the calls) and I got the mortgage, got an apology and an ex gratia payment for catching them out telling fibs.
On the issue of how deep they dig, if you provide information that they find was subsequently incorrect in an effort to circumvent frankly bonkers legislation, it will open up a world of hurt. In the matter of primary school admission in the first case, Local Authorities are under real pressure to cut expenditure and to be answerable to central Government edicts on a plethora of restrictions, especially to do with benefits and social expenditure at large. The result is that rules are delivered with bluntness and pursued with near missionary zeal (vide rubbish collection and school zoning surveillance operations). Anyway, why should we have to lie when we’ve done nothing wrong?
Last edited by Whenurhappy; 7th Jun 2013 at 12:03.
How deep do these 'authorities/admissions bodies' dig?...
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more University
can't remember how to do that smart quote-y stuff and the FAQ seems to have disappeared.
Nams "most universities class you as overseas unless the student has been ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands (Channel Islands and Isle of Man)".
If only it were that simple. It's getting a little blurred with some of the most recent fees changes but it's not universities, it's the HEFCE who decide the rules for "home fees". Home fees covers other EU countries and EEA etc but NOT IoM and Channel Islands (neither are in the EU) and also devolution has made Scotland etc v messy (so we'd better limit this to England and other EU). For IoM and CIs there's an "Islands" rate of fees.
It is stretching the patience and manners of reasonable people that all this nonsense is caused by EU membership. I don't particularly wish for any change but it gets a bit much when students in one's class from far away countries are on home fees because they have produced a (for example) Portuguese passport and you know that the difficulties described here are going on for Brits.
Nams "most universities class you as overseas unless the student has been ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands (Channel Islands and Isle of Man)".
If only it were that simple. It's getting a little blurred with some of the most recent fees changes but it's not universities, it's the HEFCE who decide the rules for "home fees". Home fees covers other EU countries and EEA etc but NOT IoM and Channel Islands (neither are in the EU) and also devolution has made Scotland etc v messy (so we'd better limit this to England and other EU). For IoM and CIs there's an "Islands" rate of fees.
It is stretching the patience and manners of reasonable people that all this nonsense is caused by EU membership. I don't particularly wish for any change but it gets a bit much when students in one's class from far away countries are on home fees because they have produced a (for example) Portuguese passport and you know that the difficulties described here are going on for Brits.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a SINGLE problem referred to above is caused by the EU
They are all made up by the numpties in Whitehall who are desperate to cut costs and who forget that we had/have a lot of people working overseas in business and the forces who bring a benefit to the UK
These days no-one is allowed to use their judgement as they then will be sued by no-win, no-fee lawyers (another brilliant cost cutting idea)
They are all made up by the numpties in Whitehall who are desperate to cut costs and who forget that we had/have a lot of people working overseas in business and the forces who bring a benefit to the UK
These days no-one is allowed to use their judgement as they then will be sued by no-win, no-fee lawyers (another brilliant cost cutting idea)
Why else would all the Wasteminster parties support EU membership ? If we left they would have no one else to blame for their decisions. It's a no brainer.
Smudge
Smudge
Thread Starter
Sandy Parts,
It's not sufficient these days to simply tick a box and sign a form. These bodies now 'need' additional and verifiable proof that you are entitled to these services (in this case primary education). The fact that one could scan a completely fabricated Passport to them (which they admitted they can't check with IPS or UKBA), but that would satisfy their 'need'.
But I go back to my earlier point, why should be obliged to tell fibs to have a service delivered that we are ordinarily entitled to but (in this case) the local authority are being completely anal about?
Several years ago we became friendly with the Chief Executive and his wife of a Borough Council near our family home, as our daughters went to school together. The chap was extremely well educated and had worked in Local and Central Government etc before landing a CE role with a 'strategically important' borough council. However, his knowledge of the forces was approaching nil. He assumed I was ‘army’ (in spite of advising him otherwise) and was bought into the received wisdom/urban myth of that when we took an overseas posting that we paid no tax, housing was free (well, to be true, it is for some of us) etc etc. His sole exposure to the Military was attending various Remembrance parades when a motley collection of TA and cadets would trundle past the podium, where he would be propping up the mayor. Accordingly – I suspect that this is the same for many local authorities - they simply have no idea about ‘the military’ and what it entails for SP and their families. No amounts of diktats from Government - Covenant notwithstanding – will change these ideas. Illustrative of this approach, if you were to examine the ‘fair access protocols’ produced by local authorities for school admission, you would see that the children of SP are lumped in with asylum seekers, refugees, wards of the courts, children released from the criminal justice system and members of the Romany and Traveller communities.
It's not sufficient these days to simply tick a box and sign a form. These bodies now 'need' additional and verifiable proof that you are entitled to these services (in this case primary education). The fact that one could scan a completely fabricated Passport to them (which they admitted they can't check with IPS or UKBA), but that would satisfy their 'need'.
But I go back to my earlier point, why should be obliged to tell fibs to have a service delivered that we are ordinarily entitled to but (in this case) the local authority are being completely anal about?
Several years ago we became friendly with the Chief Executive and his wife of a Borough Council near our family home, as our daughters went to school together. The chap was extremely well educated and had worked in Local and Central Government etc before landing a CE role with a 'strategically important' borough council. However, his knowledge of the forces was approaching nil. He assumed I was ‘army’ (in spite of advising him otherwise) and was bought into the received wisdom/urban myth of that when we took an overseas posting that we paid no tax, housing was free (well, to be true, it is for some of us) etc etc. His sole exposure to the Military was attending various Remembrance parades when a motley collection of TA and cadets would trundle past the podium, where he would be propping up the mayor. Accordingly – I suspect that this is the same for many local authorities - they simply have no idea about ‘the military’ and what it entails for SP and their families. No amounts of diktats from Government - Covenant notwithstanding – will change these ideas. Illustrative of this approach, if you were to examine the ‘fair access protocols’ produced by local authorities for school admission, you would see that the children of SP are lumped in with asylum seekers, refugees, wards of the courts, children released from the criminal justice system and members of the Romany and Traveller communities.
Last edited by Whenurhappy; 11th Jun 2013 at 13:43.
