Reply With QuoteThey knew the rules and took the risk...........................Should have paid the initial fine.
In November they were convicted of failing to ensure their child regularly attended school under the Education Act 1996.
Surely 'regularly' means failing to attend for a day or two every week over a period of time, not for five days in one go for a holiday?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...of-school.html
They knew the rules and took the risk...........................Should have paid the initial fine.
Regularly attending is not the same as regularly absconding.
Sounds like the boy learned a valuable lesson by experiencing his parents behaviour, possibly one the school alone could not have managed.
Last edited by stooo; 10th April 2015 at 07:54.
"Bite my shiny metal ass."
- Bender Bending Rodríguez
Another bit of a quality journalism, it reads like the bailiffs came along because they took the child out of school, not the fact they didn't pay a £120 fine...
Cheers..
Jase
The other take on it is that they took their children out of school knowing full well that there was the potential to be fined, thought they'd ignore the fine and it would go away and it bit them on the bum.
As a parent I sympathise with their desire to go on holiday at a cheaper price mind you.
I think it's complete bollocks tbh.
Fining parents for taking their kids out of school. I have to pay for day care when there are teacher training days, sometimes a couple a month. I can't remember billing anyone for what I have to pay extra per month.
My wife is a teacher, and loathes continous absenteeism. However the travel agents/centreparcs/hotels/airlines etc...etc... take massive advantage of school holiday dates, even when it's not the traditional Summer break.
Doubling and sometimes tripling their prices at these times.
Took our kids to the States, when they were both pre school and my wife had a year out. £1,790
Exact same holdiday in the half term that year was over £5,000
Last edited by MuRph77; 10th April 2015 at 09:20.
Am I right in thinking these cases only ever make it to court because the parents involved refuse to pay the fine on principle? I don't get it, take the £50 hit and move on.
My take is that the school / authority is misusing the law to apply any fine, irrespective of the subsequent penalties for non payment.
Taking a week off for an educational trip is not the same thing as 'regularly' not attending.
Schools / courts should not have the right to fine parents for taking their children out on an educational trip for a few days once per year.
Someone broke the law, got a fine, appealed it and failed. Upon not paying the court ordered whatever bailiffs are called these days to kick their door in. This happens a thousand times a week in the UK... doesn't really matter if you agree with the law or not - you cant flout it with impunity.
Luckily, the two schools I still have an active interest in - or maybe the education authority that runs them - don't seem to be quite so keen on fining everyone for every minor infraction, although I know a few parents have been sent very snotty letters relating to unauthorised absences for term-time holidays of the "next time you will pay "x" amount" type.
I don't think they have broken the law though. The law is to prevent regular non-attendance not occasional educational family trips.Originally Posted by Cirrus
The school / authority are choosing to misapply the law.
Parents could say the child was off sick for a week and the school wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
I really don't think it does kids any harm to miss a few days school so I don't agree with fining parents who are honest enough to tell the truth instead of just saying the child is ill - which they could easily do and would probably get away with it.
However whether you agree with it or not once you've been fined not paying it is just stupid. If the Bailiffs start removing stuff to pay the debt and add court costs etc to the original fine it will end up costing you a hell of a lot more than the original fine.
Section 444A and section 444B of the Education Act 1996 give powers to the Local Authority (LA) and other designated bodies to issue Penalty Notices where the parent/carer is considered capable of but unwilling to secure an improvement in their child’s school attendance.Penalty Notices are issued for a number of reasons including:
• Overt truancy
• Absences from school, either when a parent continually fails to provide an explanation or the school considers the absence to be avoidable.
• Holidays taken during term time where the absence has not been authorised by the school.
The school / EA would appear to be applying their bit of the law exactly as written and intended, and when the penalty went unpaid the courts applied their bit the same way. Like I said - like it or not, but you cant ignore it.
If the parents described it as an educational trip rather than a holiday the school couldn't object.
The shocking thing is, that this just isn't surprising any more. The behaviour of no one involved is surprising, from stupid rules to fines made by schools to ignoring the court to sending the baliffs to ending up with a thousand pound bill. Nothing surprises me. Common sense has left the country. We have the society we deserve.
Perhaps parents need to add up the time wasted on schools on non educational activities like watching videos, waiting for classes to settle down, strikes, etc.?
Good thinking!
Of course they could, at the end of the day it's an unauthorised absence, they knew the consequenses and chose to ignore them. If they asked for permission and were denied then they brought it in themselves, if they didn't ask permission then they should have. I personally think the circumstances should be looked at carefully before imposing fines, attendance history, age of the pupil etc, ( factors unknown in this case ) my kids headmaster is great like that and no one I know has had a problem when common sense is applied, but then my kids are 8 and 6 and so a few days at this age won't cause as much issues as a older child.
If it's an eccomomic decision to take a child out due to holiday costs , for example risk a £120 fine to save £500 then do it but pay the fine. I have sympathy and can understand that decision but the £1200 eventual costs incurred were not due to them taking the child out of school.
Cheers..
Jase
But try to imagine trying to teach kids a set syllabus when only 95% of them are there at any time. The time they must waste going over something that is needed by today's lesson that little Jushua missed because he was in Florida.
The more expensive holidays is just market forces. Kids cost money, deal with it. Take a cheaper holiday or stay at home and do interesting free stuff. Sympathy level = 0 and I'm going to be hitting this problem in a couple of years time.
The underlying problem is that we parents are made to thínk we are responsible and we áre held responsible when the kid causes damage BUT fundamentally we sign over our kids to the State when we register the birth. From that moment on the State owns them and we are just accountable.
Same apllies to identifying toddlers as potential terrorists and denouncing fatties.
When you think this through we are basically just unpaid caretakers following State rules of education.
As to the school thing of the topic the only way to escape that is to home school.
There is an additional level on injustice: The law only applies to law abiding citizens.
The bottom layer of society can do as it pleases since they are scint anyway, living off benefits and charity. The State is loath to take the kids away into the system as that results in more costs and not in any way better reaised kids.
Ádded to this there is a growing population that does not register the child on birth.
Anyway; whether one agrees or not, whether one thinks the law is ethical or not, it ís the law and we have democratically chosen for it haven´t we?!
Not entirely sure I agree with all of Cilla's post above. You have the kid, you have the responsibility within the legal framework set up to ensure you don't send said urchins up cleaning chimneys before they've grown up.
I'm also not sure of the incidence of not registering child births since the penalty for not doing so is a heavy fine. I couldn't find any figures to support an increase in this since we have not need not to. If you don't register it then they can't have any number of state benefits like child care and so on.
As a teacher I used to hate it when kids went away on holiday; it meant a fair bit of extra work when they returned.
[QUOTE=Glamdring;3482481]Not entirely sure I agree with all of Cilla's post above. You have the kid, you have the responsibility within the legal framework set up to ensure you don't send said urchins up cleaning chimneys before they've grown up.[/quote
That is what I write too; that YOu are held accountable.
So??? They are scint anyway. Most often they don´t even have address in the system so...I'm also not sure of the incidence of not registering child births since the penalty for not doing so is a heavy fine.
I am sorry. I don´t get this one.I couldn't find any figures to support an increase in this since we have not need not to.
Well, a doctor cannot refuse to help the kid in case of medical emergency.If you don't register it then they can't have any number of state benefits like child care and so on.
´Enjoying´ the schooling system does not play untill the kid is 4 and if one would prefer homes schooling anyway, it saves the hassle of applying for permission.
Not having kids, what power does a school have to issue a fine??.. Is there a law that says they can fine people?
Yes - the Education Act. If the school identifies an problem with attendance they request of the council / education authority that a penalty be issued against the child's parents or guardians. The penalty is modest - like a speeding ticket - if paid within a set period. There are rules as to how many can be issued... like you cant issue 2 for for 2 consecutive days unauthorised absence - that is one event.
If there is good reason for the absence then a school should be informed and evidence provided if requested so no penalty is even issued, but that can also be used as grounds for an appeal against the penalty.
If the penalty is not paid within the period then the amount owed increases to something a bit more painful. If that remains unpaid the breach is reported to the courts who take-over the proceedings and can issue much harsher penalties - including that bailiffs come around and take your flatscreen TV.
I haven't ever been through the process, but that is my understanding of it based on talking with someone who has.
This thread reminds me of an item I saw long ago on HTV - back when they still existed.
It was a report on truancy with a reporter following a council truancy officer around the streets of Cardiff or Swansea. They are strolling down a main street towards a park and he is saying "This is a an area you always find a few kids - like there" and he points to a girl sitting on a bench reading a book and drinking pop. He walks up to her - all full of his own importance - and demands "Why aren't you in school"?
The girl looks up at him and - in the most scathing tone the world has ever heard - snaps "Because I'm 23 you idiot".
I laugh about it still ;)
My little girl starts school in September, we don't even know which school yet but we have booked to go to Lapland for Xmas for our friends wedding, I am best man. It's going to be on the last day of term before they break up for Xmas so I am going to have to take her out for 2 days. I will pay the fine but my wife is stressing what if they say no.
I don't agree with this at all, I thought the government was supposed to be looking into the travel companies actions at school holidays but we all know they will and have done nothing about it.
Last edited by Martylaa; 10th April 2015 at 13:45.
Well if the law is the law, and absence due to holidays is not permitted how can one school abide by it and others turn a blind eye? After all it's the law.
I would be very surprised if anyone makes an issue of a primary age (is the impression I get?) child leaving two days before xmas break-up to attend a family wedding - which it clearly is given you are close enough to be best man. More so if she is to be a flower girl. Or something ;)
Speak to the head about it - they are actually allowed to authorise absences in undefined exceptional circumstances, and this might well qualify. Actually, weddings would probably be classed as "religious observances", in which case the Act seems to suggest you would have every right to take her out of school...
Failing that, kids get sick a lot in late winter.
There is wiggle-room in the act - it relies on the school first identifying an attendance issue which they may or may not choose to deal with through the penalty system initially.
These sort of rules really wind me up. A friend of mine took his two kids out of school for a holiday earlier this year, and nada, zip, not a thing was said. No fine.
I thought long and hard about taking my kids out of school for a holiday this year and I am going to do it. If I get a fine, so be it, I will pay it, but I do think it's an unfair system. My daughter (7) has not missed a day since school started last September and my boy is only 3, so not even of the required age by law to attend school.
What makes things even more confusing with the school my kids attend is the fact that Christmas time we received a letter off the school saying that if a pupils attendance is 98% or above over 3 terms then 5 days authorised absence would be permitted. We then get a text message saying that the school will not be giving out authorised absence forms for holidays. If you want one you have to write to the schools governors and that time off will only be given in exceptional circumstances.
Why would you need time off school if it wasn't for a holiday.
As was written earlier: ´If the school identifies an problem with attendance they request of the council / education authority that a penalty be issued against the child's parents or guardians.´
Since not all kids nor parents are the same, the school should imo not treat them all with the same rigidity.
If the child scores well above average and the parents are ditto involved than a a few days should imo not be identified as a problem. The problem in such a case would basically be the size of the box in which the school management mind sits.
But there we have it again; do rules serve the purpose of things going more or less smoothly or is applying the rules the purpose.
The law maybe the law but there always is the spririt/purpose of the law to be considered. Authorities don´t like that though as it is percieved as undermining it ánd fines are a wonderfull source of income of course.
With it, the kids learn that sticking to the rules is more important than using common sense. Great for the State, less so for the kids.
You want me to give a list?
Not everybody lives in suburbia with the school in the area.
That is not even going néar eduction not being the same as attending school.
Again; whát is the purpose of the school system?
Please do because hospital appointments and such have to be allowed for, and I don't think you need authorised absence in the event of a family emergency of some kind.
The point is that you cannot see any reason whereas I can.
I see at as my responsiblity to raise a responsible adult with an ample tool kit of basic knowlegde. Attending school is párt of that. It schoild not stnad in the way of it.
I think going to the training days of a race a friend; being hands on part of it in the paddock is a reason.
Ditto learning how to ski.
Helping out with the matanza.
Spending time with the grand parents when those are over from abroad.
Joining me on a study trip abroad and learn more english or french in a week than he would in a year at school.
Going on an archeology or survival camp in say Belgium which happens to have different hollidays.
Competing in free climbing style events which are far away and need the Friday and or Monday for travel.
Etcetera. There are só many thing which are very valuable learning experiences which simply happen to coincide with school hours. As the responsible parent who is held accountable for the behaviour of his kid I have the RIGHT to decide.
He is a well above average* student and we make sure he keeps up with the program when not attending so he misses out on nothing but does get a lot extra. I have negotiated that he well get bonus points on his fysical education notes for every climbing final he reaches.
I don´t see why I should be fined for being a resonsible parent beyond and above the system designed for the average.
That covered I need to mention that it annoys me to no end that the school itself is ludicrously flexible with teaching hours when a teacher is sick or absent. My kid can learn a whole lot more at home than several hours of ... nothing at school. My kid has the good sense to do homework and study but even that is not always possible because the school does not even provide a suitable surrounding for that when classes are cancelled.
Dûh.
The way it is we have our son do work in advance, prepare the program, when a teacher is off for a prolonged period so that by the end of the year hé is not getting a compressed/hurried package to deal with.
* proving my point since he is quite average and has a double handicap of being a ´giri´ (a negative word for foreigner) and not a native spreaker.
That's good to hear, we find out her school next week, so i may have a visit once the school is confirmed to ask about it.
Kids are ill quite often so they are used to teaching a class with absent kids. They manage to catch up just fine. Especially with younger kids it really does them no harm. If they are about to sit their GCSE's then that is probably a different matter.
AFAIK the law does not apply to Reception.
"Bite my shiny metal ass."
- Bender Bending Rodríguez
It seems a bit extreme to me. What will do the child more harm, missing a week of school or the Balifs visiting their parents house?
I expect loads of parents just pull sickies with their kids anyway and I don't think the holiday companies are to blame, it's just supply and demand. It works both ways, there's less demand outside of school holidays so they have to charge low prices accordingly.
Was it an educational trip, doesn’t seem to be from what I’ve read. If parents choose to lie about their child’s absence then the school certainly does 'have a leg to stand on’.
The parents appealed and lost. Despite that, they then chose not to pay the Court fine and as a result the bailiffs became involved: what else could they expect?
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Really, that's even better, will ask my wife about this, maybe she will stop stressing then...
Quick update on this chaps. I went to see the head teacher in my kids school about taking my kids out for a holiday during term time and she informed me that although my boy is only 3, because I chose to enter him into the school system, the system regarding holidays during term time applies to him too..
There has been a major ´incident´ with the class my son is in. Only six of 28 are not involved but 5 of the parallel class are.
Four have immediately been suspended for FIFTEEN DAYS!!!
Another six for a week as per coming Monday.
The rest has other penalties applied.
The suspended kids are for the largest part those who nééd to attend most. They see this as a holiday.
The school and the system are not dealing with this at all well and the six well behaved kids are also suffering now under a clamp down and are experiencing punishment too.
The teahcers are serously dropping the ball just as they time and again do; making the good suffer under the bad.
The TOTALLY fail to reward good behavior in ány way.
My son was one of the six not involved yet feels punished for that ánd the incident.
How do those morons expect I keep him motivated to behave well??!!
All in all it is a clear example of what I need PROTECT him from.
I have requested an emergency talk with the class teacher. Since she knows what I will have to say there has been no respons. Next is a request to speak with the head master.
If that is not forthcoming I will write to the regional inspection listing the sequence and request a meeting thére.
I am not having any second thoughts about keeping my boy from school and teach him important stuff and ethics. The system is nót holy, just a portal to the company store society we live in.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 17th April 2015 at 12:31.
Posting Permissions