School uniform and benefits

Poppy9

GlasweJen wrote: »

For me it's more that they moved areas without jobs or lining up a school placement.

perhaps OP had no choice in moving areas. Redundancy, ill health etc. could have meant the OP had their home repossessed or could no longer afford the rent so had to move to cheaper area or into social housing and this was the only place offered.

Maybe they had to flea domestic violence!

I am concerned that the LEA took so long to sort out a school for her DD though.

In my LEA you get a uniform grant but only for Y7. Most schools carry a supply of uniform if you are in need though from donated items, lost property or left overs from 6th form "uniform swap" with they organise as part of their community work.

FBaby

Dunroamin wrote: »

Unfortunately, many families are no longer prepared to make sacrifices to support their children's education, despite the government providing the funds to do so.

Totally agree. Familes on low income get plenty of child tax credits. They get child benefits which the 'well-off' have to do without now. This money should go on such things as school uniforms and the rest. It is income for the CHILDREN specifically, not for the family. Not to pay the bills (except what can be directly attributed to the children and even then it could be debatable). If the same family didn't have children, they would still need to pay for their bills without what they get in benefits because they have children.

The difference between what a couple without children on JSA gets and what the same couple not working with children get is significant. This IS the extra money that should go on such things as appropriate uniforms, school trips etc...

notanewuser

HotBubblegum wrote: »

Im not sure if this is the right place for this thread, but i cant find anywhere else suitable to put it.
We moved area to the west midlands at the beginning of Oct 2012. I approached the local authority so my daughter who has just turned 14, could attend a local school. I received the forms and sent them back.

<snip>

We are a family who unfortunate because of the move, in receipt of JSA until we can find jobs.

Poppy9 wrote: »

perhaps OP had no choice in moving areas. Redundancy, ill health etc. could have meant the OP had their home repossessed or could no longer afford the rent so had to move to cheaper area or into social housing and this was the only place offered.

Maybe they had to flea domestic violence!

.

The OP makes it sound like there are 2 adults as well as the child.

dori2o

FBaby wrote: »

Totally agree. Familes on low income get plenty of child tax credits. They get child benefits which the 'well-off' have to do without now. This money should go on such things as school uniforms and the rest. It is income for the CHILDREN specifically, not for the family. Not to pay the bills (except what can be directly attributed to the children and even then it could be debatable). If the same family didn't have children, they would still need to pay for their bills without what they get in benefits because they have children.

The difference between what a couple without children on JSA gets and what the same couple not working with children get is significant. This IS the extra money that should go on such things as appropriate uniforms, school trips etc...

We save throughout the year for school Uniforms, and often have to buy more around this time of year as they (especially the younger one) grow out of clothes so fast.

BUT, why on earth should it cost £150+ for a school uniform. There is absolutely no justification anyone can give for the costs to be so high.

And whilst some people do get benefits there are other things that those benefits are spent on. School dinners (not everyone gets them free), bus fares, school trips, stationary, sports equipment (football boots, hockey sticks, tennis gear etc). Thats without mentioning non-school related spending.

I have no problems buying school uniforms. What I have a problem with is schools forcing you to 1 supplier who just happen to be amongst the most expensive places to shop.

People claim it is to stop the stigma of children who have asda trousers etc as opposed to expensive brands, yet these same people say you should buy the stuff 2nd hand. Isn't there still the same stigma that you have 2nd hand clothes as opposed to cheaper alternatives?

As I said earlier, if it was just a blazer or a jumper that was a necessity and everything else could be sourced at the parents discretion I wouldn't have a problem, but FORCING parents to spend such sums on something which quite frankly isn't all that important in the education of children, when purse strings are being tightened ever further is wrong.

If I put my child in clothes bought from Tesco alongside a child who bought theirs from the schools supplier, I can guarantee nobody would tell the difference, or think that one was better than the other.

silvercar

And whilst some people do get benefits there are other things that those benefits are spent on. School dinners (not everyone gets them free), bus fares, school trips, stationary, sports equipment (football boots, hockey sticks, tennis gear etc).

But this child hasn't been in school for 4 months, so none of this expenditure would be required.

notanewuser

dori2o wrote: »

I have no problems buying school uniforms. What I have a problem with is schools forcing you to 1 supplier who just happen to be amongst the most expensive places to shop.

.

Do you really not know why?! It's because the school get a kickback!!

dori2o

silvercar wrote: »

But this child hasn't been in school for 4 months, so none of this expenditure would be required.

I was looking at the whole picture rather than just the OP's situation.

Dunroamin

dori2o wrote: »

We save throughout the year for school Uniforms, and often have to buy more around this time of year as they (especially the younger one) grow out of clothes so fast.

BUT, why on earth should it cost £150+ for a school uniform. There is absolutely no justification anyone can give for the costs to be so high.

And whilst some people do get benefits there are other things that those benefits are spent on. School dinners (not everyone gets them free), bus fares, school trips, stationary, sports equipment (football boots, hockey sticks, tennis gear etc). Thats without mentioning non-school related spending.

I have no problems buying school uniforms. What I have a problem with is schools forcing you to 1 supplier who just happen to be amongst the most expensive places to shop.

People claim it is to stop the stigma of children who have asda trousers etc as opposed to expensive brands, yet these same people say you should buy the stuff 2nd hand. Isn't there still the same stigma that you have 2nd hand clothes as opposed to cheaper alternatives?

As I said earlier, if it was just a blazer or a jumper that was a necessity and everything else could be sourced at the parents discretion I wouldn't have a problem, but FORCING parents to spend such sums on something which quite frankly isn't all that important in the education of children, when purse strings are being tightened ever further is wrong.

If I put my child in clothes bought from Tesco alongside a child who bought theirs from the schools supplier, I can guarantee nobody would tell the difference, or think that one was better than the other.

School uniform is dirt cheap these days and not that expensive even if bought from exclusive shops. You seem to think that £150 is a high price to pay but that doesn't seem a lot to me to buy the clothes a child will be wearing 5 days a week for about 40 weeks a year. There are many parents who would baulk at this amount but think nothing of paying the same price for an expensive pair of trainers and a couple of pairs of designer jeans.

Sometimes it's all about priorities.

satarical

Dunroamin wrote: »

School uniform is dirt cheap these days and not that expensive even if bought from exclusive shops. You seem to think that £150 is a high price to pay but that doesn't seem a lot to me to buy the clothes a child will be wearing 5 days a week for about 40 weeks a year. There are many parents who would baulk at this amount but think nothing of paying the same price for an expensive pair of trainers and a couple of pairs of designer jeans.

Sometimes it's all about priorities.

Well done!!!!!

Children must be your first priority. Whether it be clothing or food. The last thing a child needs is to be made to feel 'different' - they must be able to fit in with their peers.

My twin girls cost us a fortune when they started grammar school, especially the school holidays to the Alps, America as well as the Great Wall of China that they had to go on to be with their friends.
School uniform is a very important part of being 'the same'.

My 12 year old grand daughter came home a week or two back and asked (because mum suggested!!!) if we could buy her two horses!! Uhhh - two? Why two? 'Because my friend has two and I just love going riding with her on their farm - if I had two then she could come riding with me?'

That might sound over the top but to her it was very important.

mumps

Dunroamin wrote: »

School uniform is dirt cheap these days and not that expensive even if bought from exclusive shops. You seem to think that £150 is a high price to pay but that doesn't seem a lot to me to buy the clothes a child will be wearing 5 days a week for about 40 weeks a year. There are many parents who would baulk at this amount but think nothing of paying the same price for an expensive pair of trainers and a couple of pairs of designer jeans.

Sometimes it's all about priorities.

You might be surprised at how much "special" uniform items cost from these suppliers. My DD, she left school four years ago, went to a school with a smart uniform but some changes were made. As one example the girls could no longer wear the sort of white blouses you can buy anywhere, you know long or short sleeves, open collar. These blouses could be bought for about £2 each. Suddenly they had to wear a white blouse with an open collar, looked identical under school jumper, but with three quarter sleeves and designed to be worn over skirt not tucked in. They cost £16 each and for the life of me I can't see what they added of any value. My daughter never had one of these blouses as girls already at the school could continue to wear the original blouses until they needed new ones. She never needed a new blouse!