Nice People Thread Part 9 - and so it continues

michaels

We moved when I was about 8 and eldest sister was 9 I think one of the main reasons was the catchment area secondary had a poor reputation (it was the former secondary modern hereas the former grammar was on the other side of town but we moved about 15 miles and went to a different former secondary but witout the bad reputation.

I might know of a property that is in the catchement area for arguably the best primary and secondary schools in a town renowned for its schools which attract a lot of 'moving out of Londoners', only draw back is it is a 40 minute walk to the station but there are lots of buses and parking at the staton either of which would probably make it about 1hr door to Canary Wharf tube station. 3/4 bed detached on a large plot so could spend 100k on it and have a large modern property on a big private plot. Happy to entertain offers of 600k or would consider rent to buy options....

michaels

PasturesNew wrote: »

Maybe chewy needs to look at the issue from a different angle.

Could he not ditch the OH and find a single woman with kids who already lives in the right house/area?

But wouldn't that result in the Chewie genes not being propogated...as you said, win-win

PasturesNew

michaels wrote: »

But wouldn't that result in the Chewie genes not being propogated...as you said, win-win

He could get her to pop out another one

Maybe source one that has just one sickly child.

chewmylegoff

PasturesNew wrote: »

Maybe chewy needs to look at the issue from a different angle.

Could he not ditch the OH and find a single woman with kids who already lives in the right house/area?

This was plan A+, but then I found out you don't have any kids.

PasturesNew

I have Facebook.... never got on with it.

But, I've made a Facebook page, for "promoting !!!!!!".... and it's weird. I made a post on it but there's one of those "little moving bars of colour" that would indicate it's still posting/waiting ..... it's been ages. Made a post, and it did that, changed my mind about my first post so deleted that and made a 2nd and it's making the funny little markers.

I have no confidence it's doing much.

I just returned to the page, 10 minutes after 'posting', I thought I'd refresh the page but it tells me it's still doing something.

Facebook's never worked for me.

The first 2-3 years I "didn't get it" as when I landed on the page and went to try to find my friends, as I moused over anything everything just disappeared. And I didn't know that wasn't supposed to happen.... just assumed it was !!!!... which it is of course.

PasturesNew

chewmylegoff wrote: »

This was plan A+, but then I found out you don't have any kids.

I also don't live anywhere near London .... and don't have deep pockets to pay for your elevated lifestyle and expectations.

silvercar

PasturesNew wrote: »

I have Facebook.... never got on with it.

But, I've made a Facebook page, for "promoting !!!!!!".... and it's weird. I made a post on it but there's one of those "little moving bars of colour" that would indicate it's still posting/waiting ..... it's been ages. Made a post, and it did that, changed my mind about my first post so deleted that and made a 2nd and it's making the funny little markers.

I have no confidence it's doing much.

It isn't. I have never found the moving bars of colour last more than 3 seconds.

silvercar

LydiaJ wrote: »

Not unreasonable at all. I wouldn't leave it as long as Thursday. You have enough on your plate without medical issues, however minor, adding to the rest of it.

I agree. If the receptionist cannot find you an appointment you ask to speak to the practice manager. Today.

PasturesNew

silvercar wrote: »

I agree. If the receptionist cannot find you an appointment you ask to speak to the practice manager. Today.

This is why people [a] don't bother go to A&E.

Either there is an appointment at a suitable time, or there isn't. It shouldn't be dependent upon having special insider info (e.g. that there is a practice manager and to speak to them) you can get an appointment that didn't exist.

The other thing they ask is "is it urgent?" I've no idea often..... that's why I'm going to see a Doctor. To find out if it's urgent! So the answer usually has to be "dunno".

LydiaJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

As far as I can make out it is still effectively like that in Surrey. Although you can select your preferences, the schools' admission policies are that children with siblings already at the school get first priority, then children for whom that school is closest to their home (closer you are the higher your priority), then if any other places left after that they are doled out to the next closest applicants.

I doubt there is any spare capacity at any half decent school, so really you need to make sure your closest two schools are decent just in case your closest is completely oversubscribed.

If you can't get into the closest one, you probably won't get into the next closest one unless it's not terribly good because there will be lots of others who live closer than you. Often the families who miss out worst are the ones who live quite close to two schools but not quite close enough to either of them. But it's not necessary to guess about these things. Schools may make information available online, or if not then you can ask them and get it, so it is always possible to find out roughly how close you have to live to be sure of getting in.

DS was in year 4 when LNE died and the life insurance suddenly made it possible for me to stop renting and buy a house. With my eldest at that age, obviously secondary catchment was a big consideration for me. I considered the area where I was willing to commute to my job from, and decided which school I thought would suit him best. Its policy was "siblings and then everyone else in order of closeness". During the three years up to when I was looking, the furthest non-sibling to be given a place had been at a distance of 1.1 mile, then 1.2 miles, and then 0.9 mile. I drew myself a rightmove "drawn area" of 0.8 mile round the school, and felt safe I wouldn't have to worry about a second choice.

PasturesNew wrote: »

I was never aware of anybody talking about schools etc when I was growing up - or until very recent years.

My dad bought a house in a village he liked, that was close to his job. He was nearly laid off in the following year, so if we'd moved a year later we'd have been nearer to where his job relocated to.

People bought what they could afford in the places they liked. Schools weren't thought about. There was no way of knowing/measuring back then except to drive past and see if it looked rough.

I'm sure that was true of your parents and their friends. But then they were living in a rural area (where schools tend to be better anyway) and other things you've said about them suggest that they weren't the sort to invest large amounts of thought, effort and money in making sure you and your siblings got the best start in life they could manage. I still think that among more middle class and/or "aspirational" parents, especially in big cities, choosing a house with school catchment in mind became widespread as soon as most counties gave up on the 11+ and introduced comprehensive schools. I agree there's even more of it now that there is more information more easily available about schools, but it's been happening for decades - as michaels' example demonstrates.