Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Faye
    • By MSE Faye 6th Apr 17, 8:59 AM
    • 146Posts
    • 55Thanks
    MSE Faye
    Supreme Court: Parents CAN'T take kids on term-time holiday without risking a fine
    • #1
    • 6th Apr 17, 8:59 AM
    Supreme Court: Parents CAN'T take kids on term-time holiday without risking a fine 6th Apr 17 at 8:59 AM
    Justices ruled against Jon Platt, a father who'd refused to pay a fine for taking his daughter out of school...
    Read the full story:
    'Supreme Court: Parents CAN'T take kids on term-time holiday without risking a fine'

    Click reply below to discuss. If you havenít already, join the forum to reply. If you arenít sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
    See the latest news from MoneySavingExpertNews
    Follow the MSE on Twitter: @MoneySavingExp
    Get Martin's Money Tips
    Join the MSE Forum
Page 1
    • VT82
    • By VT82 6th Apr 17, 9:10 AM
    • 1,039 Posts
    • 878 Thanks
    VT82
    • #2
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:10 AM
    • #2
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:10 AM
    The law on this has been screwed up ever since the figure of '£60' appeared out of thin air. This turned what was a moral decision for parents into a straightforward financial one, and was such a ball drop by the government who are so obsessed with putting figures on things. I'm just surprised they didn't link the fine to inflation for a change!!!
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 6th Apr 17, 9:17 AM
    • 15,098 Posts
    • 14,796 Thanks
    Guest101
    • #3
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:17 AM
    • #3
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:17 AM
    Could be a vote winner for the opposition....


    (it's a shame MSE didn't link the actual case notes)
    • Browntoa
    • By Browntoa 6th Apr 17, 9:22 AM
    • 35,034 Posts
    • 41,119 Thanks
    Browntoa
    • #4
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:22 AM
    • #4
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:22 AM
    The guy didn't go himself any favours in interviews , claim over as slightly arrogant in my eyes

    At least the laws clear now on both sides

    As someone who likes quieter flights and hotels I deliberately holiday during term time rather than late June to early September.
    • gabriel1980
    • By gabriel1980 6th Apr 17, 9:25 AM
    • 265 Posts
    • 478 Thanks
    gabriel1980
    • #5
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:25 AM
    • #5
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:25 AM
    I wouldn't have paid the fine either, I honestly don't think the school should have the right to issue a fine.
    • thorsoak
    • By thorsoak 6th Apr 17, 9:49 AM
    • 5,912 Posts
    • 27,557 Thanks
    thorsoak
    • #6
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:49 AM
    • #6
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:49 AM
    So, what about the youth workers and school holiday club workers who are contracted to work through school holidays - when are they supposed to take their children on holiday?
  • jamesd
    • #7
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:58 AM
    • #7
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:58 AM
    Best to solve this by widely varying the school holidays between regions so that there is no financial incentive in the holiday prices because there is no significant crowding.

    Pity also the poor parents who are subject to criminal prosecution if their child is absent from school on a day that is a mandatory religious holiday for the religion of the child and not one of the parents.
    Last edited by jamesd; 06-04-2017 at 10:09 AM.
    • MABLE
    • By MABLE 6th Apr 17, 9:59 AM
    • 3,834 Posts
    • 2,015 Thanks
    MABLE
    • #8
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:59 AM
    • #8
    • 6th Apr 17, 9:59 AM
    Too right. Can you imagine what would happen if the Supreme court had upheld the original decision. Holidays companies would capitalise on this and as a result they would increase their holidays.
    • LKRDN_Morgan
    • By LKRDN_Morgan 6th Apr 17, 10:01 AM
    • 294 Posts
    • 932 Thanks
    LKRDN_Morgan
    • #9
    • 6th Apr 17, 10:01 AM
    • #9
    • 6th Apr 17, 10:01 AM
    Oh well. Still cheaper to take the fine than pay for the same holiday outside of term time.
    • worldtraveller
    • By worldtraveller 6th Apr 17, 10:11 AM
    • 12,569 Posts
    • 26,665 Thanks
    worldtraveller
    Clearly it was the correct ruling.
    Last edited by worldtraveller; 06-04-2017 at 10:14 AM.
    There is a pleasure in the pathless woods, There is a rapture on the lonely shore, There is society, where none intrudes, By the deep sea, and music in its roar: I love not man the less, but Nature more...
    • harz99
    • By harz99 6th Apr 17, 10:18 AM
    • 2,861 Posts
    • 2,812 Thanks
    harz99
    IMHO you have to be very foolish not to just pay the £60 per child/occasion and just get on with your life if you wish to take the child out of school during term time.


    As others have said, it's very little compared to the additional cost during school holiday periods.


    As long as the head-teachers retain and use flexibility regarding the very, very, few people whose jobs don't allow them to organise and take family holidays within the school holiday periods I don't see the problem, and the matter is certainly not worth dragging through the courts any further.
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 6th Apr 17, 10:18 AM
    • 15,098 Posts
    • 14,796 Thanks
    Guest101
    Clearly it was the correct ruling.
    Originally posted by worldtraveller


    You seem to assume that everyone agrees with you?
    • worldtraveller
    • By worldtraveller 6th Apr 17, 10:24 AM
    • 12,569 Posts
    • 26,665 Thanks
    worldtraveller
    You seem to assume that everyone agrees with you?
    Originally posted by Guest101
    Not at all. I just don't understand why a parent would, now clearly illegally, take a child out of school purely to suit their holiday plans, causing disruption to the childs education, the education of others in the school and the teacher. IMHO, it's just yet another symptom of the "me, me, me" society that we live in today.

    I just hope that Mr Platt is not hoping to go to the USA on holiday again with his child in future, or on his own, as he may well end up with a criminal record and therefore banned from entry to that country.
    Last edited by worldtraveller; 06-04-2017 at 10:36 AM.
    There is a pleasure in the pathless woods, There is a rapture on the lonely shore, There is society, where none intrudes, By the deep sea, and music in its roar: I love not man the less, but Nature more...
    • Gavin83
    • By Gavin83 6th Apr 17, 10:30 AM
    • 5,946 Posts
    • 10,186 Thanks
    Gavin83
    I think this was the correct ruling and parents should be fined for this. At the end of the day the state is funding your children's education, if you wish to remove them from school for that period you should be expected to pay it back. I've no problem with the actual action but you should be prepared to pay. I'd put it in the same category as those who skip doctors appointments, I think they should be made to pay too.

    Having children is an expensive luxury and you should be prepared to pay for them. If you want cheaper holidays then don't have children.
    • One-Eye
    • By One-Eye 6th Apr 17, 10:36 AM
    • 46,705 Posts
    • 7,174,141 Thanks
    One-Eye
    Yet another government failure to make a law that is clear and achieves the desired purpose. If they wanted to stop term-time holidays, then that's what the law should have said. Instead it is about "regular attendance" without ever defining what regular attendance means.

    The Supreme Court now says:
    "regularly" means in "accordance with the rules prescribed by the school."
    ... so they have handed total responsibility to individual headteachers - who are not universally known for being reasonable.

    If you have kids at school you should immediately write to the headteacher demanding a written definition of the school's regular attendance rules.

    Jon Platt's case now goes back to the Magistrates Court. He might still win if the school can not prove that they had "prescribed rules" on attendance prior to April 2015 and that he breached them.
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 6th Apr 17, 10:38 AM
    • 15,098 Posts
    • 14,796 Thanks
    Guest101
    Not at all. I just don't understand why a parent would, now clearly illegally - let's be fair here, there's no need to criminalise parents over trivial matters- , take a child out of school purely to suit their holiday plans - perhaps they are on a low income and want their child to experience other cultures, or have an enjoyable time, or simply think it's in their interest to spend family time together or any number of reasons. , causing disruption to the childs education - the education system is a joke and missing out on a week is hardly going to affect the child, no matter what the DOE claim. and the education of others in the school - the government does that nicely all by itself. . IMHO, it's just yet another symptom of the "me, me, me" society that we live in today. - You're entitled to your opinion, but it's not. teachers spend about 70% of their time on 20-30% of their students. Those who are bright receive almost no support and are unable to 'overachieve'. Due to chronic underfunding teachers are forced to work at the lowest common denominator.

    I just hope that Mr Platt is not hoping to go to the USA on holiday again with his child in future, or on his own, as he may well end up with a criminal record and therefore banned from entry to that country. - don't be silly. he simply needs to attend the embassy and explain the situation (though why wou'd want to visit is beyond me)
    Originally posted by worldtraveller


    So why use 'clearly', why not in my opinion.


    It's like saying 'clearly anyone who voted for trump was sexist' - it's not true, but you make out that anyone who disagrees with you is perhaps dim.


    (im not saying you said that, just using an example)
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 6th Apr 17, 10:41 AM
    • 15,098 Posts
    • 14,796 Thanks
    Guest101
    I think this was the correct ruling and parents should be fined for this. At the end of the day the state is funding your children's education, if you wish to remove them from school for that period you should be expected to pay it back. I've no problem with the actual action but you should be prepared to pay. I'd put it in the same category as those who skip doctors appointments, I think they should be made to pay too.

    Having children is an expensive luxury and you should be prepared to pay for them. If you want cheaper holidays then don't have children.
    Originally posted by Gavin83


    Don't the children deserve a holiday?
    • One-Eye
    • By One-Eye 6th Apr 17, 10:47 AM
    • 46,705 Posts
    • 7,174,141 Thanks
    One-Eye
    Lady Hale, said: “Unauthorised absences have a disruptive effect ...on the work of other pupils."
    I really don't get this. I can think of many kids whose presence in school has a disruptive effect, but none whose absence would. And why does she think it is only unauthorised absences that have such effects.


    Last edited by One-Eye; 06-04-2017 at 10:50 AM.
    • Guest101
    • By Guest101 6th Apr 17, 10:51 AM
    • 15,098 Posts
    • 14,796 Thanks
    Guest101
    I really don't get this. I can think of many kids whose presence in school has a disruptive effect, but none whose absence would.
    Originally posted by One-Eye


    The reality is teachers have crowded class room and a lack of assistants - often relying on volunteers (many of whom are fully qualified) because of lack of funding.


    Therefore teachers spend more time with the pupils most in need, whilst those with the potential to excel are ignored.
    • tensandunits
    • By tensandunits 6th Apr 17, 10:53 AM
    • 813 Posts
    • 1,218 Thanks
    tensandunits
    The guy didn't go himself any favours in interviews , claim over as slightly arrogant in my eyes

    At least the laws clear now on both sides

    As someone who likes quieter flights and hotels I deliberately holiday during term time rather than late June to early September.
    Originally posted by Browntoa
    Likewise, we try to avoid school-age children (and tourist season) when we book days out. Weekdays during term time seem to be the safest bet.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,761Posts Today

8,186Users online

Martin's Twitter