Is this residency fraud?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try no probability of being caught because parents have the right to claim a DC residence they own and do not rent out as their legal domicile in the District.

Not if a parent does not live there. If the parents were divorced and shared custody, then yes you can use either address without counting the number of days in each place. But that isn't OP's situation. Grandma, not a legal guardian, lives in that apartment. To use your terms, she is "renting" that apartment, even if the rent paid is $0. The important thing is that neither the child nor any legal guardian of the child lives in that apartment.

Funny how when poor black families use grandma's address, it's a problem, but not when rich OP is essentially doing the same thing.

The only difference is that she's rich enough to own the property. (I think it's wrong in both cases.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

I also don’t like residency fraud (including arrangements like OP’s) for this reason—it means poor/middle class kids are less likely to lottery into good schools—but also for admittedly selfish reasons.

+1. Our IB is has a growing percentage of IB families, although much lower IB overall than the JKLMs. When people like OP pull these sorts of shenanigans, it means that other IB families that actually live in the neighborhood are more likely to get waitlisted for PK3/4. When this happens, they go to other schools, like HRCS. Once they start down a different path, some stay on it. That means fewer actual IB families at the school. OP and others like her undermine the sense of community that comes with families in the same neighborhood at the school. Families doing what OP is doing are less likely to make the trek across town for evening school activities, no play dates since they don’t want to give away their arrangement, no bumping into each other at the playground, etc.

This is why I find what OP is doing annoying—both for the “buying” her way into a school, and the undermined sense of community at our neighborhood school. I’m not annoyed enough to follow them home or report them, but TBH I wouldn’t mind if someone else did.

Come on, the grandmother will be in the hood, presumably for many years, taking care of the child after school. I seldom have time for PTA meetings, chaperoning field trips, parents' breakfasts at the school etc., but my mom, who lives nearer to our school than I do, goes to all that stuff for the family, and loves it. She's normally the one who bumps into my children's classmates at neighborhood playgrounds. What I find annoying is when vigilante parents start hassling parents who own IB. Go ahead, report moms like OP. You might be doing them a favor. They'll get cleared if they have a stack of residency docs, and own IB without renting a place out. Then they can go on their merry way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try no probability of being caught because parents have the right to claim a DC residence they own and do not rent out as their legal domicile in the District.

Not if a parent does not live there. If the parents were divorced and shared custody, then yes you can use either address without counting the number of days in each place. But that isn't OP's situation. Grandma, not a legal guardian, lives in that apartment. To use your terms, she is "renting" that apartment, even if the rent paid is $0. The important thing is that neither the child nor any legal guardian of the child lives in that apartment.

Funny how when poor black families use grandma's address, it's a problem, but not when rich OP is essentially doing the same thing.

The only difference is that she's rich enough to own the property. (I think it's wrong in both cases.)

Exactly!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try no probability of being caught because parents have the right to claim a DC residence they own and do not rent out as their legal domicile in the District.

Not if a parent does not live there. If the parents were divorced and shared custody, then yes you can use either address without counting the number of days in each place. But that isn't OP's situation. Grandma, not a legal guardian, lives in that apartment. To use your terms, she is "renting" that apartment, even if the rent paid is $0. The important thing is that neither the child nor any legal guardian of the child lives in that apartment.

Funny how when poor black families use grandma's address, it's a problem, but not when rich OP is essentially doing the same thing.

The only difference is that she's rich enough to own the property. (I think it's wrong in both cases.)

A problem to whom? Our IB DCPS is obviously not short on poor black families using grandma's address, because they need the childcare extended family provides in the evenings. They seem to be left alone by DCPS, and other IB families. FIne with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try no probability of being caught because parents have the right to claim a DC residence they own and do not rent out as their legal domicile in the District.

Not if a parent does not live there. If the parents were divorced and shared custody, then yes you can use either address without counting the number of days in each place. But that isn't OP's situation. Grandma, not a legal guardian, lives in that apartment. To use your terms, she is "renting" that apartment, even if the rent paid is $0. The important thing is that neither the child nor any legal guardian of the child lives in that apartment.

Funny how when poor black families use grandma's address, it's a problem, but not when rich OP is essentially doing the same thing.

The only difference is that she's rich enough to own the property. (I think it's wrong in both cases.)

A problem to whom? Our IB DCPS is obviously not short on poor black families using grandma's address, because they need the childcare extended family provides in the evenings. They seem to be left alone by DCPS, and other IB families. FIne with us.

PP here. I was referencing the many comments about using "Grandma's address" on DCUM. Apparently OP is not subject to the same derision because she is "one of us" not them( affluent, etc.).

[Anonymous]

Not buying the derision thing. You guys need hobbies, pets, a life. Live yours and leave OP and the grandmothers alone. Enough already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

+1. I also don’t like residency fraud (including arrangements like OP’s) for this reason—it means poor/middle class kids are less likely to lottery into good schools—but also for admittedly selfish reasons.

Our IB is has a growing percentage of IB families, although much lower IB overall than the JKLMs. When people like OP pull these sorts of shenanigans, it means that other IB families that actually live in the neighborhood are more likely to get waitlisted for PK3/4. When this happens, they go to other schools, like HRCS. Once they start down a different path, some stay on it. That means fewer actual IB families at the school. OP and others like her undermine the sense of community that comes with families in the same neighborhood at the school. Families doing what OP is doing are less likely to make the trek across town for evening school activities, no play dates since they don’t want to give away their arrangement, no bumping into each other at the playground, etc.

This is why I find what OP is doing annoying—both for the “buying” her way into a school, and the undermined sense of community at our neighborhood school. I’m not annoyed enough to follow them home or report them, but TBH I wouldn’t mind if someone else did.

Not impressed. You read this sort of wimpy post on most of the threads about school residency. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Follow them "home," report them, film them, chat with your principal etc. rather than hoping somebody else will. Alternatively, live and let live, since you can't get families that own IB and don't rent their places out busted, not under the current residency verification system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Try no probability of being caught because parents have the right to claim a DC residence they own and do not rent out as their legal domicile in the District.

Not if a parent does not live there. If the parents were divorced and shared custody, then yes you can use either address without counting the number of days in each place. But that isn't OP's situation. Grandma, not a legal guardian, lives in that apartment. To use your terms, she is "renting" that apartment, even if the rent paid is $0. The important thing is that neither the child nor any legal guardian of the child lives in that apartment.

Funny how when poor black families use grandma's address, it's a problem, but not when rich OP is essentially doing the same thing.

The only difference is that she's rich enough to own the property. (I think it's wrong in both cases.)

But I was saying it is a problem when the rich person does this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not buying the derision thing. You guys need hobbies, pets, a life. Live yours and leave OP and the grandmothers alone. Enough already.

OP asked for opinions, idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

+1. I also don’t like residency fraud (including arrangements like OP’s) for this reason—it means poor/middle class kids are less likely to lottery into good schools—but also for admittedly selfish reasons.

Our IB is has a growing percentage of IB families, although much lower IB overall than the JKLMs. When people like OP pull these sorts of shenanigans, it means that other IB families that actually live in the neighborhood are more likely to get waitlisted for PK3/4. When this happens, they go to other schools, like HRCS. Once they start down a different path, some stay on it. That means fewer actual IB families at the school. OP and others like her undermine the sense of community that comes with families in the same neighborhood at the school. Families doing what OP is doing are less likely to make the trek across town for evening school activities, no play dates since they don’t want to give away their arrangement, no bumping into each other at the playground, etc.

This is why I find what OP is doing annoying—both for the “buying” her way into a school, and the undermined sense of community at our neighborhood school. I’m not annoyed enough to follow them home or report them, but TBH I wouldn’t mind if someone else did.

Not impressed. You read this sort of wimpy post on most of the threads about school residency. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Follow them "home," report them, film them, chat with your principal etc. rather than hoping somebody else will. Alternatively, live and let live, since you can't get families that own IB and don't rent their places out busted, not under the current residency verification system.

Sure you could. “Where do the children sleep?” The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

OP here. Don't throw the R word out please. I am not white.

Not sure that makes a difference -- why are you so desperate to get out of your zoned school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

+1. I also don’t like residency fraud (including arrangements like OP’s) for this reason—it means poor/middle class kids are less likely to lottery into good schools—but also for admittedly selfish reasons.

Our IB is has a growing percentage of IB families, although much lower IB overall than the JKLMs. When people like OP pull these sorts of shenanigans, it means that other IB families that actually live in the neighborhood are more likely to get waitlisted for PK3/4. When this happens, they go to other schools, like HRCS. Once they start down a different path, some stay on it. That means fewer actual IB families at the school. OP and others like her undermine the sense of community that comes with families in the same neighborhood at the school. Families doing what OP is doing are less likely to make the trek across town for evening school activities, no play dates since they don’t want to give away their arrangement, no bumping into each other at the playground, etc.

This is why I find what OP is doing annoying—both for the “buying” her way into a school, and the undermined sense of community at our neighborhood school. I’m not annoyed enough to follow them home or report them, but TBH I wouldn’t mind if someone else did.

Not impressed. You read this sort of wimpy post on most of the threads about school residency. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Follow them "home," report them, film them, chat with your principal etc. rather than hoping somebody else will. Alternatively, live and let live, since you can't get families that own IB and don't rent their places out busted, not under the current residency verification system.

Sure you could. “Where do the children sleep?” The end.

What do you know about residency fraud investigations? You've been investigated? We were, this year. We offered to have DCPS do a home visit but they declined. They just wanted more residency verification docs immediately. The investigator asked no questions. We handed over the docs she wanted and were cleared on the spot. Friends had a similar experience.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like you residency fraud-involving-in-boundary-residential-property-ownership haters, busters and vigilantes need to campaign like mad to convince the city council to get serious about boundary fraud investigations. Go for it!

[Anonymous]

License plates and grannies.

#NeighborhoodBeef
#DoesDCNeedAnotherGang
#NorthwestVerifiers
#TenleytownTattlers

#Grannygate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really hope some of you don’t start following random grannies just to out the OP...

...wouldn’t surprise me in Trumps America.

oh stfu about Trump. OP is taking a spot away from a poor kid - she's literally buying a spot in a better school likely in part due to her own racism about the Shaw schools.

also it was OP who asked is it fraud. we're just answering the question.

+1. I also don’t like residency fraud (including arrangements like OP’s) for this reason—it means poor/middle class kids are less likely to lottery into good schools—but also for admittedly selfish reasons.

Our IB is has a growing percentage of IB families, although much lower IB overall than the JKLMs. When people like OP pull these sorts of shenanigans, it means that other IB families that actually live in the neighborhood are more likely to get waitlisted for PK3/4. When this happens, they go to other schools, like HRCS. Once they start down a different path, some stay on it. That means fewer actual IB families at the school. OP and others like her undermine the sense of community that comes with families in the same neighborhood at the school. Families doing what OP is doing are less likely to make the trek across town for evening school activities, no play dates since they don’t want to give away their arrangement, no bumping into each other at the playground, etc.

This is why I find what OP is doing annoying—both for the “buying” her way into a school, and the undermined sense of community at our neighborhood school. I’m not annoyed enough to follow them home or report them, but TBH I wouldn’t mind if someone else did.

Not impressed. You read this sort of wimpy post on most of the threads about school residency. Why not put your money where your mouth is? Follow them "home," report them, film them, chat with your principal etc. rather than hoping somebody else will. Alternatively, live and let live, since you can't get families that own IB and don't rent their places out busted, not under the current residency verification system.

Sure you could. “Where do the children sleep?” The end.

What do you know about residency fraud investigations? You've been investigated? We were, this year. We offered to have DCPS do a home visit but they declined. They just wanted more residency verification docs immediately. The investigator asked no questions. We handed over the docs she wanted and were cleared on the spot. Friends had a similar experience.

In a year where the AG just brought several residency fraud cases, I'd hardly be so sanguine. The ultimate charge is different, but the cases filed by Racine pretty clearly shows that he considers knowingly putting the wrong address on the form to be deliberately lying.