Parents fined for not sending child to school

Southampton Magistrates Court

Southampton Magistrates Court

First published in News

PARENTS from Ringwood have both been ordered to pay £840 after not ensuring their child attended school.

The parents failed to send their teenager to school regularly over the course of three months last year.

They did not attend court to face the charges.

Magistrates in Southampton fined each of them £400 in their absence.

In addition to the fines, magistrates also ordered them to pay out a victim surcharge of £40 as well as paying costs of £400.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:59am Fri 16 May 14

wwozzer says...

"They did not attend court to face the charges."


You can see where the kid gets it from.
"They did not attend court to face the charges." You can see where the kid gets it from. wwozzer
  • Score: 23

3:52pm Fri 16 May 14

Northamboy says...

Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined.
Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined. Northamboy
  • Score: 0

5:09pm Fri 16 May 14

On the inside says...

Northamboy wrote:
Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined.
You don't want teachers who are trained and you don't want elections? Oddball.
[quote][p][bold]Northamboy[/bold] wrote: Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined.[/p][/quote]You don't want teachers who are trained and you don't want elections? Oddball. On the inside
  • Score: 0

6:41pm Fri 16 May 14

solomum says...

What is the victim surcharge for? The victim in this is the child who is missing vital education, and the parents if they have tried unsuccessfully to get their child to school.
What is the victim surcharge for? The victim in this is the child who is missing vital education, and the parents if they have tried unsuccessfully to get their child to school. solomum
  • Score: 1

7:20am Sat 17 May 14

Bally_Hoo says...

The victim surcharge is basically costs awarded to pay for the prosecution.

This will hopefully show parents that they have to take responsibility for the their children's behaviour.

Teenagers are always difficult to motivate, and working parents can't always afford the time to oversee their children, but if the children had been set good examples about responsibilities, and showed an interest in their children they would be better off.

Contrast this story, with that of the teenage boy from Romsey, who survived a heart attack, and is working hard to catch and pass his exams, his parents have inspired him.
The victim surcharge is basically costs awarded to pay for the prosecution. This will hopefully show parents that they have to take responsibility for the their children's behaviour. Teenagers are always difficult to motivate, and working parents can't always afford the time to oversee their children, but if the children had been set good examples about responsibilities, and showed an interest in their children they would be better off. Contrast this story, with that of the teenage boy from Romsey, who survived a heart attack, and is working hard to catch and pass his exams, his parents have inspired him. Bally_Hoo
  • Score: 5

10:39am Sat 17 May 14

cornishkev says...

If it's £400 each plus £400 costs plus £40 victim surcharge surely that's £1240.
Looks like someone else needs to go back to school.
If it's £400 each plus £400 costs plus £40 victim surcharge surely that's £1240. Looks like someone else needs to go back to school. cornishkev
  • Score: 3

11:23am Sat 17 May 14

richard57 says...

On the inside wrote:
Northamboy wrote:
Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined.
You don't want teachers who are trained and you don't want elections? Oddball.
if the the teachers are not trained why are they employed.im a qualified engineer and i dont need to take days off work.As for polictics lets not go there.
[quote][p][bold]On the inside[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Northamboy[/bold] wrote: Whilst I don't agree with keeping children off school I do think it should work both ways. If a child loses a days schooling because of teacher training days or the school being used for electoral voting the school should be fined.[/p][/quote]You don't want teachers who are trained and you don't want elections? Oddball.[/p][/quote]if the the teachers are not trained why are they employed.im a qualified engineer and i dont need to take days off work.As for polictics lets not go there. richard57
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree