Councils skip court for hundreds of unpaid absence fines

Councils have chosen not to take court action in almost 2,000 cases where parents have not paid absence fines, with thousands more left unresolved, new analysis shows.

The government established a national framework for issuing enforcement of penalty notices (PNs) in August 2024 to address the unequal use of absence fines across different areas.

But recent research by the Education Policy Institute (EPI) found a “postcode lottery” in issuing absence fines remains – with 15 councils making no prosecutions for non-payment of fines altogether.

Schools Week analysis reveals these councils have nearly 2,000 unpaid fines that were written off before being taken to court, and more than 6,000 unresolved cases.

Almost three-quarters of the councils that have chosen not to prosecute cases are in London or the south-east.

Councils that made the most prosecutions are concentrated in Yorkshire and the West Midlands, including Doncaster, Birmingham, Sheffield, Bradford and Wakefield.

Town halls that did not prosecute families told Schools Week they preferred to address the structural barriers to school attendance, while others blamed staff or system capacity.

Maxine Perrott, a researcher at the EPI, said analysis showed the “ongoing regional differences in how absence fines are used, and raises questions about their effectiveness”.

The Department for Education said all schools and councils “must follow our guidance”, and that geographical variation had reduced since 2023-24.

Absence fines at all time high

Under DfE guidance launched in 2024, schools must consider £80 fines when a child misses 10 half-day sessions.

This rises to £160 if paid after 21 days but before 28 days. After this, councils can prosecute parents.

Last year, councils handed out just under 493,000 penalty notices on behalf of schools in 2024-25. Around 6 per cent of these (28,909) led to prosecution.

Research by EPI found 15 councils had not prosecuted any families for non-payment after 28 days.

The majority of these (73 per cent) were in London and the south-east and include Waltham Forest, Buckinghamshire, Southampton and Slough.

But four councils in the north of England – Stockport, Trafford, Warrington and Leeds – were also on the list.

‘Work with families, not against them’

Figures from the DfE’s parental responsibility measure data set reveal there were 1,893 cases for prosecution which the 15 councils decided to withdraw.

Nine of the councils also had “unresolved” cases, amounting to 5,106 in total. A large majority of these were in Leeds (3,810), while data for Stockport reveals all council fines appear to be paid on time.

Leeds said the unresolved cases are still being considered or progressed, and that a “small number of cases may be withdrawn where circumstances change”.

In Waltham Forest, the council chose not to take 472 cases to court, despite fines being left unpaid after 28 days.

A council spokesperson said all cases were discussed with schools, with considerations of individual circumstances, and whether prosecution would be an “effective step” in improving attendance.

“Enforcement, including prosecution, remains part of this approach but is applied in a proportionate and considered way, ensuring fairness and consistency across all cases.”

Kensington and Chelsea had 51 absence fine cases left unresolved in 2024-25. The council said it “works with families and not against them” to overcome barriers to attendance.

“We acknowledge that families may face a range of complex and often overlapping barriers that impact their children’s ability to attend school regularly.

“These challenges can include health concerns, housing instability, mental health difficulties and other family circumstances that are not always visible or straightforward.”

Processes ‘still being embedded’

In Barnet, DfE data shows that the council withdrew prosecution for 212 unpaid fines. The council said it was “unable to prosecute due to not having the capacity” at the time.

But it added that “in most cases the preference is to work with schools and families to offer support, guidance and intervention when appropriate”.

In Warrington, the council said processes were “still being embedded”.

Meanwhile Buckinghamshire said no prosecutions last year “was not typical of other years”, as officers experienced “operational and resource constraints”.

Lewisham, which did not prosecute 230 unpaid fines, said it “does not prosecute specifically for non-payment”, but does for irregular attendance.

A Lewisham spokesperson said it focuses on “early support and working with families to address the causes of absence”, which is “more effective in improving attendance long-term”.

‘Raises questions of effectiveness’

Perrott said: “The fact councils are taking such different approaches to prosecution of penalty fines is another example of the postcode lottery we discuss in our analysis.

“Beyond the issue of fairness, it raises questions of whether fines are the most effective way of increasing attendance.”

But Dan Lilley, head of youth at the Centre for Social Justice, said: “The best place for children is in education, and councils should be using all the tools at their disposal to keep them there.

“We need to reset the relationship and responsibilities of parents and teachers, including through attendance awareness courses and fines where appropriate, but also extra support for the children struggling the most.”

A DfE spokesperson said the department is “clear every school and local authority must follow our guidance which sets out clear expectations on supporting children to attend school, and when enforcement may be necessary.”

The DfE said it was reducing variation of use across the country, which has fallen from zero to 19.5 per cent in 2023-24 to zero to 17.1 per cent in 2024-25.