The family has proof of residence (which is its own absurdity we won't discuss), and this third party can arbitrarily override that based on a black box argument.
The family has proof of residence (which is its own absurdity we won't discuss), and this third party can arbitrarily override that based on a black box argument.
Doesn't the family have a very straightforward libel claim against the third party? That the car was parked elsewhere may be true. "Although you are the owner on record of a house in our district boundaries, your license plate recognition shows that is not the place where you reside" is a statement the family can disprove in court (to a civil standard) and demonstrate has financially damaged them ("her daughter is currently attending a private school 45 minutes away from her home"). If that statement came from the third party (rather than the school district misinterpreting the raw data themselves), the family will win. The straightforward financial damages (let alone anything pain / suffering / punitive damages) likely exceed the company's payment from the school district ("a total of $41,904 for a 36-month-long contract"). It wouldn't take many of these claims before the company becomes insolvent, and good riddance.
I'd also expect them to win a lawsuit against the school district for falsely denying the basic right of education. Perhaps the individual school administrator also for libel. With any luck, a total legal bloodbath that warns any other school districts away from this conduct.
If the company just provided the raw data, they may be in better legal shape. But I'd say either they or the school administrator libeled the family. Maybe both. (Of course, I'm not a lawyer.) Even if the company did provide only the raw data, I wonder if libel is somehow implied in its contracted/intended use. And I'm really hoping for the legal bloodbath outcome, because this is unconscionable.
The family may not have time or money to pursue this, but there are lawyers who work on contingency or even pro bono, including the ACLU.
I can't imagine why highly paid school admin wouldn't correct an obvious mistake.
I would not have expected a school administrator to be highly paid. What kind of salary are we talking about here?
I've heard enough about Texas's high school football culture and the pressures on administrators over it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eagle_Stadium_(Allen,_Texas) for example.
It's the teachers that are shafted, not the admin/manager class.
They're being paid to manage the parts of the organizations that do that sort of thing, among others.
Real solution is to loosen regulations on private schools and provide equivalent tax return to parents who choose private over public.
But the parents aren't, and grandma's tax contribution may have already gone towards funding the parents. The system's structured with local revenue; letting people change their locality too easily messes with that structure a lot.
(I pay, for example, about $3k in school taxes annually, but I have two kids in a $21k/year district. If they have kids, I may be still paying for their education, let alone the grandkids.)
> Real solution is to loosen regulations on private schools and provide equivalent tax return to parents who choose private over public.
Yeah, privatization always results in better results and zero scammy abuses of the system.
(One hopes the /s can go unsaid.)
Sure, but that's why a level of human intervention with a touch of empathy is required for cases like this one and the unhoused example.
if she didnt, i would (sort of) agree. but she does.