A large increase in the number of parents who give false addresses to get their children into high-performing schools has prompted a crackdown on cheats by councils and schools.

A survey by The Times of local authorities has found that they are becoming better at discovering catchment-area cheats.

Parents who rent a property within a school catchment area for a few weeks or months either side of the school application date are now being increasingly foiled by councils.

Stockton council on Teesside now specifically states in school application material that “temporary addresses” will not be acceptable, and East Sussex is among those requiring proof of a 12-month tenancy agreement.

At least 12 of the 39 councils responding to the survey, including Barnet, Shropshire, Redbridge and Bournemouth, require parents who have recently bought a property in the catchment area of their chosen school to provide proof that they have sold their old home or that they have rented it to someone else.

In the case of renters, they must show evidence of terminating their old lease and closing utility and council tax bills.

Some councils, including Barnet, dispatch all of their correspondence in “Do Not Redirect” envelopes, so that parents who rent properties within catchment areas for a short period cannot be assured of receiving an offer of a school place or any correspondence about the school.

Others, including Somerset, are willing to go as far as mounting surveillance operations on parents they suspect of cheating. In Pembrokeshire, random checks are made on addresses for 20 new applications for in-catchment places a year.

Moving house to get into the catchment area of a popular school is perfectly legitimate. Lying about your religious beliefs to get your children into a faith school may be questionable ethically but it is not something that can be legislated against.

But lying about where you live to get a place at a school, including using the address of grandparents or other family members, is illegal and parents who are found guilty risk prosecution under the Fraud Act 2006. In most cases, the offer of a place is withdrawn.

A place cannot be withdrawn, however, if parents move out of the catchment area once the child has started at the school.

The Times research comes after a survey of 31 councils by the Local Government Association (LGA), which found that 24 (77 per cent) had seen a significant increase in the numbers of parents lying on application forms. Councils that recorded rises over the past three years include Richmond upon Thames (up from five to 50), Cheshire (0 to 16), Coventry (0 to 14), Bristol (two to eight), Trafford (0 to six), Poole (0 to five) and Gloucestershire (0 to four).

Les Lawrence, chairman of the Children and Young People Board of the LGA, said: “There appears to be an emerging and worrying trend of parents willing to break the law in order to try and get their children into the best schools. While everyone wants the best for their children, parents who are willing to go beyond the law means that other law-abiding parents and children miss out.

“Councils are taking this very seriously because they are elected to put local people first. It is every parent's nightmare if their child fails to get a place because another parent has lied to get their child into a school.”

Malcolm Eady, Cabinet Member for Children's Services and Education on Richmond council, southwest London, said that one of the most common forms of cheating was when parents stated the address of the child's grandparents as being the child's home.

“We have seen a big increase in the number of bogus applications for primary places from around a handful in 2006-07 to approximately 50 this year. We have the best primary schools in the country and they are therefore extremely popular,” he said. “Our admissions team knows every trick in the book and are successful in rooting out bogus applications.”

Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, said that he was “committed to ensuring fair access to schools for all children”, including those whose families could not afford to move into the catchment area of a good school.

Recent research from the Sutton Trust has found that the best comprehensives are more socially exclusive than grammars. Another survey from the Halifax suggests that housesnear leading state schools can command a price premium of up to 10 per cent.

Mr Knight said that councils were right to check out addresses, although he did not condone the recent use by Poole council of anti-terror legislation to spy on parents.

Times recommends

• Private schools offer discounts to attract pupils
• Is lack of sleep taking a toll on children?
• Children to be taught respect for worms