Skiing Europe/Chris Reynard - Children's ski holiday left in ruins.

A snowHead

Wayne

I'm afraid statute trumps case law re privity of contract (and even case law is more complicated than you make out). If anyone wishes to pursue the schools I'm afraid they would find out pretty quickly about what the statute says about the matter. I think you will find that "occaisonally" was inserted into the regulation precisely so that schools and similar did not become package tour operators. I've already pointed out where I believe the best route is for financial recovery - the schools wouldn't do anything without consulting the local authorities either.

Daveyladboy - totally agree - we all know who the main culprit is here, and if he is found guilty of fraudulent trading and/or acting as a director while disqualified then my guess is a prison sentence awaits. AITO should also account for their inability to live up to their own promises and self regulate their own industry.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

You need to Login to know who's really who.

From the regulations

2.—(1) In these Regulations—

“brochure” means any brochure in which packages are offered for sale;
“contract” means the agreement linking the consumer to the organiser or to the retailer, or to both, as the case may be;
“the Directive” means Council Directive 90/314/EEC on package travel, package holidays and package tours;
“offer” includes an invitation to treat whether by means of advertising or otherwise, and cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly;
“organiser” means the person who, otherwise than occasionally, organises packages and sells or offers them for sale, whether directly or through a retailer;
“the other party to the contract” means the party, other than the consumer, to the contract, that is, the organiser or the retailer, or both, as the case may be;
“package” means the pre-arranged combination of at least two of the following components when sold or offered for sale at an inclusive price and when the service covers a period of more than twenty-four hours or includes overnight accommodation:—
(a)transport;
(b)accommodation;
(c)other tourist services not ancillary to transport or accommodation and accounting for a significant proportion of the package,
and
(i)the submission of separate accounts for different components shall not cause the arrangements to be other than a package;
(ii)the fact that a combination is arranged at the request of the consumer and in accordance with his specific instructions (whether modified or not) shall not of itself cause it to be treated as other than pre-arranged;
and
“retailer” means the person who sells or offers for sale the package put together by the organiser.

Withdrawal by consumer pursuant to regulation 12 and cancellation by organiser
13.—(1) The terms set out in paragraphs (2) and (3) below are implied in every contract and apply where the consumer withdraws from the contract pursuant to the term in it implied by virtue of regulation 12(a), or where the organiser, for any reason other than the fault of the consumer, cancels the package before the agreed date of departure.

(2) The consumer is entitled—

(a)to take a substitute package of equivalent or superior quality if the other party to the contract is able to offer him such a substitute; or
(b)to take a substitute package of lower quality if the other party to the contract is able to offer him one and to recover from the organiser the difference in price between the price of the package purchased and that of the substitute package; or
(c)to have repaid to him as soon as possible all the monies paid by him under the contract.
(3) The consumer is entitled, if appropriate, to be compensated by the organiser for non-performance of the contract except where—

(a)the package is cancelled because the number of persons who agree to take it is less than the minimum number required and the consumer is informed of the cancellation, in writing, within the period indicated in the description of the package; or
(b)the package is cancelled by reason of unusual and unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of the party by whom this exception is pleaded, the consequences of which could not have been avoided even if all due care had been exercised.
(4) Overbooking shall not be regarded as a circumstance falling within the provisions of sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph (3) above.

Clause 2 makes it pretty clear that SE is the organiser of the package and Clause 12(3) makes it pretty clear that the consumer is entled to compensation from SE for non performance of their contract. It quite simply is not worth pursuing the schools for breach of contract on their part - as well as not being desirable for a number of reasons pointed out by others it just will not get very far legally.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Had the school collected cheques made out to Skiing Europe and stressed that it was a group holiday that the pupil families could participate in (much as a group of friends would do), I would agree. Or if the invites/requests for payment contained wording to the extent that the school's legal status was as organiser, not retailer or TO, then I would agree.

But if they sold the holiday on, to the parents, without stating the role the school was playing, I am not so sure that the school can absolve itself of any responsibility. We don't know the answer to this one, so anything more would be guess work.

It would be interesting to know whether the school's meeting with its legal team was to get advice on recovery from SE or whether it was to get advice on protecting itself from the parents.

I suspect the school's chance of recovering the money will be zero. Even if they win the case, the chances of getting this crook to pay out will be zilch.

If people think that suing the school could have unpleasant consequences, just wait until they meet the parents that have gone without/scrimped/saved all year, just so their child could have this holiday.

You'll need to Register first of course.

The School is part of the package in that it supplies 'carers/teachers/team leaders....' a substantial part without which the package is incomplete and cannot take place.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

"Had the school collected cheques made out to Skiing Europe and stressed that it was a group holiday that the pupil families could participate in (much as a group of friends would do), I would agree."

What is the legal basis for this statement - plenty of travel agents collect cheques in their own name and arrange trips for specified groups - this doesn't make them the package tour operator.

After all it is free

Reynard's website keeps making changes; the generous incentives he used to offer seem to be drying up - I think this forum is working! I think he's reading it and it's getting to him... Keep up the pressure everyone; just consider the poor people booked to travel with skiing europe over the Easter hols, they may be blissfully ignorant of the fate awaiting them...

Stephen101, I am not sure this is anywhere near as clear cut as you would like it to be. As anarchicsaltire, says, the school play an intrinsic role in providing the resources to make the trip happen and as a parent I would consider my contract was with the school, with them subcontracting the transport and accommodation.

As an example, if the trip had to be cancelled because insufficient adult carers turned up for the flight/coach, who would be liable for the cancellation costs?

That the transport and accommodation supplier let the side down (and this may be harder to prove than the school may think) simply does not excuse the school from its contractual obligations. Were the parents to attempt to sue SE, I would be think SE may have a good defence that their contractual relationship was with the school, not the individual parents. SE may not even know the names of the pupils who were due to go, just the numbers of people. Without knowing all of the facts, it's getting difficult to comment further.

A judge will have a field day with the school, if this gets to court and if the school thinks it can just walk away, it may have another think coming.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Bar shaker

I think any judge would laugh out of court any suggestion that SE was not the package operator under the regulations. If you read what I said previously I didn't say that there was no chance that it couldn't be argued that the school was also the package operator - but I think any lawyer would be able to mount a pretty good defence - and I very much doubt the parents would want to risk even more money in legal costs in trying to argue the case, which would rest on interpretations of the regulations and would only have a limited chance of success. The best chances of recovery I'm afraid are through a claim of negligence against the local authority for putting SE on their approved lists without proper due diligence and/or triggering the AiTO bond and/or shaming AiTO into accepting its reponsibilities. Recovery against the school (which would probably have to be covered by the local authority) or from SE/Reynard are probably the least likely routes I'm afraid.

In the meantime Devon Trading Standards should use their powers under the regs to investigate SE - e.g. ask for sight of confirmed bookings and payments - to protect those with holidays booked at Easter - and to see if there is a case against Reynard for fraudulent trading and breach of the regulations - to do any less would be complete negigence on their part given everything that is in the public domain.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Bar shaker

Look at the definition of "package" - i.e "at least two of the following components" - you could argue that the schools were responsible for (c) - but which one of (a) or (b)?

snow reports

Offer, acceptance and consideration (normally money) is needed for a legally binding contract. If the school did not receieve any 'consideration' from the parents it is doubtful that there is any contract in place between the school and the parents.

Have skimmed this thread.

Seems to me that the company needs to be forced into liquidation by a creditor. Debt of £750 is sufficient.

Alternative might be to get it wound up in the public interest but instinct is that that will take longer.

Position can then be properly investigated by a liquidator (happy to act !)

Anyone know who Bank's the company -might provide another avenue ?

You know it makes sense.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Blastfromthepast

Given that the company has not filed accounts and SE traded while its owner was still disqualified as a director - I suspect the we are talking about Chris Reynard trading as Skiing Europe (with the company only being registered for name protection). So liquidation of the company will achieve very little. Also doubt whether any bank would have lent any money to SE given Reynard's past history.

A snowHead

Oh well

Devon County Council is to reimburse Tavistock families following a cancelled half-term school ski trip to Switzerland.

The authority announced yesterday that it would enable Tavistock College to refund the families pending any legal action and negotiations with insurers.

More details

A snowHead

"If it was sold as a school skiing trip with Skiing Europe, then I would agree. If it was sold as XYZ School Skiing Trip with the details of where and when laid out, but no information regarding who the Tour Operator was, then I consider that the parents would have entered the contract assuming the school was the TO. "

Definitely the former in the case I know about - SE even sent a rep to a meeting with the parents. The payment schedules were also those specified by SE.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Wayne,

that was annouced about 10 days ago:

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Bar shaker

I doubt it - more likely that Devon CC recognised their liability in approving SE as an operator. I don't think anyone has claimed that SE was somehow hidden from them by the schools.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Stephen101, you may be right but the one important thing is that the families have been refunded from this debacle.

After all it is free

The answer will be how it was sold to the parents.

Puzzled

it was sold as a school trip with Skiing Europe and come and meet Chris Reynard - don't recall him ever turning up. The excitement about skiing and so on was palpable.

The lawyers who are getting a class action together are addressing a meeting tomorrow. Is it coincidence the references to Trailfinders, and other reputable firms were removed off the SE web site today?

Still with a few acres, a pool, holiday cottages and £250k ish in pocket for little effort I dont think this 70 year old thinks he has done anything wrong. Perhaps he can go and holiday ?

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

[quote="Stephen101"]Bar shaker
The best chances of recovery I'm afraid are through a claim of negligence against the local authority for putting SE on their approved lists without proper due diligence and/or triggering the AiTO bond and/or shaming AiTO into accepting its reponsibilities.

I have personally asked AiTO 4 times to get moving and do the right thing. Not yet, they are clear it is "not their problem" not even the breach of their rules and standards. They are impotent and I would not book a holiday with them bonding now. Their actions show the true level of their standards.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

snow reports

The response below from AiTO on the Reading School blog is of interest. If the schools really cancelled then SE would have had to informed them of the new address for the rearranged accomodation, which as I have mentioned above would have had to been supplied to the parents before the departure in order to comply with the law. Otherwise it is not the schools which cancelled the trips but SE. Where is the documentary evidence that this happened - this is something that trading standards and AiTO can check very easily. I am told on good authority that no such evidence was provided to the schools and that SE was also in breach of contract since schools were having to pay for the coaches as the companies were not prepared to travel without receiving payment. AITO makes it clear that if the trips did not depart and it was the fault of SE then the bonds should pay up. The lawyers and trading standards should put AiTO's hands to the flame if they haven't done so already - which might explain AiTOs relctance to comment at present

RESPONSE FROM AITO

Thank you for your email about the cancellation of your child’s school ski trip last weekend. We are extremely sorry about the disappointment that your child will have suffered as a result, as well as you and other members of your family.

You will appreciate from the Headmaster’s letter that, firstly, it was Reading School which cancelled the ski trip, not the tour operator. We understand from Skiing Europe that all arrangements for the trip had been confirmed and were in place, and that some 1,000 children from other schools are currently at a variety of ski resorts on their school trips. Secondly, since your son’s school states (in the letter that you enclosed with your email) that it is planning a class action and is taking legal advice, it would be inappropriate for us to comment on the cancellation by the school in any more detail.

In response to your query as to whether AITO’s standards have been met, I would comment briefly as follows.

AITO does indeed have high standards for its tour operator members, as you may have noted from the association’s website, www.aito.com. One of the main criteria from the viewpoint of most consumers is that AITO insists that all its member companies should put in place a bond or insurance policy to offer full financial protection (in excess of current Government requirements) to all consumers who book AITO member holidays. We are glad to confirm that Skiing Europe, in common with all members of AITO, ensures full financial protection for its clients via bonding/insurance. Had the half-term trips not departed, all parties would have thus received a full refund of the money that they had paid for their holidays – in the region of £750-plus per child.

Thank you for your enquiry about AITO.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Burgess
Membership Manager

The Association of Independent Tour Operators (AITO)
133A St Margaret's Road, Twickenham, Middlesex, TW1 1RG
Tel: 020 8744 9280 Fax: 020 8744 3187 Email: peter@aito.com

You know it makes sense.

I have to say that if I were told that a hotel I'd thought I'd booked and paid for through an agent had cancelled my booking I'd be straight on the phone to the hotel to find out why, if they told me they'd cancelled because they'd not received payment I'd be calling the agent, if he then said that alternative accommodation had been arranged I'd want confirmation from that accommodation before I departed.

I believe there are more than enough tales of payments not being received for an investigation to take place, likewise I'm very wary of a company that appears to be limited in fact being a sole trader.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

A snowHead

I am a person that has received a cheque from Mr Reynard and Skiing Europe some three years ago.

It would appear that he was trading as a limited company even though companies house stated the company was dormant.

But trading as a limited company and not following the law.
The letter that came with the cheque did not have a company number on it nor did it have a registered office address on it.

I say he was trading as a limited company because the cheque just had Skiing Europe on it and if he was a sole trader then the
bank would have had to put Chris Reynard T/A Sking Europe on by law. The Cheque was HSBC by the way.

What ever way he is doing it, it is illegal.

The cheque bounced, which is why I still have the details.

A snowHead

I’ve heard a lot of bad press about Skiing Europe and about Chris Reynard, be it from teachers or instructors that have worked for him and his company. I have been the ski party leader in my school for a number of years now and have always used Halsbury Travel. They haven’t let me down yet and the trips have always been a massive success!

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Skifriend

Your observations are very interesting and you should report them, with your evidence, to the Insolvency unit at the Department of Business (or whatever the DTI is called these days). If SE was operating as a company 3 years ago, then it would appear that Reynard was acting as its director while he may have still been disqualified from being a director ( to say nothing of what should have been reported to Companies House and HMRC in accounts). The DTI and the courts have always taken a pretty dim view of disqualified directors acting as directors - and the DTI can initiate prosecutions.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

[quote="D G Orf"]... I'd be calling the agent, if he then said that alternative accommodation had been arranged I'd want confirmation from that accommodation before I departed.

In a perfect world the TO would pick up the phone or mobile and talk to their customer too. Try it. This lot won't even speak to a teacher who booked £25k worth of travel. Or a rep from Ski Club of GB or AiTO.
wink

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

http://www.skiing-europe.com/howtobook.htm A new web page today.

Check this new posting of their process! They clearly state we will take ALL the money and 6+ weeks after they will then confirm the package. He knows the law far too well NehNeh

to get caught out.

You'll need to Register first of course.

SE have been removed from the list of members on AiTO's website.

Those with holidays in Easter need to check what bonding arrangements are now in place.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Looks like there have been several changes to the website today: SCGB logo has gone, also reference to John Shedden (which to anyone in the know would have been a bit endorsement of the company) as one of the instructors has gone, downloads of the main brochure and "safety management system" brochures no longer connect to anything..... Wink

After all it is free

Reynard is being incredibly naive if he thinks that changing his website and brochure will have any impact on his liabilities and legal responsibilities. All the evidence will continue to exist.

Web archive will have the old details.

A cheque does not need to say T/A (trading as), it can say whatever the account holder wants.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

GrahamN - lots of changes to the skiing europe website today!
'Meet the team's been hurriedly altered, but I see Chris Reynard still can't be bothered to change 'webcams', 'photo gallery' or 'downloads'!
There's some gaping holes where he's removed the SCGB and AITO logos that were misleading...
There are some good posts on the Reading Grammar School ski trip blog, including some personal details about the infamous Chris Reynard...
A new post on there has a link to a www.thisissomerset.co.uk article about another cancelled ski trip, by Kings of Wessex School, this time they got let down by skibound... I notice they have the same address in Brighton as Hourmont total ski, who let us down badly 5 years ago - are they by any chance related?

Help!!

Skiing Europe/Chris Reynard - Children's ski holiday left in ruins.

snowHeads Forum Index >>> The Piste