 Poster: A snowHead
|
Bar shaker
You are correct but most people do - it would however be an offence under the Business Names Act not to display the owner's name on all the following documents:
Business letters
Purchase orders
Invoices
Receipts
Written demands for payment of business debts.
So if the letter sent with the cheque didn't make it clear that Reynard was the owner then he has committed an offence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
This info may help
Displaying a sole trader or partnership business name
If you are a sole trader or partnership, your business name, your own name, or the partners' names and business address must be clearly displayed in most cases:
* wherever you run your business and deal with customers or suppliers
* on all business letters, orders, payments, invoices, receipts and other business documents
Displaying a name online
If your business has a website, you must display:
* general information about your business - including business name, address, email address, VAT registration number (if applicable)
* details of any relevant professional body that you belong to or any authorisation scheme to which your service is subject
These details from the link below
http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?r.s=sc&r.l1=1073858805&r.lc=en&r.l3=1073859929&r.l2=1073859131&r.i=1073788944&type=RESOURCES&itemId=1073788946&r.t=RESOURCES
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I am pretty sure the vast majority of UK businesses breach that Business Link guide, in some form or another. The information to be contained on a website Is this enshrined in statute?
Trying to catch them on a small technicality is not the way to stop Skiing Europe. Publicising how they do business, so that everyone of their potential customers knows about them.. that is the way to stop them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
[quote="Stephen101"]Bar shaker
You are correct but most people do - it would however be an offence under the Business Names Act not to display the owner's name on all the following documents:
Is that the same for a sole trader? SE is either a sole trader or partnership but not a Limited Liability Partnership
SE is not a Ltd company [that is dormant, not trading, and has CCJs against it]
SE Enterprises is also a sole trader with Reynard
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Iwona Nowika is the Iwona 'Reynard' on the meet the team page of the website... You're quite right skifriend, they have returned annual accounts, on time, recently. Call me cynical - but why the change...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just found more info on Companies House website:
PARTNERS IN SKIING LIMITED
IDEHILL LODGE BALL LANE
FARWAY
COLYTON
DEVON
EX24 6DL
Company No. 04138373
Now dissolved, and other companies he has had in the past below, all to do with school activities.
Ski Europe
Active Learning and Leisure
Howglen Ltd
Making Fresh Tracks Ltd
Partners In Skiing Ltd
Skiing Europe Ltd
The man seems to prey on schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently Chris and Iwona Reynard live in a huge renovated country home and Chris Reynard has built a golf course on his land....
Explains where his customer's money is going!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
No skitrip
The answer to your question is yes - of Reynard was only using SE as a business name then he has to say that he is the owner of the business and where documents can be served.
Re the change in directors - I wouldn't be at all suprised if Reynard has activated SE as a company (once his disqualification as a director ceased) so that he could put all his debts where liability is limited, while at the same time transferring all his personal assets to his wife in the belief that they would be protected from his creditors when the balloon goes up. If this is the case I would advise both Mr and Mrs Reynard to get a good lawyer and look up the law on fraudulent trading. Perhaps someone could check with the LAnd Registry as what has happened to who owns the property and who it is mortgaged to. The Reynard's also have a buisness running country cottages - I'm almost tempted to book one for the weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
No skitrip
-- I'm almost tempted to book one for the weekend. |
Let's all go with no means of payment! I think I know a few coach companies who would oblidge blcoking his country lanes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
A quote from the above, sounds familiar.
"Mr. Reynard covers his literature with endorsements that he says that he has received from various organisations such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents. He quotes as supporting him people like Alan Cottle, the outdoor education adviser for Surrey. I believe that Mr. Dane Oliver is also quoted as supporting him. I believe that all those people have written sharp and pointed letters to Mr. Reynard saying that in no way were they supporting his organisation, particularly the poor, ill-thought- out scheme for giving people qualifications. That scheme was not recognised by anybody.
On the same programme, when Mr. Reynard was asked about who recognised the qualifications that he had given out, he again fell into silence. The broadcast is most interesting and anybody interested in any part of outdoor activities should listen to the tape. I strongly commend it as it is revealing. It illustrates why we need the Bill. There are people like Chris Reynard around, albeit in the minority. People exist who are prepared to use bogus safety claims and comments from other people out of context and without their permission to try to sell their product on the market. We need the Bill to provide protection from those people."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A line later states:
" it is important to remember that the company was the first in English legal history to be convicted of homicide: and according to the Library briefing, it's managing director was the first to be given an immediate custodial sentence arrising from the operation of a business."
Sweet mother of God!
How can he run a school skiing company?
And be on council 'approved' lists?
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much  on Thu 17-03-11 23:14; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
daveyladboy, Reynard was not given a custodial sentence, the MD, Peter Kite was sentenced to 18 months I think (or he served 18 months I cannot remember which).
Reynard was a co-owner but not a director at the time and therefore not liable. I forget exactly how he wriggled out of this one, but do remember being sickened by it at the time. Reynard was the de facto boss at the Lyme Regis centre at the time of the canoeing incident and was cutting corners left right and centre as he always has and will probably continue to do so.
He is a very slippery creature and has wriggled out things time and time again. Unfortunately as the saying goes - scum always floats to the top no matter how hard you try to remove it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Thanks Samerberg Sue, I know - that's all in the link to Hansard, along with lots more damning references to Reynard, including a paraphrasing of an interview with Reynard over the whole tragedy, where he remained silent when asked any thorny questions.
Can anybody out there tell me who 'IGI insurance - an ABTA provider' are? They're refered to in 'At the resort' under 'your security'. I can find an IGI insurance who no longer trade under that name, an IGI based in Dubai who don't appear to be involved in this sector and an IGI who underwrite travel insurance policies. Which one is it? Is he required to provide a certificate number, or to state the level of cover (eg operator insolvency)? Just wondering!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Deary me!
Reynard's a convicted crook, focus on him and his dodgy company.
School's booked in good faith - they're not barristers/business analysts!
If school's and teachers are blamed/pursued in the courts they will not arrange any more trips, no matter how reputable the company, which means fewer children get to experience the thrills of the sport we love...
Don't lose sight of the fact that Chris Reynard & skiing Europe are at fault here...
Absolutely! Why do people try to blame all involved in such circumstances. It's very clear who the bad guys are. The good guys that have got caught up in it (teacher, LEA officers, parents..) may never go near a school ski trip again. Who would blame them?
The skiing 'industry' needs school ski trips - otherwise it becomes just a sport for reasonably well to do families who can afford to pay for a family trip. The sort that have been skiing since they were aged 4 and no doubt ski 'better than their teachers' who (in my case) started at 35.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
dw832, well said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Daveyladboy
IGI Insurance are a trading name of AmTrust Europe Limited an insurance company. They have confiremed the following to me:
"We do not currently provide Skiing Europe with an ABTA bond. We do provide a financial failure guarantee for Skiing Europe however this is something that would only provide compensation in the event of Skiing Europe going into liquidation. "
Now of course if the contracts were with Chris Reynard trading as SE - rather than SE Limited (only companies can go into liquidation - sole traders go bankrupt) then it may be difficult to force SE Limited into bankruptcy. It may be the case that Reynard trading as SE was in effect breaking the law by selling unbonded holidays and AiTO have failed in ensuring that one of its members had proper bonding arrangements. In terms of recovering money I suspect that the local authorities, AiTO and the insurance companies are likely to be better routes than Reynard, although that doesn't mean that there isn't a strong public interest case in ensuring that Reynard faces the full force of the law.
We should also perhaps remember that some of the things said in Hansard about Reynard were said under Parlimentary privilege - so they they could be reported more widely without invoking the libel laws. That said there is nothing to prevent comments about Reynard based upon facts which can be seen as fair comment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
After some digging I have now found that Chris Reynard set up another limited company end of September last year. I think you will find that this new company now owns the assets of Skiing Europe Ltd including the big house that Mr Reynard will be renting it from???????
A directors search provided the information below:
WESTWARD HOLIDAYS LTD
IDEHILL LODGE BALL LANE
FARWAY
COLYTON
DEVON
ENGLAND
EX24 6DL
Company No. 07388132
Status: Active
Date of Incorporation: 27/09/2010
He is so sure of himself that he is still using his own name!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
[quote="Stephen101"]
Now of course if the contracts were with Chris Reynard trading as SE - rather than SE Limited (only companies can go into liquidation - sole traders go bankrupt)
The contract is definitely with SE [not Ltd] with Chris Reynard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Thank noskitrip - I think I may take this up with Devon Trading Standards who are responsible for enforcing the Package holiday regulations. Having the bond with a different entity from that which is trading would seem to indicate that the trading entity is unbonded and therefore breaking the law and AiTO is meant to check its members bonding arrangements!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to the most recent post (Fri 18th March) yet another school has been forced to cancel their Easter holiday ski trip, to Switzerland, due to 'grave concerns'...
http://readingschoolskitrip.blogspot.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IGI aka AMTrust confirm there is an insurance policy in force for bankruptcy of the sole trader Mr Christopher Reynard trading as SE. This is NOT a bond it is an insurance policy and the web site is incorrect.
AMTrust are seriously bored of answering this question! They might need to choose their customers more carefully. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Thanks noskitrip - when I asked the question they definitely said they only covered the lquidiation of SE - and only companies can liquidate. And of course reflecting the normal level of service expected from insurance companies they didn't send an email pointing out or apologising for their initial error.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am told that SE has resigned as a member of AiTO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
| I am told that SE has resigned as a member of AiTO. |
At least some future buyers will not be misled by their endorsement now. I won't book a holiday with an AiTO business. They have shown they are not able to manage the quality of business on their list in any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
have just come back to this forum after being away for a while and am amazed to see how it's grown!
but i don't think any effort needs be put into trying to stop SE trading - they seem to be doing a fine job of that themselves.
Who on earth would ever book with them again?
Word must be all around the schools and other potential customers by now. sounds like a self-destruct mission to me..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bumpy
I disagree - in order to trigger the Insurance guarantee it would appear that Reynard has to be forced into bankruptcy. This will only happen if claims are made against him and county court judgments are sought for repayment of hid debts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Just so everyone knows who they might be dealing with since Reynard does not appear to have a good record in complying with the Business Names Act it should be noted that the AiTO website also used to note "Ski Free" and "Westward Holidays" as trading names of Skiing Europe. Google cache also shows a website for "Skiing Free" which when last on line (Jan 2011) had the same telephone numbers and address as Reynard. Has anyone had any dealings with these entities?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
weve just got back from a 10 day trip where the kids got race training, half board, lift pass, flights and transfers all for £550!! where does £900 come from ridiculous!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| iskar wrote: |
| weve just got back from a 10 day trip where the kids got race training, half board, lift pass, flights and transfers all for £550!! where does £900 come from ridiculous! |
The free places for teachers
School administration
etc
etc
If you look around the various posts on various forums you will see quite a few different amounts mentioned.
So, believe it or not, your question has hit the nail on the head  when you asked
| iskar wrote: |
| where does £900 come from |
I said it above, but I think it's worth saying again so:
| Wayne wrote: |
There is one "fact" that stands out from all the guff that is, and will forever, surround this whole shambolic event. Oh and this happens a thousand times a year.
"Who" is the TO that the parents booked the holiday with. This really is all that matters, if you're looking to get your money back. Who is the (your) contract with.
The legal definition of a (the) TO is quite clear and has been tested in the courts many times. The parents did "not" book a holiday with SE, they booked with the school/education authority - I very much doubt that the "meeting with the legal team and the Head" with produce anything that will clarify this to the parents and the reasons are obvious.
The fact that the school head does not understand what they are doing or that they were in fact acting as a TO is irrelevant, they are still obliged (forced) to adhere to the 1992 regs, and many others.
e.g.
It would be “very” simple for any parent to check if the VAT office has registered the school/authority as a TO, and the TO’s margin scheme, if not then …..
It would be very simple for any parent to check if the school bonded the funds it held as required by the 1992 regs, if not then ….
It would be very simple for any parent to check if ….. well you get the idea
The parents do "not" have a claim against SE, however much they are vilified either here or elsewhere. The school may have though. The parents do however have a very simple case against the TO they booked with.
NOTE - I have no connection to any parties involved in this "stuff" nor do we run school trips. |
If you book a holiday with (for example) Thomas Cook then they are acting as agents for the TO – they charge the TO a commission, you contract is with Thomas Cook.
If (for example) you book with us then, as we are the TO, your contract is with us.
If a school booked a trip with a TO “their” contract is with the TO. If the school then adds amounts onto the cost for extra items/services they are providing, then sells the “new” package "they" have created to a parent, then the parent’s contract is with the school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Wayne
As explained before you are plain wrong about the schools being the tour operator under the regulations - to be so they have to be meet the definition in the regulations, they do not. Where is you legal evidence that the schools have been deemed to be the Tour operators in similar situations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Stephen101,
Yep - you may right. What do I know ?
Don't misunderstand me on this topic though, I'm not defending anyone here.
I honestly wish stuff like this didn't happen as "stuff" sticks and it brings our industry standards into question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Wayne
There are three issues here:
- getting back the money of those who paid for holidays that were not delivered by SE (or more correctly Reynard trading as SE), or have had to cough up extra for holdiays that were only delivered in part
- getting back the money of those who have paid for holidays with SE at Easter
- making an example of Reynard so as to discourage others and to stop history reapeating itself for a third time with Reynard
On the first and second - I suspect that the best chances are through Reynard being made bankrupt and then triggering the insurance policy with IGI and/or pursuing the local authorities for negligence in approving SE as an operator, especially given that the schools were contracting with Reynard as a sole trader, and because the schools appear to have relied upon the local authorities to do the vetting for them. Pusuing the schools directly is unlikley to be very effective since i) they have little money and will just pass the costs onto the local authorities since they wil claim that they relied on their approval of SE and ii) any decent lawyer would be able to make a case that SE was the tour operator since it provided 2+ out of the 3 elements of a package as defined by the regulations, and that the school was another party to the contract experiencing circumstances beyond their control. Some might want to raise questions with the Governors of the School regarding their own (over?) reliance on local authorities - especially, given that many schools are becoming Academies and will in future need to be less reliant on local authorities (perhaps their is a nice business opportunity for someone offering competent due dilgence on counterparties to Academies - they couldn't do much worse than some (but not all) local authorities).
On the third - AiTO need to be made to feel the heat - SE was their member and they had responsibility for ensuring that he kept to their rules and standards. They also repeatedly promise "complete financial protection" and "peace of mind" if you use an AiTO member. This has clearly not occurred in this case. The Package Holiday Regulations were written on the basis that there would be a significant element of self regulation from the industry - given than AiTO doesn't appear to be up to the task - and the regulations are not entirely clear about the protection such as this where the tour operator continues trading but fails to meet their contractual and legal obligations so that customers experience financial loss I would have thought that there is also a very good case for new regulations ( so letters to Vince Cable and your MP might be called for as well)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
I disagree - in order to trigger the Insurance guarantee it would appear that Reynard has to be forced into bankruptcy. This will only happen if claims are made against him and county court judgments are sought for repayment of hid debts.
|
Stephen101 - i wasn't really meaning bankruptcy (that might happen anyway and who knows it could even be the intention), but i was thinking more stopping them running ski trips. They cant run ski trips if no-one is booking with them and surely no-one is - are they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| noskitrip wrote: |
The school is holding a meeting with the legal team and the Head on Tuesday. It may throw light on what process was followed.
Chris Reynard only became a Director in 2011 - his wife preceded him. So there would of been no need or idea to search his name. The trading entity has been about for decades in one form or another and when it is endorsed by 22 school testimonials, Ski Club of GB, AON, Trailfinders it all looks good, smells good BUT Hindsight tells us it is a crock and a story built on threads of truth working at the edges of contract law.
AiTO are ineffective and NOT interested - someone elses problem - the holiday was cancelled so they have declared themselves "out". No tour went ahead so nothing to do with them. [Not really bothered their name or a quality of one of their operators is dragging their name through the news] I question if there is a point to AiTO standards at all?
Last week Skiing Europe changed tack. He posted a list of hotels on his site. http://www.skiing-europe.com/hotels.htm lots of pretty pictures of hotels. That again look good, helps build a very clever story. Do you know any of those hotels? I would like to contact the owners as Advertising Standards Authority are interested!  |
* The top left photo is Hotel Faberwirt in Wildschonau. I stayed there as SE rep in Feb half term. Think the lady who owns it is called Hannah, she has 2 fairly good english speaking daughters. Use trip advisor to find contact details!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
£800 per person? Where are they going, Courchevel 1850 for a Russian party?
17 staff all on a freebie, thats why it was £800 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here we go again, freebies for teachers.  Yes, you could get 17 free places on a school ski trip. With Skiplan for instance, at a quick glance, that would mean a firm booking for about 136 children travelling by coach or 170 by air. Quite a sizeable group to manage 24 hours a day for a week. Think about it, would any children ever benefit from a school ski trip if the accompanying staff had to pay for the privilege of organising, running it and taking on the 24 hour a day responsibility for the children? Let me run that one by you again: the school staff are giving their time, energy and expertise for free to set up the trip (I won't bore with all the detail of just how much that involves) and then on the trip are giving their time for free 24/7 to look after the young people. But they can swan off skiing can't they, while the pupils are with their instructors, can't they? Cushy number that one, isn't it. Well, yes they can go off skiing ..... until the phone goes and there is a pupil injured who has to be accompanied to hospital by a member of staff, or unless the kid who has been throwing up all night isn't fit to ski and a member of staff has to stay in the hotel to look after him .... and so on it goes.
They are giving something for free, not getting it. And the children are getting their ski trip at the cost per head for the staff who make it possible of less than £100. If you added up the realistic cost per hour of qualified professionals to do the job from start to finish, what do you think it would cost just for their time, never mind their travelling and living costs during the week?
The cost of this kind of school trip is pretty well inclusive and includes some items which you would be adding on to the basic brochure price of your normal ski holiday - such as ski hire, 4/5 hours a day tuition, equipment hire, insurance, inspection trips (often a requirement for risk assessment)..... all that before the free places for accompanying staff. It can't be difficult to reach £800 I expect.
As before, I make no defence for Skiing Europe's current failures, but I do rise - all too easily - to people using an opportunity like this yet again to come out with this calumny about teachers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
ccl, Excellent post - the general ignorance and envy that colours peoples judgement about teachers on ski trips really annoys me.
BTW I worked for SE way back - never got paid and on the last trip after being hospitalised as a result of being skied into while teaching, discovered that my insurance cover was less than perfect! Luckily I had my own insurance and was able to use that. SE upped sticks and left me alone for 5 weeks in the hospital and did not even bother to get my kit out of my room and into storage. The lady who rented the place organised it and also helped me with the hospital and repatriation. They did send me an application form for the following season though but as I was still rehabbing I declined.
My local authority banned groups from using SE or any other organisation associated with Mr Reynard way before H&E started to control things. Our PE Advisor at the time had personal experience of the various set-ups and would not permit any of his LEA schools to use them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think anyone who thinks about it knows that the teachers costs when going on trips is paid for as part of the holiday cost. Do those carping really expect teachers to cough up out of their own pockets for going on trips to supervise other peoples children during school holidays - I wonder how many teachers they would get volunteering (because that is what it is) on such a basis. As for those who do not think that such a role is necessary and everything can be left to the holiday company - they clearly do not have children. And so what if the teachers get a little pleasure of their own while supervising school groups - I never see the argument that business men should contribute to the cost of client entertainimng in nice restaurants, or for having nice office furniture, or travelling first class etc. etc. (but of course they are wealth creators, entrepreneurs- blah, blah, blah)
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Thu 24-03-11 12:40; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ