 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
D G Orf, I agree with you and no one should suffer except Reynard.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| flangesax wrote: |
| rayscoops, I thought Krampus only visited around Xmas! |
Very good 
Krampus is the wierdest, scariest thing ever...and it hurts if the get you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
to schools that had previously and unilaterally (although morally right but perhaps without the necessary legal form, maybe there was an implied breach by SE that repudiated the contract - who knows) cancelled their contract and trip.
|
That is your and Reynard's point of view - you forget that Reynard may have also voided the contract by breaking the law. And if you think that this matter hasn't been looked into already I suspect you are wrong - the schools have taken legal advice on this matter and that advice should be listened to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Stephen101, I agree, but it is not really my view - just a possibility that I have put forward when you categorically stated that SE had cancelled the contract (only time and a lengthy legal process will determine this) but it is/was also AiTO stated view too !
It is a mess and the parents should get their money back now from the schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Stephen101, what is your connection to all of this ? you seem very reluctant to suggest parents should lobby the schools in the first instance to get their money back  did some one you know book the ski trip for the school or do you have some other direct link with the school ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Parent of a child who lost their holiday. Do I need a more direct link to the school. I think you will find that arguments around whether the parents/schools have the liability are even more tortuous than those around whether Reynard cancelled/voided the contracts. And perhaps you should think who would benefit most from legal disputes between the school and parents - it couldn't be Mr Reynard could it, given that the authorities are likely to delay any investigations/prosecutions for fraudulent trading while such contractual disputes are ongoing.
What is your connection to all of this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen101, no connection at all, as I said earlier I found the 'stop bashing teachers' sentiment from ex-teachers etc. when a few had the temerity to question their attendance on the freebie inspection trip ... mildly annoying.
Are you sure your missus or mates are not teachers at your school 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No my missus or mates are not teachers at the school (or other schools for that matter - no I tell a lie I have an aunt who I haven't seen for 10+ years who is a school teacher) - but I do consider it a public duty to stand up to those who want to use any opportunity to bash 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.
|
|
i just hope that there are some parents reading this and understanding that waiting for schools/LA to pursue SE/Reynard is not the only or necessarilly the best option for them to get their money back, and are aware that some schools have already reimbursed parents that booked with them and that maybe all schools should be doing likewise !
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rayscoops, yet again a selective troll, as ever with your nit-picking  What is it that makes these personal attacks against one or two people on this thread so irresistible to you?
You took advantage of one of these "freebies" as you call them and are judging everyone by the standards exhibited by your acquaintances. As I said earlier, there are people like that, but the vast majority are not. I have reported teachers such as your friends to their Headtachers and LEAs for such conduct both on the so-called Freebies" and while leading school parties. There are black sheep in every walk of life.
Please try to refrain from posting until you have not only read but also UNDERSTOOD what the poster has said, you are maliciously detracting from the main thrust of this thread which is to raise the profile of Mr Reynard with the intention of making sure there is a case for him to answer. And, of course raising his Internet profile so that should he ever have the temerity to raise his head again in this particular market (which, based on previous behaviour, is highly likely), then teachers and /or LEAs unaware of his particular foible of taking people's monies and not paying for the services they contracted, do have a ready resource to use.
I hope that the schools do recover their money, but somehow I doubt it as they are only one aspect of Mr Reynard's creditors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Samerberg Sue, the thread is also about getting money back for parents, not just personal vendettas against a crook which may or may not result in parents getting their money back. Schools have lost nothing and have no money to recover it is the parents and the kids that have lost out and this message is getting lost.
edit - this is about right
| achilles wrote: |
Arguing whether teachers have accepted bribes is rather offensive, and loses the focus of this thread - which is presumably to recover funds lost by parents and schools. This seems a lot more to the point:
| Quote: |
| it now needs schools to talk to each other and move quickly to launch legal action for the recovery of their money. The longer they leave it, the less of it will be available for reimbursement. The first step should be an application to the High Court to freeze his assets, pending the claims for reimbursement and damages. |
There does seem to have been an awful lot of moaning and contacting media, and too little direct legal action by those actually affected really to achieve something. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
rayscoops, I suspect many parents are seeking legal advice, as are the schools, thus they will not post on here as they have probably been advised not to.
Just because some schools had the funds to refund the parents we can't assume that all schools have the funds to do so. Though I agree with you that parents need repaying asap I do not believe that this money should automatically come from the school as this could seriously compromise the schools ability to provide for the school as a whole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
leedsunited
as I said before just google school skiiing holidays and you will soon find that school inspection trips are very common. As to who pays it is again clear - it is the parents as it is built into the quoted prices. If you also do a bit more googling you will see that many local authorities either require or encourage inspection visits.
Yes you may think it is bribery - but that is your definition. I somehow doubt that you will be able to persuade the Met to issue mass warrants for all those in the coporate boxes at Wembley, Twickenham, Wimbledon etc. I think we all know that there is a far clearer candidate for an arrest warrant. |
And if i google 9/11 i also find that it was the US goverment behind the attacks, does not meen that it is right, and if these "risk assesment" trips are a legal requirement then they should be paid for out of school funds, not by any supplier and certainly not by the parents.
I would also guess that it could all be done be without a visit, just google as you say or liaise with the many others who have gone before!
Again i ask the question why only ski trips have "risk assesment" trips?
Why is it that a school going on a cricket trip to South Africa do not feel it neccesary to carry out a "risk assesment"?
How many schools have financed these "risk assesment" trips themselves?
Is this "risk assesment" all encompassing, if so then surely part of that risk is the suitability of the supplier, did the many reports that came flooding back from these trips cover this, was a D&B report submitted. that would have told you all you needed to know for less than a tenner!
Rayscoops is correct, as much as we deplore SE CR and feel for the kids the schools and staff involved have to take some responsibility in all of this, they made the arrangments, they took the money and in some instances broke the contracts, they should also pay the money back forthwith, they where quick enough to take it however well intentioned.
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 Fri 15-04-11 12:55; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| rayscoops wrote: |
| Schools have lost nothing and have no money to recover |
Rubbish - did you not hear the Head of Mount Grace school talking about the cuts and economies they were going to have to make tocover their losses.
Samerberg Sue, stephen101, unfortunately this mega-troll is absolutely typical of rayscoops - it's what he does. He'll keep on going until you stop feeding him. Unfortunately that does distract from the main point - but at least it keeps it at the top of the Google searches!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I don't think anyone is waiting for the Schools/LA to pursue SE/Reynard or others for the funds - in my particular case I know they are already doing so.
All I can say to rayscoops that is for someone who has no connection to this matter is that you have a very strange way of showing it. Oh and if vendetta means wishing to see Reynard being held to account for his actions to a court then so be it. It is for the courts to decide whether or not he is a crook - so I wouldn't libel him in such a manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I have to agree with the comments regarding the parents recovering their money from the schools, the parents have made their contract with the individual schools, it is thus the schools responsibility to refund the parents for non existent trips, the school can then attempt to recover the money from SE/Reynard or insurance or even LEA's who by endorsing SE as an approved supplier, (apparently in many cases with no checks at all), are at least in part responsible.
As for Mr Reynard I suspect he will shortly be undergoing a thorough inspection by HM Customs and Excise, Inland Revenue and the Police, if as has been reported he failed to pay many of last years bills even after he had taken most if not all of the payments for this year then I think we can safely say that a heck of a lot of money is unaccounted for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
GrahamN
Finished feeding - absolutely nothng else new to say to him (or leedsunited for that matter) and he certainly doesn't have anything new to say to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
GrahamN
Finished feeding - absolutely nothng else new to say to him (or leedsunited for that matter) and he certainly doesn't have anything new to say to me. |
So i guess i wont be receiving an answer to my questions then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| D G Orf wrote: |
I have to agree with the comments regarding the parents recovering their money from the schools, the parents have made their contract with the individual schools, it is thus the schools responsibility to refund the parents for non existent trips, the school can then attempt to recover the money from SE/Reynard or insurance or even LEA's who by endorsing SE as an approved supplier, (apparently in many cases with no checks at all), are at least in part responsible.
As for Mr Reynard I suspect he will shortly be undergoing a thorough inspection by HM Customs and Excise, Inland Revenue and the Police, if as has been reported he failed to pay many of last years bills even after he had taken most if not all of the payments for this year then I think we can safely say that a heck of a lot of money is unaccounted for. |
And unfortunately anything they can recover i feel will go straight to HMRC as it has been reported that he has not been keeping up with his PAYE etc!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
D G Orf, Are you certain the contracts were made with the schools?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Shimmy Alcott, Who did the parents hand their hard earned cash to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shimmy Alcott, generally parents pay the school, who once the money has been collected pay the tour operator, I'm self employed and often do subcontracting, I may know who will actually get the work in the end but my contract is with the person who pays me, likewise the parents contract will be with the school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Shimmy
It doesn't matter the arrangements are covered by the Package Holiday Regs (and statute takes precedence over contract law) - you can recover from the agent (the school in this case) in certain circumstances, but they are not required to pay up in other circumstances which are beyond their control - and this is were you could get into a legal argument if you are so inclined. If the school agrees to pay up - it will almost certainly because they have been given clearance by the LEA to do so. You can try and demand that the school pay up - but be prepared for a legal argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen101, ah, ok, thanks for that.
If you left click on the persons name in that left hand column (where their name is blue) then it will automatically go into reply box (so you dont need to type their name, handy if they have a wierd or long username) 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Shimmy Alcott,
I think it has to be that way - otherwise travel agents would become responsible for all the misdemeanours of the tour operators, which wouldn't do much for the travel agency business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
[quote="ccl"]
| Quote: |
By the way leedsunited, you might care to read back at least to my earlier postings in which I merely indicated that in some instances inspection trips have become a requirement for risk assessment purposes. Generally that will be the decision of a local authority. And it won't just be for ski trips.
Now for the confession. I admitted that I was on an inspection trip way long ago. I further admit that it was thoroughly enjoyable; that while sussing out resorts with a view to a school trip I did so on skis in the sunshine which was an undiluted pleasure; that of an evening I ate well and relaxed over a few glasses of wine in the highly congenial company of like-minded people; and that I failed to declare any of this to Inland Revenue (not least because in the first instance I paid for it myself). |
Your first point is what is really confusing me because at the moment the only activity that i can find any reference to "risk assesment" visits appear to only apply to skiing trips and only by members of this forum, as i have alreadt pointed out and if you looked at my earlier posts i know of a school going to South Africa on a cricket tour, a very high risk country but i do not see them carrying out a "risk assesment" trip, now you may call me cynical but it may just be down to the fact that the tour operator involved has not offered a free trip to carry one out!
With regards to your own "assesment trip" i applaud you for paying for it yourself and do not have an issue with this but my question is, how many others have carried out this LA reccomended visit, i say recommended because again if you look at my earlier posts i have yet to be shown that it is a legal requirement, at their own or expense.
I would also like some indication of how many of these trips took place as this is definately where some of the money has gone, therefore however we wish to dress up the need for these freebies every single person who has accepted one is complicite in the draining of funds from SE.
Enjoy the golf
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Samerberg Sue wrote: |
rayscoops, yet again a selective troll, as ever with your nit-picking What is it that makes these personal attacks against one or two people on this thread so irresistible to you?
Please try to refrain from posting until you have not only read but also UNDERSTOOD what the poster has said, you are maliciously detracting from the main thrust of this thread which is to raise the profile of Mr Reynard with the intention of making sure there is a case for him to answer. And, of course raising his Internet profile so that should he ever have the temerity to raise his head again in this particular market (which, based on previous behaviour, is highly likely), then teachers and /or LEAs unaware of his particular foible of taking people's monies and not paying for the services they contracted, do have a ready resource to use. |
Now that is a telling off, go stand in the corner.
"SS" I do not think you need to use this to raise his internet profile, i thought his profile was high enough long before this or where the many taking the free junkets to clouded on his hospitality to carry out due diligence, there was plenty out in the public domain long before this unfortunate event.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
| No my missus or mates are not teachers at the school (or other schools for that matter - no I tell a lie I have an aunt who I haven't seen for 10+ years who is a school teacher) - but I do consider it a public duty to stand up to those who want to use any opportunity to bash teachers. |
And i consider it a public duty to identify were goverment policy is being broken and positions of trust and integrity are being abused. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| leedsunited wrote: |
Your first point is what is really confusing me because at the moment the only activity that i can find any reference to "risk assesment" visits appear to only apply to skiing trips and only by members of this forum |
Could that possibly be because we are only really discussing ski trips, surprising as it may seem in a skiing forum and because only members of the forum will be posting in the forum?
| leedsunited wrote: |
| as i have alreadt pointed out and if you looked at my earlier posts i know of a school going to South Africa on a cricket tour, a very high risk country but i do not see them carrying out a "risk assesment" trip, now you may call me cynical but it may just be down to the fact that the tour operator involved has not offered a free trip to carry one out! |
And presumably because the school is not required to.
| leedsunited wrote: |
| With regards to your own "assesment trip" i applaud you for paying for it yourself |
Don't applaud too soon - I got my money back when I booked a school trip with the company (in non-serial used fivers in a brown envelope you will appreciate).
| leedsunited wrote: |
| I would also like some indication of how many of these trips took place as this is definately where some of the money has gone, therefore however we wish to dress up the need for these freebies every single person who has accepted one is complicite in the draining of funds from SE. |
Well of course that is where some of the money has gone just as that is where some of any tour operator's money goes if they offer inspection visits, just the same as money goes on advertising, websites, brochures etc. But your therefore .....every single person who has accepted one is complicit in the draining of funds from SE is a breathtaking leap of illogicality which is frankly not worth responding to.
Except I just have responded dammit, and I told myself I wasn't going to rise to any more trolling. Blame the rain that has come on and kept me from my golf .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| GrahamN wrote: |
| rayscoops wrote: |
| Schools have lost nothing and have no money to recover |
Rubbish - did you not hear the Head of Mount Grace school talking about the cuts and economies they were going to have to make tocover their losses. |
| Quote: |
| A group of 77 pupils and 11 staff from Mount Grace School in Potters Bar, Hertfordshire, had been due to leave for Switzerland today. Headteacher Peter Baker told The Sunday Times: "We paid a total of £62,000, with kids paying £830 each – a lot of money, as we are not in a particularly affluent area. For some children this was their only holiday for the year. |
77 kids x £830 = £63,910, the school paid £62,000 so how has the school lost out rather than the parents if parents have paid for 77 children at £830 a pop, unless they have paid the parents back ?
http://www.southwestbusiness.co.uk/homepagetest/Anger-schools-ski-trips/article-3431933-detail/article.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Shimmy Alcott wrote: |
| rayscoops wrote: |
| Stephen101, do you accept that the parents or teachers or school or LA have some cupability in this ? |
No, not at all. Sad fooking world if we have to be that paranoid. |
I really think you are burying your head in the sand if you do not at least think that the school or LA have no cupability in this when in some instances they have quite happily handed over in excess of £50K - £100K to this man without doing the most basic of due diligence checks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
I don't think anyone is waiting for the Schools/LA to pursue SE/Reynard or others for the funds - in my particular case I know they are already doing so.
All I can say to rayscoops that is for someone who has no connection to this matter is that you have a very strange way of showing it. Oh and if vendetta means wishing to see Reynard being held to account for his actions to a court then so be it. It is for the courts to decide whether or not he is a crook - so I wouldn't libel him in such a manner. |
you are being pedantic now, the schools/LA may well have started trying to get the parents money back but the parents are waiting for this to be achieved (which may never happen), so when in your estimation is it likely for the parents to get their money back through this priocess ? How long do they have to wait ?
If the schools do not receive the full amount of money back to return to the parents, do you think the schools should make up the difference ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
[quote="ccl"][quote="leedsunited"]
| Quote: |
Could that possibly be because we are only really discussing ski trips, surprising as it may seem in a skiing forum and because only members of the forum will be posting in the forum?
|
No i have searched the internet and spoken with teachers, still only seems to apply to skiing
| Quote: |
| And presumably because the school is not required to. |
Ah double standards, i thought it was a requirement.
| Quote: |
| Don't applaud too soon - I got my money back when I booked a school trip with the company (in non-serial used fivers in a brown envelope you will appreciate). |
Doesnt suprise me
| Quote: |
| Well of course that is where some of the money has gone just as that is where some of any tour operator's money goes if they offer inspection visits, just the same as money goes on advertising, websites, brochures etc. But your therefore .....every single person who has accepted one is complicit in the draining of funds from SE is a breathtaking leap of illogicality which is frankly not worth responding to. |
It should not be happening full stop, accepting any kind of inducement is contrary to goverment rules and is illegal.
| Quote: |
| Blame the rain that has come on and kept me from my golf |
So you are a fair weather golfer or is it another freebie therefore it does not matter!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Shimmy Alcott wrote: |
rayscoops, I suspect many parents are seeking legal advice, as are the schools, thus they will not post on here as they have probably been advised not to.
Just because some schools had the funds to refund the parents we can't assume that all schools have the funds to do so. Though I agree with you that parents need repaying asap I do not believe that this money should automatically come from the school as this could seriously compromise the schools ability to provide for the school as a whole. |
the LA should be financing the schools to pay the parents back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
by the way, it is a cop out to start chucking the 'troll' word around in lieu of answering questions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rayscoops wrote: |
| by the way, it is a cop out to start chucking the 'troll' word around in lieu of answering questions |
Easier to do that than face up to hard facts and provide the answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
| It doesn't matter the arrangements are covered by the Package Holiday Regs (and statute takes precedence over contract law) - you can recover from the agent (the school in this case) in certain circumstances, but they are not required to pay up in other circumstances which are beyond their control - and this is were you could get into a legal argument if you are so inclined. If the school agrees to pay up - it will almost certainly because they have been given clearance by the LEA to do so. You can try and demand that the school pay up - but be prepared for a legal argument. |
| Stephen101 wrote: |
Shimmy Alcott,
I think it has to be that way - otherwise travel agents would become responsible for all the misdemeanours of the tour operators, which wouldn't do much for the travel agency business. |
so does this mean the schools are acting as a de-facto travel agent ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Stephen101 wrote: |
| I Oh and if vendetta means wishing to see Reynard being held to account for his actions to a court then so be it. It is for the courts to decide whether or not he is a crook - so I wouldn't libel him in such a manner. |
get your money from the school first, and then continue with your good work to nail Reynard after. These actions can be mutually exclusive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still waiting for an answer to my question, how many schools have paid out of their own funds for "assesment trips"?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
A week that would take a fortnight to describe so no more about that - I'm off to the golf course.