Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Alpine Elements - another one bites the icy piste

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
^^I agree but how can he be prevented from simply starting again, when the flagrancy of his past dealings seem to be ignored? How can he be permitted to simply start again, with ‘new’ money? Do his new backers even know, or care, about his history? It stinks Evil or Very Mad
ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
ski holidays
 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?
On the face of it, thoroughly disreputable. Sad
ski holidays
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Tiddles wrote:
you could see this coming a mile off really

Taking in as much money as possible

crashing the company

let someone else take the hit

press restart

given the statement there is no way this happened overnight and he already had the plan to restart again


I'm on the same page as this view. Who takes the hit? Well, basically, HMRC always get hit (that's us tax payers paying for it), and I guess ATOL is Govt backed ultimately so we take the hit again. They probably had a bounce back loan too.

The good news is that HMRC are getting very cute these days and they will be all over the Directors if they have preferred themselves to creditors. I know someone who crashed and phoenixed recently and he now has a world of pain from HMRC, something he thought he had neatly sidestepped.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
@Montana, there's a helpful briefing note here:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjUxYa9iMHtAhXKPsAKHRCLBFoQFjAAegQIBRAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fresearchbriefings.files.parliament.uk%2Fdocuments%2FSN04083%2FSN04083.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0U4iwrWE1OzaATjylHxCu5

TLDR - phoenix companies are not illegal but they must be done properly; there are also various offences which may be committed by a director of an insolvent company if they continue trading inappropriately. All this will take time to come out in the wash
ski holidays
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...


Based on the the past MO of the individual involved probably not that much to give benefit of the doubt for. Pre-packs are shabby at best, where they are being trumpeted in the same statement in which the guy tells everyione he has been stalling on it's tough crap for them but he'll be setting up again it seems the rules are not really fit for purpose. If you/he can prove say he's not takne any money out of the business in the last 24 months I might be persuaded to a different view.......
ski holidays
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
would you care to 'flesh out' that opinion? Smile

Always good to entertain alternative views Cool
snow conditions
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
Feel free to put forward any rationale you have for alternative conclusions.
Otherwise it looks fairly straight forwardly illegal.

This from Planetski seems accurate:
There is no obvious mention [on their website] of the company going into administration.
The website also still displays both the ABTA and ATOL logos, but PlanetSKI has been told it is no longer a member of either scheme.
ABTA told us that Alpine Elements resigned as a member on 9th November 2020.


If the reported explanations are correct then it's hard to see how trading beyond April last year
would not have been done in full knowledge that the company was insolvent.
ski holidays
 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.
It will be interesting to see how the market evolves over the next few years. The chalets and hotels are not going anywhere so assuming there is a market, new or "new\old" operators will pop up to fill the vacuum.

The crux will be what sort of market exists once covid has worked it's self out.
latest report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
admin wrote:
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
would you care to 'flesh out' that opinion? Smile

Always good to entertain alternative views Cool


No not really. It's very obvious where all the 'jumps' are and I don't have time/can't be arsed either.

I'm not at all saying that there is not truth in what people are expressing but there should always be a level of caution when castigating someone without all the facts. Terms like 'it looks like' or 'in my opinion' are a little better than coming out and saying it's illegal or calling the guy a Grade A lady's front bottom without having 100% of the facts.

IMO Madeye-Smiley
snow report
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
chocksaway wrote:
Looks like snowheads did most of the journalism for planetski Very Happy

https://planetski.eu/2020/12/09/alpine-elements-collapses-but-plans-relaunch/


planetski.eu : built on editorial freebies and clickbait.
ski holidays
 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.
Legend. wrote:
I'm not at all saying that there is not truth in what people are expressing but there should always be a level of caution when castigating someone without all the facts. Terms like 'it looks like' or 'in my opinion' are a little better than coming out and saying it's illegal or calling the guy a Grade A lady's front bottom without having 100% of the facts.


philwig wrote:
This from Planetski seems accurate:
There is no obvious mention [on their website] of the company going into administration.
The website also still displays both the ABTA and ATOL logos, but PlanetSKI has been told it is no longer a member of either scheme.
ABTA told us that Alpine Elements resigned as a member on 9th November 2020.


FACKS. Resigned as member, still advertising that they're part of the scheme. Seems on fairly dodgy group legally given that a) they'd have been well aware that they were a company at risk, b) people would potentially still be booking on the website and be reassured by the ABTA and ATOL memberships

No conclusions, just the fact that they were advertising being part of ABTA/ATOL but, in the case of the former, had resigned and, in the case of the latter, hadn't confirmed their membership.
snow report
 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
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
Legend. wrote:
but there should always be a level of caution when castigating someone without all the facts.


You're new here, right?
snow report
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@philwig wrote:

If the reported explanations are correct then it's hard to see how trading beyond April last year
would not have been done in full knowledge that the company was insolvent.

If you check their accounts to April 2019, you will find a stable unremarkable company, the accounts were completed in Sept 2019 and obviously showed no sign of the problems to come. They were filed in January 2020, again before there were any real signs of the problems to come. It is grossly unfair to suggest that they have been insolvently trading since April last year.
ski holidays
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Legend. wrote:
admin wrote:
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
would you care to 'flesh out' that opinion? Smile

Always good to entertain alternative views Cool


No not really. It's very obvious where all the 'jumps' are and I don't have time/can't be arsed either.

I'm not at all saying that there is not truth in what people are expressing but there should always be a level of caution when castigating someone without all the facts. Terms like 'it looks like' or 'in my opinion' are a little better than coming out and saying it's illegal or calling the guy a Grade A lady's front bottom without having 100% of the facts.

IMO Madeye-Smiley


Problem is that we will NEVER have 100% of the facts - there is probably only one person who does and if there is anything amiss he'll be doing his best to bury them. I wasn't aware the thought police operated to prevent us making our own judgements based on what we do know. He is actually a snowheads member who popped up once, tried to supress a bad review of one of his chalets, cocked up his first post, had another go and then fecked off. So I formed part of my view based on that......
latest report
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Timc wrote:
@philwig wrote:

If the reported explanations are correct then it's hard to see how trading beyond April last year
would not have been done in full knowledge that the company was insolvent.

If you check their accounts to April 2019, you will find a stable unremarkable company, the accounts were completed in Sept 2019 and obviously showed no sign of the problems to come. They were filed in January 2020, again before there were any real signs of the problems to come. It is grossly unfair to suggest that they have been insolvently trading since April last year.


I think the context was last year as in season rather than calendar year.
latest report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
...I think the context was last year as in season rather than calendar year.
Correct - my mistake, sorry.
I thought it obvious that the pandemic hit in April 2020, but a mistake none the less. I'm just ahead of my time.

I had actually already read the previous accounts (38 pages), that wasn't my point as they were not hugely interesting.
snow conditions
 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?
@Dave of the Marmottes, Very generous of you to put that interpretation on it. I formed my opinion of the company on my last ever chalet holiday. Converted to self organising and self catering after that. However April last year is April 2019 and April this year is April 2020 and that's the way I read it. I don't like the company but without the facts it is impossible to tell and he may have been rushing around trying to save his life's work or not. Both versions are pure conjecture.
snow report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
Unfortunately pre-pack administration is perfectly legal plus wrongful &/or fraudulent trading is exceptionally difficult to prove in most cases. The big naughty here is the continued use of ABTA (& ATOL ?) on marketing / website etc .. that is an easy fact to prove here. Multiple complaints to the local Trading Standards team, administrators & ABTA / ATOL may help those not covered by bonds .. others should seek credit card chargeback if possible.

Otherwise .. best approach is to avoid giving them custom in future ...
ski holidays
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
philwig wrote:
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...
Feel free to put forward any rationale you have for alternative conclusions.
Otherwise it looks fairly straight forwardly illegal.

This from Planetski seems accurate:


probably cribbed off this thread tbh
snow conditions
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Has he done this sort of thing before? The Travelmole link said he started the business in 1997, but Alpine Elements Ltd was only formed in 2003. At which time he was a director of a company called Snowboard Lodge Ltd.
latest report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
Legend. wrote:
There is a hell of a lot of jumping to conclusions on this thread...


Based on the the past MO of the individual involved probably not that much to give benefit of the doubt for.…


Past MO? Oh, I didn't realise this person a history of putting his companies into administration. Has he, Dave of the Marmottes?
latest report
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
His past MO has been to overpromise underdeliver with things like a "luxury" offering, undertrained staff, aggressive approach to social media presenting negative reviews etc and this year a total stonewalling on refunds customers were legally entitled to. It's been one of the most complained about ski TOs I've ever known. So yes I can draw my own conclusions based on this as to the intention behind the current phoenixing - more sheep to be shorn
snow conditions
 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.
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
His past MO has been to overpromise underdeliver with things like a "luxury" offering, undertrained staff, aggressive approach to social media presenting negative reviews etc and this year a total stonewalling on refunds customers were legally entitled to. It's been one of the most complained about ski TOs I've ever known. So yes I can draw my own conclusions based on this as to the intention behind the current phoenixing - more sheep to be shorn


Ah, ok. So, absolutely nothing to do with the situation that has forced numerous travel operators, large and small over the edge. Enjoy the sheep.
snow report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@JoeMellor, care to declare an interest?

Yes the situation has been horrible but hey that's what businesses do - they enjoy good returns in the good times and are expected to manage sufficiently carefully for the bad times. If he was saying that's it we can't do it I'm sorry that would be one thing. The thing that sticks in the craw is the solicitation of further monies for this season under false ATOL and ABTA credentials - care to offer the defence for that? And of course the "two fingers suckers" nature of the I've bought back the brand already and will be relaunching.
snow report
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@JoeMellor, true that the stability of many travel companies has been undermined by Covid, and travel companies in the UK have Brexit to contend with too. So it's no great surprise that many will, sadly, be unable to survive.

But, the way they deal with the situation marks their individual character as clearly as any other aspect of their business activity.
It's not the 'what' that people are taking issue with here, it's the 'how'.
snow report
 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.
@Dave of the Marmottes,

If this alleged ‘phoenixing’ is true then it stinks.

What seems even worse to me is that our legal framework appears to allow this kind of deceit and betrayal of customers with impunity. Over and over again. Why??

As for the loss of yet another U.K. run alpine holiday specialist, it reduces competition, saisonniere jobs (albeit on poor terms) and isn’t something I’ll be celebrating.

I never travelled with them but my impression is they offered basic but good value holidays for many years.
snow conditions
 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
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
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
@JoeMellor, care to declare an interest?

The thing that sticks in the craw is the solicitation of further monies for this season under false ATOL and ABTA credentials - care to offer the defence for that? .


I assume that you have proof that people have booked after the ABTA/ATOL membership ended? According to Planet Ski, it's not possible to book holidays.

No interest.

Care to use your real name?
ski holidays
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
I did a 'practice' book on the Alpine Elements website yesterday - it would have allowed me to go ahead (hotel) : Site still claiming to be ATOL/ABTA certified....
latest report
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
they are dodgy as hell.... have dealt with them on a business basis and had to black list them...
snow conditions
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@JoeMellor, not sure Dave said that bookings were made, merely that they were solicited. Which, given that the website is still live and apparently offering bookings, is true.

ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
JoeMellor wrote:
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
His past MO has been to overpromise underdeliver with things like a "luxury" offering, undertrained staff, aggressive approach to social media presenting negative reviews etc and this year a total stonewalling on refunds customers were legally entitled to. It's been one of the most complained about ski TOs I've ever known. So yes I can draw my own conclusions based on this as to the intention behind the current phoenixing - more sheep to be shorn


Ah, ok. So, absolutely nothing to do with the situation that has forced numerous travel operators, large and small over the edge. Enjoy the sheep.


The point is this - unlike nearly all other tour operators he has not refunded customers their money. The amount concerned is £2.5million. What happened to that money?

On top of that there will be deposits collected on new bookings, collected at a time when the Directors will have known for sure what the plan was! Where is that money?

I haven't read it but he has been pleading on Planet Ski:

Quote:
ALPINE ELEMENTS LATEST

“I had two options – liquidate and have the business broken up with all my staff losing their jobs, or try to buy the brand, the business and assets back from the administrators so staff can keep their jobs."

The MD of the ski tour operator James Hardiman answers criticism that going into administration and buying back the brand is a ploy to avoid refunding £2.5m to customers whose holidays were cancelled.


£2.5million is quite a lot of money. It's money that legally has to be protected until the holiday is completed. You can be sure that most suppliers in the alps would not have been paid for services not delivered so WHERE'S THE MONEY?
latest report
 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?
Another trousering a load of money by not refunding & will walk away from their liabilities to be able to set up again under a new name.
It happens everyday in all walks of business.
latest report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
PeakyB wrote:


What seems even worse to me is that our legal framework appears to allow this kind of deceit and betrayal of customers with impunity. Over and over again. Why??



Ok so this is not about AE but more generally. I can see a case generally in society for pre-pack administrations as a means of keeping jobs alive and maintaining the number of competitors in the marketplace. As in the previous owners fail, but someone new is able to pick up the pieces and with some new capital which is at risk for them try to make a go of it again.


The problem is where the pre-pack is sold to the previous owners/managers where there seems to be a clear conflict of interest. If the law allows you to screw over creditors and yet continue essentially the same business with the same owners/managers where is the moral hazard for those original owners? Sure they've lost whatever they had on the balance sheet of the old business but for many SMEs that might be minimal with anything seriously valuable like a property leased in from elsewhere (say personal or connected party ownership). And it is certainly not an implausible possibility that rather than as is often claimed that they have put every effort and last drop of investment into keeping the company going, they've been making sure that they aren't a big creditor when the end end comes and maximising their own personal financial situation. Obviously suppliers they've screwed over in the process might not be so keen to do business with them but a sales a sale to salesmen. And where the other victims are consumers it's not as though a bad rep necessarily gets around too much. It's a stable of Watchdog's Rogue Traders for double glazing/builders/elderly scams etc for a reason.

IMV there should be rules limiting the amount of "ownership" owners, directors (& senior management) of failed businesses can have over phoenix companies to prevent the incentive of using it as a wipe the books clean and carry on tool. This would hopefully ensure there was genuinely new investment coming in (rather than recycling of cash extracted from the old company) and greater diversity of leadership.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
DotM (and others) - this isn't a novel situation. Our insolvency laws have been refined over many years - centuries! - to balance the competing interests of differing stakeholders in failing businesses. It is extremely unlikely that that the framework is wide open to abuse in the way you suggest. Remember also that the protections offered by limited companies are frequently academic to business owners once banks are involved, as personal guarantees / collateral are a fact of life. More info required before conclusions can be drawn...
snow report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
@Dave of the Marmottes,
Quote:

IMV there should be rules limiting the amount of "ownership" owners, directors (& senior management) of failed businesses can have over phoenix companies to prevent the incentive of using it as a wipe the books clean and carry on tool.


+1
snow report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
It certainly doesn't smell very good.
The TravelMole link wrote:
James said he had no choice but to call in the administrators for Alpine Elements Ltd because the company still owes refunds to 2,500 customers whose holidays were cancelled at the end of the last ski season when resorts were forced to close. Under ABTA rules, the refunds had to be paid by the end of January 2021, but Alpine Elements didn't have the money. James said it has yet to receive refunds itself from suppliers including airlines, landlords and catering companies for holidays that didn't go ahead.

"We really thought we could get through this but we needed the money from this year's ski season and when [French] President Macron announced the ski lists wouldn't open we had to finalise the administration," he said.

So he was planning to use money from this season's holidaymakers to refund last season's, which looks a bit like trading while insolvent.

And he set up the new company (Venture Holidays, using the same properties) last May - so it also looks as though this was all planned at least 6 months ago. Sad
snow conditions
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
IanTr wrote:
DotM (and others) - this isn't a novel situation. Our insolvency laws have been refined over many years - centuries! - to balance the competing interests of differing stakeholders in failing businesses. It is extremely unlikely that that the framework is wide open to abuse in the way you suggest. Remember also that the protections offered by limited companies are frequently academic to business owners once banks are involved, as personal guarantees / collateral are a fact of life. More info required before conclusions can be drawn...


I would suggest the laws have been refined to suit the needs of the government (HMRC always a preferred creditor) and government again (preserving jobs is always good plus that lovely PAYE lolly) and business interests including investors, practioners and other totally disinterested experts. Not much interest of the consumer being represented - too small, too nebulous. Saying something has been done per the law is all very well but with the corporate veil so easy to use (and yes Mr Hardiman's words are very sloppy with his use of the "company" when he really means "my trade") I'm not convinced that "right" always triumphs.

Maybe a compromise would be for an additional law that said a Phoenix company had to disclose to all potential counterparties "Formal notice : This trade was previously carried on by XXX limited under substantially the same management. XXX Ltd entered into adminisatration on XXXXXX and the cost to unsecured creditors was YYYYYY"
latest report
 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.
The latest on Alpine Elements:
"Back-from-the-brink ski specialist: 'We were hung out to dry'"

https://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?c=setreg&region=2&m_id=s~T_~AvT_m&w_id=38392&news_id=2045416
ski holidays
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
So "I struggled to find a buyer pre-administration" but "I sold it to a company I'm director of"
latest report



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy