Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi all,


Apologies for an elitist topic... we accepted a place at a local private school, signed the contract, and paid a deposit.


S/he was then offered a place from the wait-list at our first choice. We withdrew them from the first school, and resigned ourselves to losing the deposit. We have now received a bill for the first term.


This happens to others. As anyone got away with not paying?


It is a very popular school, and they are very likely to fill the place, therefore not suffering any damage, and actually benefiting from our deposit. Legally, you should only pay damages that flow from the breach of contract.


Of course, it's very likely that this group of schools will support one another, and we will find ourselves under pressure from the new school too, and our name will be mud...


Any experience or anonymous legal advice very welcome,


Tercio

I've always understood that if you give notice after Easter your liable for first terms fees as well as deposit, before it's just the deposit. at least that's how I've always understood it. its to deter a lot of late movement I guess? When did you withdraw?
There is no need to apologise for sending your child to a private school although you may think there is given the tone of some of the people on this forum. You have chosen to spend your money on education, rather than expensive foreign holidays (thereby wasting valuable finite energy resources), or an expensive car, or even a second home in the country (thereby pushing up house prices and contributing to the death of the English village).....sorry for the rant- but you should not apologise. As a teacher myself, in the state sector, I am all too aware of the inverted snobbery surrounding the topic.
  • Like 1
Uncleglen, how can you possibly know that the op has chosen to pay school fees instead of foreign travel, expensive cars or a second home? Do you know something that the rest of us don't? (excuse thread derail but that just seems SO bizarre).

"It is a very popular school, and they are very likely to fill the place, therefore not suffering any damage, and actually benefiting from our deposit. Legally, you should only pay damages that flow from the breach of contract."


With the caveat that I'm not an expert, it's not quite as simple as that. Contractual terms for payments of this type are enforceable unless they are penalties i.e. intended to be a deterrent rather than pre-estimate of loss. However, that test is applied in light of the overall commercial rationale/business model, not just the particular case, so not such an obvious outcome. You can expect that the school will have a fairly well-rehearsed case as to why this is not a penalty.


If you are asking whether they are likely to pursue you if you refuse to pay, anecdotally the answer is 'yes - very likely'. Are they likely to win? Impossible to predict without seeing their evidence, and you won't get that unless you fight, and incur some fairly hefty costs.


It might be worth writing to them and pointing out that it seems more likely that deposit plus a whole term's fees is an arbitrary figure rooted in tradition and practice in the sector rather than a genuine pre-estimate of loss, that you are willing to pay a lesser, reasonable amount, and make them an offer.


Edited to add - if you want to be a bit cheeky you could also say that if they do pursue you for the full amount, you will require disclosure from them of the detailed financial information that supports any supposed pre-estimate of loss calculation i.e. how many deposits are forfeited, how many sets of fees billed and received for non-attending students, the actual additional costs to them of re-allocating rejected places etc.

There is a fairly recent case on this - same situation, don't know if the terms of the contract are similar to what you signed up to, but the school won. I'll try and find the reference so you can see whether it's similar to your contract.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • From memory foxes only became a regular sight in the 90s, the attached article says they first appeared in the 30s becoming far more common in the 80s.  Apparently, whilst we think that urban foxes live longer than rural due to their 'easy' life few will make it over the age of two.  In towns they are far more crowded than their natural habitat where they are more territorial. I've never seen foxes and cats fighting but once saw two cats squaring up to each other and a watching fox went up and butted its head against one of the cats.  There's a video on youtube of a cat and fox facing off when the cat is eating outside, but it wont let me embed on this post.  Get too close and I'll scratch you. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/15/urban-foxes-are-they-fantastic-or-a-growing-menace My main issue is leaving things out like gardening gloves and they go or are shredded.  One stole a bag of bird food in front of me, took it next door, shredded the bag and then left it.  
    • I was trying to remember when Franklins moved to Lordship Lane from Walworth Road where it was combined with an antique/bric a brac shop. Mid 1990s, first wave ED gentrification?
    • Hello, I lost a babies blanket between Tessa Jowell and the Picture House on Lordship Lane 😞It is teal colour with the name Cillian embroidered on it.  If anyone sees/finds it please let me know.  Thank you! 
    • Good to hear Sue - I  love Franklin’s  Although to be fair it would be a mad world where decades old local institution couldn’t do much better than (gawd help us all) a generic Youngs pub  (I had better meals in that place when it was the vale and ran by the Murphia. And that was fairly poor food even then ) 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...