Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have a thriving sporting culture in the East Dulwich area and so I am extremely disappointed to announce that Alleyns School has decided to take away the pool time they rent to a local swim club that encourages kids and parents to train together. Tigersharks Swim Club has trained at Alleyns pool for 27 years and has been given 2 weeks notice by the school to terminate that relationship. It is devastating to both the group of 150 swimmers and the coaching team - it is their livelihood. We are trying to change the decision and so if you have ever swam at Tigersharks, know someone who has, or would just like to support us, please add your name in the comments below as we try and petition the school on the basis of community, inclusion and just downright fairness. Thanks so much in advance. 

  • Agree 1

Alleyns would most probably have based their decision on regular participation numbers by Tigersharks . You have mentioned a "group of 150 swimmers" but it might help if you can accurately quantify the regular attendance numbers.

My understanding is that the regular participation is significantly less.

10 minutes ago, vladi said:

Alleyns would most probably have based their decision on regular participation numbers by Tigersharks . You have mentioned a "group of 150 swimmers" but it might help if you can accurately quantify the regular attendance numbers.

My understanding is that the regular participation is significantly less.

Me and my family are some of the many members affected by this short-sighted decision - and there's plenty of people in the pool when we go every week.: children learning to swim, families swimming together, etc
From what i understand, absolutely  no reason has been given by the school for pulling out for this 27 year relationship - so hard to know why they are trying to do this. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Tiger Sharks holds a special place in my heart - not only did both my children learn to swim at Tiger Sharks but it was also where I learnt to swim properly for the very first time.  Rather than watching their lessons each week, I was encouraged into the pool and Chris expertly and patiently taught me how to breath properly while swimming. 
If correct, this decision to terminate Tiger Sharks contract with little or no explanation feels very wrong. It’s no way to treat anyone, let alone an organisation with which you’ve had a 27 year relationship. Schools should be anchor institutions, at the heart of the community - I hope Alleyn’s aren’t turning their backs on this civic duty, as historically this was always something they did quite well.  

 

  • Like 2

Wow, thanks for making this issue public. I thought I was the only one outraged at what took place. I am angered at this decision and the way that this was dealt with.  


I am one of many persons affected by this decision - the way that Alleyn's School dealt with the situation was very careless and inconsiderate to Kris, the coach of the team. He was given very short notice on this decision, and no clear reason as to why this happened. They also did not allow for him to renegotiate terms or suggested alternatives. Really unfair and inconsiderate from what is meant to be a role model institution and their role in the community. 

Personally, this is terrible news too - Tiger sharks swimming lessons were the place where I could just switch off from the pressure of the day to day, and with all the benefits it has in my well being and mental health. It helped me keep up with my swimming practice, and doing so without being under pressure from competitive swimmers or from the intense time commitment for lessons from other clubs. This also affects a very large community of users who have grown under Kris's guidance and feedback - this really is just an appalling situation and I would say this just tarnishes the Alleyn's School brand severely.

Please, do add my name to any sort of letter to campaign on the issue. My name is Vitor Paiva, and I have been at Tiger sharks with Kris since 2016.  

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
44 minutes ago, vladi said:

Alleyns would most probably have based their decision on regular participation numbers by Tigersharks . You have mentioned a "group of 150 swimmers" but it might help if you can accurately quantify the regular attendance numbers.

My understanding is that the regular participation is significantly less.

The pool is always full when we’re swimming. Regular attendance really isn’t an issue. Sessions are always well attended. Perhaps this is why Alleyn’s wants to co-opt it and try to do it in house to make more direct profit

The 150 swimmers is the monthly count of regular swimmers over the Monday, Thursday and Sunday sessions the club has (had) access to. The total Club membership count is 217. Tigersharks have supported national swimmers to achieve high standards in swimming and water polo. Krys is a gifted coach who has helped many ambitious individual athletes, myself included, who holds a world ranking of 5 in the 200m Butterfly. It is not the Club's goal to achieve just numbers or status. We support challenged swimmers who are not suited to high level achievement. WE ARE A COMMUNITY CLUB offering bursaries and reduced rates. Inclusion is at our heart.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

I joined Tiger Sharks 3y ago so my kids could learn an essential life skill, which their own school could not support.

3y later and they've gone from being afraid of the deep end, to being among the strongest swimmers in their school.

Even better - I get to swim at the same time (and can now even do a passable butterfly!).

Tiger Sharks is a special community - hopefully Alleyn's will see sense here.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
32 minutes ago, Mav said:

Law of unintended consequences perhaps?

I think there is more to it that just that - no amount of running the club themselves, which would also incur costs, would compensate for that change...

The thing is, and for what seems to have taken place - this is only affecting Krys classes, and by extension, the Tiger shark swimming club.  None of the other clubs who also use the same facilities have had their activity restricted and stopped. They all seem to continue to operate the same way as before, and are expected to continue to do so for next year. This is very discriminatory towards the users of the club, and to Krys himself. 

So, yeah, it is quite a rubbish and despicable attitude from Alleyn's School to behave like this. I mean, one is there for 27years, every single year, week and weekends, building the club and the community from the ground up. And what does one get for one's efforts? A simple call over the phone to announce that the school is not going to renew his contract and that he has to go?  This 2 weeks before the term time finishes, and when everyone was already thinking about the beginning of the new term next year? And no justification over the phone or an invitation to a meeting to discuss the situation. Just a phone call and goodbye. It's rubbish behavior... This coming from a school that wants to be seen as setting a high standard of conduct for the community... 

Would you be happy if you had put in the effort over the years, creating the club and the community from the ground up, just for someone to then throw you out and steal your efforts and ideas, and profit from them instead? Because that's what Alleyn's School is seen to be doing in here... 
Don't they have enough already??

Edited by VPaiva
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Really sad. My son and I swam there 15 or so years ago. With teaching from Krys my son went on to swim at the London Youth Games and be chosen to swim for London at national level. This has been a great resource for the local community for a very long time and it is shocking there has been no proper communication from the school with a reason given for ending such a long relationship. It shows a distinct lack of basic good manners. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
9 hours ago, CPR Dave said:

I'm guessing there will be lots of unfortunate decisions made like this as the private schools tighten thier belts to find the money for Labour's new 20% VAT on fees. 

The community will pay a hefty price for that policy.

Don't think it is a financial decision. The club has always rented to pool from Alleyns and they were told that there was no option to re-negotiate. A 27 year relationship terminated with 2 weeks notice and no reason given.

My only thought us that it could be a strategy: independent schools have, over the last few years, made a lot of the support they give to local communities - a cynic may say that was done (even partly) to prevent them losing charity status & paying VAT. So, it could be that Tigersharks is a victim of the school withdrawing such goodwill "if you dont scratch our backs, we wont yours"  now such changes seem  inevitable 

I really hope this isn't the case, because it would fly in the face of a number of their values

Even if this is true Alleyns could have arranged a meeting in person with Krys to discuss. Alleyn’s has no values in my opinion & I’m so glad my children don’t go there. Pity for all those families throwing their £££ at a school hoping their children will be raised by the best faculty money can buy. 😤

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

If you can just park the VAT argument this is about a local club providing sporting/leisure opportunities for the local community. As a nation whether it is the private or public sector we should be encouraging and developing sports clubs, the benefits to the local community regards health and well-being are fundamental to a healthy society. Decisions like this have far reaching consequences and I hope they will consider the strong sense of community feeling and reverse this decision. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Why would Alleyn's do this, unless, perhaps (a) they found they could get a better return for the slot booked or (b) there is some other reason that they choose not to make public? The time this relationship has been going on for, and the apparently public good it has engendered would make me suspect that for Alleyn's to have made this decision there is something we don't know. Much as many may dislike a public school and what it does, these people really aren't fools. And yet. on the face of it, this seems a foolish decision.

Edited by Penguin68
10 hours ago, tiddles said:

Doubt it has anything to do with that… 

I think the VAT issue should not just be dismissed. You think parents sending their children to independent schools are all very wealthy and it’s not the case for all. I presume they will need to look for more lucrative income streams to avoid passing on the full 20% VAT to parents. It should not be underestimated what the VAT policy will do to state education and local communities (as well as the psychological and emotional damage it will have on families and children in independent education who keep getting forgotten as apparently they can just pay more). That said it is extremely poor form not to explain why they are ending this longstanding relationship and to seemingly have potentially singled out one club.

The termination decision of Tiger Sharks by Alleyns is very diappointing in principle and in the way it was done with little regard for a small business owner and the community he has served with distinction for more than a quarter of a century.  I could barely swim a length before I joined in my late 30s and I now as a 50 something I am relatively proficient (have done a few open water distance swims) thanks to Kris and the team. He taught me, my wife, my elderly aunt with whom he was exceptionally patient and supportive and all 3 of my kids and 2 nieces. I cannot imagine another community swim club with anything like the same product and ethos.  In times when mental health is much higher on the agenda I can only say that Tiger Sharkshas made such a meaningful impact on our lives over many years and I cannot adequately express our deep sadness, anger and disappointment with the decision that has been made and the way it has been done.

Edited by tariqj
incomplete sentence
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
3 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

Why would Alleyn's do this...these people really aren't fools. 

How familiar are you with Alleyns and how it has previously run its construction projects, dealt with noise issues, engaged with its neighbours, responding to traffic and parking issues...? 

The way it seems is that the elephant in the room here is upcoming liability to VAT. To qualify for charity status, Alleyns was obliged to provide a wide variety of support to the wider community. 

Imposing VAT means the community obligation can be dispensed with . Should the Tigersharks access be continued then they will be liable to VAT at 20%.

As to the other support that Alleys provides, then its up to them to decide whether they continue with it or whether they charge.

Imposing VAT on private education will certainly have a wide range of unintended consequences.

Edited by vladi
On 23/06/2024 at 23:14, CPR Dave said:

I'm guessing there will be lots of unfortunate decisions made like this as the private schools tighten thier belts to find the money for Labour's new 20% VAT on fees. 

The community will pay a hefty price for that policy.

Again, I am not sure it is that simple, and I suspect there is bad faith in the mixture from the side of Alleyn's School. 

They have not cancelled the contracts for other clubs/teams using the facilities - they will continue using the facilities as they have been, and they haven't had the same treatment that they gave to Krys and the Tiger sharks swimming club (not renewing the contract, and informing him of the decision over the phone, with no opportunity for discussion or renegotiation of terms). 

This is no longer about VAT, this is just careless and inconsiderate behavior from an institution that is meant to known and behave better. This is discrimination, and even ageism comes to mind, as they probably expected Krys to just accept it.... This is disgraceful, and for all the talk about Alleyn's School playing ball because it suited them up until now, the community should roll back any benefit that Alleyn's School have received over the years...

 

This is an unacceptable way to manage the situation, and for all those that are trying to rationalize the situation, could you just consider how would you feel if you had put in the effort over 27 years, giving away your weeks and weekends, come rain or sunshine, developing something from the ground up and creating a club not only cherished but of great benefit to the community, to have it taken away by an institution when it suited them and without the need to further clarify and explain their decision? This is opportunistic and greedy behavior from Alleyn's School, and it should be denounced and shamed. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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