Advice on dispute with a private school please
Discussion
Vaud said:
eccles said:
You're really not helping yourself here, you're coming accross as the grizzling kid left behind when all the other kids have gone off to play with someone else!
I think you are mixing up Jasandjules and JustinP1. One commenting on the other?eccles said:
JustinP1 said:
I think the answer has already been decided though and the OP has been well and truly chased off by the vitriol he received and that anyone who actually tried to help him achieve the 'compromise' he was after were told that they know nothing.
You're really not helping yourself here, you're coming accross as the grizzling kid left behind when all the other kids have gone off to play with someone else!Edited by eccles on Saturday 19th September 16:04
JustinP1 said:
eccles said:
JustinP1 said:
I think the answer has already been decided though and the OP has been well and truly chased off by the vitriol he received and that anyone who actually tried to help him achieve the 'compromise' he was after were told that they know nothing.
You're really not helping yourself here, you're coming accross as the grizzling kid left behind when all the other kids have gone off to play with someone else!Edited by eccles on Saturday 19th September 16:04
JustinP1 said:
OpulentBob said:
Careful eccles, or he'll sue ya...
Yes, as Breadvan says, I am always suing someone so I guess it must be true. I have been deluding myself all these years.I think it's like a Fight Club type thing, where I've been doing it at night or something!
Thanks for taking it in the spirit intended
Breadvan72 said:
The claim is not for "costs", but for the loss that the school has incurred. The school's running costs will not be reduced by the absence of one pupil, and so a term's fees are a reasonable estimate of the loss incurred. It is standard for a private school to stipulate for a term's notice to terminate the contract. You are bang to rights, OP. Pay up.
This.It has always been the case. Prep or public? Whichever she would be better off at the private school, even one of the new type.
Simon (old type private school boy)
Edited by GC8 on Sunday 20th September 23:07
I like the bit of the surrounds that says "A1 South".
As for private school vs state school, a first rate state school (they exist, but there are not as many of them as there should be) is better than a second or third rate private school (there are many of those), but a first rate private school is leagues above even the best state school. It is a disgrace that a nation as prosperous as the UK cannot provide a school system which is consistently of the standard of the good private schools. Meanwhile, private education is a big factor in social division.
PS: I had a first rate state education in the 60s and 70s (this was not widely available in the 80s and 90s, was more widely available in the noughties, and may soon not be available again). My daughter is at a good private school. I wish that she was at a good state school, but my ex wife is snobby about state schools.
As for private school vs state school, a first rate state school (they exist, but there are not as many of them as there should be) is better than a second or third rate private school (there are many of those), but a first rate private school is leagues above even the best state school. It is a disgrace that a nation as prosperous as the UK cannot provide a school system which is consistently of the standard of the good private schools. Meanwhile, private education is a big factor in social division.
PS: I had a first rate state education in the 60s and 70s (this was not widely available in the 80s and 90s, was more widely available in the noughties, and may soon not be available again). My daughter is at a good private school. I wish that she was at a good state school, but my ex wife is snobby about state schools.
BV had it sewn up on the first page - pay up! Whilst JustinP1 may well have a point about it being poorly draughted, morally you are in the wrong and it will have cost the school a potential term's fees. I have had similar experiences as a private music teacher, which is precisely why I have a contract which specifies the exact notice that needs to be given.
Justin makes the keen amateur's error of assuming that his cases are a guide to anything other than their own facts. There is nothing in the information provided by the OP to suggest that the contract is ambiguous. A term's notice means a term's notice. These are ordinary words, not technical terms. Contract law is, for the most part, fairly simple. The amateur lawyer tends to over complicate what is usually fairly straightforward, and may mistakenly think that just because some points are debatable, all points are debatable. For a similar thread, see the employment forum, where another keen amateur is trying to encourage someone who has no case to run a case, based on a flawed understanding of the law of estoppel.
Keen amateurism is laudable, but not when it irresponsibly risks leading people into the hassle and expense of litigating on bad points.
Keen amateurism is laudable, but not when it irresponsibly risks leading people into the hassle and expense of litigating on bad points.
The issue is NOBODY here has seen the contract yet you're telling the OP to just pay up and that he doesn't have a case based on no more than the definition of what constitutes "a term" when used in a contract with a school. There may be other things in that contract that COULD be argued, but without seeing it,none of us, you included,can't say.
Furthermore,you seem to be trying to belittle JustinP1 just because he isn't a qualified solicitor, yet has personal experience of an almost identical situation to the OP and offered to give the OP some examples of points OP might wish to put forward to a suitably qualified and insured individual.
You seem very fond of pointing out that most of us are not regulated or insured to offer legal advice yet I wonder what good YOUR being insured and regulated would do the OP if he just pays up as per your advice and later finds out he actually could've gotten out of the contract? My guess would be not a lot since you like to use the acronym IAALBIANYL?
Furthermore,you seem to be trying to belittle JustinP1 just because he isn't a qualified solicitor, yet has personal experience of an almost identical situation to the OP and offered to give the OP some examples of points OP might wish to put forward to a suitably qualified and insured individual.
You seem very fond of pointing out that most of us are not regulated or insured to offer legal advice yet I wonder what good YOUR being insured and regulated would do the OP if he just pays up as per your advice and later finds out he actually could've gotten out of the contract? My guess would be not a lot since you like to use the acronym IAALBIANYL?
Centurion07 said:
The issue is NOBODY here has seen the contract yet you're telling the OP to just pay up and that he doesn't have a case based on no more than the definition of what constitutes "a term" when used in a contract with a school. There may be other things in that contract that COULD be argued, but without seeing it,none of us, you included,can't say.
Furthermore,you seem to be trying to belittle JustinP1 just because he isn't a qualified solicitor, yet has personal experience of an almost identical situation to the OP and offered to give the OP some examples of points OP might wish to put forward to a suitably qualified and insured individual.
You seem very fond of pointing out that most of us are not regulated or insured to offer legal advice yet I wonder what good YOUR being insured and regulated would do the OP if he just pays up as per your advice and later finds out he actually could've gotten out of the contract? My guess would be not a lot since you like to use the acronym IAALBIANYL?
I think BV's point is that just because other parts of an unseen contract might (stress, might) be unreasonable, it would not invalidate the whole contract. On term of fees based on X notice is as reasonable clause. Other clauses would not invalidate that clause.Furthermore,you seem to be trying to belittle JustinP1 just because he isn't a qualified solicitor, yet has personal experience of an almost identical situation to the OP and offered to give the OP some examples of points OP might wish to put forward to a suitably qualified and insured individual.
You seem very fond of pointing out that most of us are not regulated or insured to offer legal advice yet I wonder what good YOUR being insured and regulated would do the OP if he just pays up as per your advice and later finds out he actually could've gotten out of the contract? My guess would be not a lot since you like to use the acronym IAALBIANYL?
Vaud said:
I think BV's point is that just because other parts of an unseen contract might (stress, might) be unreasonable, it would not invalidate the whole contract. On term of fees based on X notice is as reasonable clause. Other clauses would not invalidate that clause.
Ah,maybe. That's not how I read it and that point could certainly have been made without the constant "I'm a lawyer and you're not so I'm right" vibe.Vaud said:
Other clauses would not invalidate that clause.
Possibly. Possibly not. Anyways, can someone help me out with the exact date that the OP needed to cancel by. "A Term". I don't know what a term is exactly- spoke to a teacher but her school is "unusual" so she couldn't help me either. I know I am looking silly here as it is obvious to many of you but in my defence I don't have children and school was rather a long time ago!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff