School deposits

Hintza

Where is the penalty? You all assume that the deposit is not reasonable reflection of the costs incurred the school could equally argue that is is. The OP then has the opportunity of testing their argument in court. Are the brave enough for that?

As with anything like this the Flyboy quotes the letter of the law. What that fails to take into account is what is morally right or wrong.

I for one would never put down a deposit unless I was prepared to deal. If I was buying a second hand car (this appears to the favourite one just now) and was asked for a holding deposit I would refuse as should anyone with an ounce of common sense, if however I had viewed the car and decided to buy it and left a deposit then I would be obligated to buy it.

But then again my word is my bond.

In this example if I was the school I would have it down as a registration fee which was refundable upon you taking up your place then we wouldn't be having this argument.

Where is the OP anyway another runner?

Flyboy152

Hintza wrote: »

Where is the penalty? You all assume that the deposit is not reasonable reflection of the costs incurred the school could equally argue that is is. The OP then has the opportunity of testing their argument in court. Are the brave enough for that?

There is no way that the school will have lost seven hundred pounds in administering a school place.

As with anything like this the Flyboy quotes the letter of the law. What that fails to take into account is what is morally right or wrong.

And nothing about the change in quality of the service being offered?

I for one would never put down a deposit unless I was prepared to deal. If I was buying a second hand car (this appears to the favourite one just now) and was asked for a holding deposit I would refuse as should anyone with an ounce of common sense, if however I had viewed the car and decided to buy it and left a deposit then I would be obligated to buy it.

But then again my word is my bond.

Then why put down a deposit at all, why not pay everything up front?

In this example if I was the school I would have it down as a registration fee which was refundable upon you taking up your place then we wouldn't be having this argument.

Where is the OP anyway another runner?

In which case it is not a registration fee, it is an advanced payment. You can't have it both ways.

halibut2209

Hintza wrote: »

You all assume that the deposit is not reasonable reflection of the costs incurred the school could equally argue that is is. The OP then has the opportunity of testing their argument in court. Are the brave enough for that?

This is absolutely correct and I am not denying that. What I am correcting is the incorrect assumption that a deposit is automatically forfeited. That is the part which is untrue.

Yes, the school would have to demonstrate that their ACTUAL losses are £700. This are losses which are unique to the OP. So things such as staff wages, electricity, advertising etc wouldn't count as that money would be spent regardless of the OP's actions. You think £700 are their actual losses. Others disagree. That's why we have courts

Hintza

So at the end of the day regardless of what we all say. The school either agrees to reduce the deposit or not; if not the OP could take it to court with the danger being the school could go for more.

The OP rolls the dice.

halibut2209

Almost. If the school wanted to go for more (which they would not get), then they would have to sue the OP.

Do we have "counterclaims" in this country? Or is that just Judge Judy?

Flyboy152

Hintza wrote: »

So at the end of the day regardless of what we all say. The school either agrees to reduce the deposit or not; if not the OP could take it to court with the danger being the school could go for more.

The OP rolls the dice.

They could attempt a counter claim, as is their right, but they would still have to demonstrate that that money has been lost. There is nowhere that could be reasonably proven. How the school could have lost seven hundred pounds, let alone more, is inconceivable.

arcon5

Hintza wrote: »

I for one would never put down a deposit unless I was prepared to deal. If I was buying a second hand car (this appears to the favourite one just now) and was asked for a holding deposit I would refuse as should anyone with an ounce of common sense, if however I had viewed the car and decided to buy it and left a deposit then I would be obligated to buy it.

But then again my word is my bond.

It's not as simple as that, people's circumstances can change suddenly, especially in this climate - leaving them in a position they can no longer afford to go ahead, despite whatever morals they have.

JethroUK

Flyboy152 wrote: »

You don't need to read what the law says about deposits? On what legal grounds do you think the business has to withhold all of the customer's deposit?

Flyboy152 wrote: »

Nonsense!

On what grounds would the business have the legal right to withhold the deposit?

Simples - I have already said (twice) that a deposit forms part of the agreement 'to buy' - they can retain the deposit as breech of agreement to cover damages - not only that, they can sue for the remainder of the contract "to buy" - thats THE LAW!! (and morally right!)

The buyer would then need to take the other party to court where a judge would mitigate/assess 'the damage' as a result of the "breech of contract" and they might get some of the deposit back (that's what was posted - not the law)

If you came into my shop and asked me to order a one-off item and left a deposit - wandered in 2 days later and asked for deposit back because you "changed your mind" do you suppose I'd give you your deposit back? dream on

You would need to take me to court - and after explaining my damages (lost the sale several times and ordering the item which i cant sell) you would not only loose your deposit but I would counter sue for the balance and win both counts

JethroUK

arcon5 wrote: »

It's not as simple as that, people's circumstances can change suddenly, especially in this climate - leaving them in a position they can no longer afford to go ahead, despite whatever morals they have.

Yeap - and you could fall ill before flying away on holiday you 'promised to pay for' - so you get 'insured' - 'a deposit' forms the agreement 'to buy' - doesn't matter what the excuse for breech is, it IS still a breech

We just have to talk about 'damages' that have occurred as a result of the breech - and that will ultimately be defined by 'the judge' - so no point speculating about that

arcon5

JethroUK wrote: »

Yeap - and you could fall ill before flying away on holiday you 'promised to pay for' - so you get 'insured' - 'a deposit' forms the agreement 'to buy' - doesn't matter what the excuse for breech is, it IS still a breech

We just have to talk about 'damages' that have occurred as a result of the breech - and that will ultimately be defined by 'the judge' - so no point speculating about that

In which case the consumer is liable for their losses, not necessarily entitled to detain the whole deposit.

If if somebody left say£2k deposit on a £5k car.. Do you then continue to say its fair they don't get the deposit back? Whilst the dealer resells the car and mitigates the loss.