School deposits

halibut2209

I wouldn't worry too much about Jethro. His posts are indicative of the "My opinion is always right, regardless of facts" sort.

DCodd

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

Despite much misleading information on the internet, you can not (except in some very specific instances) sign away your statutory rights under law. You are only "bound by what you sign" if the document you sign does not breach any of your statutory rights.

Hintza

In this instance the school has the money and I suspect they will be keeping it.

DCodd

Hintza wrote: »

In this instance the school has the money and I suspect they will be keeping it.

If people follow the advice from some on here and just let it go, then thats a given. If they contest it then the deposit holder has to weigh up the consequences of potentially facing court action, then it is not so cut and dried.

A threat of court action can be enough if the deposit holder is not so certain of their position.

Of course if anyone is thinking about going down the legal action route, a consultaion with a solicitor first is essential.

Flyboy152

JethroUK wrote: »

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)

Are you deliberately ignoring what the law says about contracts, losses and damages (points that have been referred to throughout this thread)? The contract cannot decide on what damages are due to any party, only a court can do that; that is the law. One party cannot impose a penalty on another; again, only a court can do that; that is the law. Any losses being sued for must be genuine and reasonable and that party has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to mitigate those losses; that is 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

That would only depend on the value of your losses. If you have taken a deposit of five hundred pounds, but have only spent two hundred pounds, you would only be allowed to keep the two hundred pounds. The court will not award you any loss of profit, because you never had it in the first place in order to lose it.

If this is the way you operate, I would presume you will be spending a lot of time in court.

JethroUK

Flyboy152 wrote: »

... The contract cannot decide on what damages are due to any party, only a court can do that....

It's not me that's not listening - I've just said that 3 times!!!!!!!

Our difference is simple - prior to the case going to court and judge assessing "the damage" (which at least we agree only 'a judge' can do) - the deposit formed part of a contract 'to buy' and to decide not to buy (for whatgever reason) is a breech and other party can (and will) retain at the very least the deposit and may sue for the remainder of the contract

Flyboy152 wrote: »

...That would only depend on the value of your losses. .....

but we 'agreed' damage/losses is for the judge to decide

Flyboy152 wrote: »

...If you have taken a deposit of five hundred pounds, but have only spent two hundred pounds, .....

And if you put £500 deposit on a holiday worth £1500 and you 'change your mind'???????????

I'll give you 3 guesses (no 1) as to what will happen to your deposit

No dont guess - I'll tell you - you wont get the deposit back even if you died (best excuse I can think of)


In this case a school could very successfully argue that they have lost one terms subscription because buyer 'changed their mind' and it was too late to fill the vacany

You dont need to read any law to see that's just common sense (& morally correct) outcome

Last I'll say on this

bod1467

I can agree (somewhat) with regards to the elder child. As to the younger child - OP has given 2.5 YEARS notice ... school cannot claim loss of subscription as they have ample time to mitigate the loss and fill the place.

And others have said before ... common sense/morally-correct and the Law do not always agree.

Flyboy152

JethroUK wrote: »

It's not me that's not listening - I've just said that 3 times!!!!!!!

Our difference is simple - prior to the case going to court and judge assessing "the damage" (which at least we agree only 'a judge' can do) - the deposit formed part of a contract 'to buy' and to decide not to buy (for whatgever reason) is a breech and other party can (and will) retain at the very least the deposit and may sue for the remainder of the contract





but we 'agreed' damage/losses is for the judge to decide





And if you put £500 deposit on a holiday worth £1500 and you 'change your mind'???????????

I'll give you 3 guesses (no 1) as to what will happen to your deposit

No dont guess - I'll tell you - you wont get the deposit back even if you died (best excuse I can think of)


In this case a school could very successfully argue that they have lost one terms subscription because buyer 'changed their mind' and it was too late to fill the vacany

You dont need to read any law to see that's just common sense (& morally correct) outcome

Last I'll say on this

Are you ignoring what you have been shown on purpose, just to cause an argument? :wall:

other party can (and will) retain at the very least the deposit and may sue for the remainder of the contract

No they can't. The very most they can keep is what they have lost and nothing more. I really don't understand why you cannot see that, despite the evidence being presented to you several times on this thread. You have asked several times, to show where in law does it say that the business can keep all of the deposit, if the losses are less than that what has been paid?

ETA:

Damages and losses cannot be paid on the basis of what might or might not happen.