Am i entitled to refund on school trip

halibut2209

I don't think the OP is coming back, so we may never get the resolution to this one.

Shame really as I've been enjoying the debate.

halibut2209

poet123 wrote: »

It is similar to being refused boarding on a plane for being drunk or other misconduct, you would not get a refund for your flight, and you would have to pay to transfer and fly later.

But that is due to behaviour AT THE TIME, not to do with an separate incident.

Could you be refused a boarding because you were drunk the week before?

mandragora_2

Why should she go? She's the one one who'had a disagreement with the teacher', sufficient that the school have taken the serious step of saying they can't take her away. Presumably they feel that her behaviour was bad enough to jeapordise her own or others' safety and well-being while away on the trip.

The staff involved get no extra pay, give up their free time and take on the huge responsibility of organising a trip for, dealing with all the paperwork, risk assessments etc etc for, running the meetings, planning, preparing and then delivering said trip to some 20 or 30 or 40 or 50 teenagers - other people's children. While away, there will be some nice things for them - sure, but they'll be on call 24 hours a day and accountable for every single thing that happens for the duration. In the evenings, when they could be at home with their own family, their own children, they will be away with your child instead, along with the rest of the coach load, making sure they are safe and having a good educational experience. I take groups away regularly, and believe me, I'm on pins the whole time, but I do it because I believe it's a valid thing to do. I get not one extra penny for it, and generate for myself hours and hours of extra work.

Anyone who looks as if they're going to argue with staff who are acting in loco parentis, or who's going to make what is generally a pleasant but potentially tricky and exhausting experience any harder than it has to be needs to be left at home, for their own safety and for the well-being of the other 49 on the trip who have managed NOT to fall out with their teachers, and who have paid good money to have a pleasant and safe trip.

Your daughter has created this problem, not the school who are going the extra mile to provide your daughter with the opportunity of an enhanced educational experience. If she's going to be bolshy in school, why risk that she'll 'have a disagreement' with a teacher about when and where to meet; how to behave; rules about staying in buddy' groups? If she disagrees with a rule while abroad, and then doesn't follow it then she could compromise every one else's enjoyment of the trip (everyone waiting in a parked bus because someone 'disagreed' with meet-up times; missing a ferry - ditto; disagreeing about the rule that says don't wander into out of bounds areas and putting herself at risk as a result etc etc).

They will probably tell you that the decision was made on the grounds of risk assessment, and the safety and well-being of your daughter and the others. The ferry has been booked, and her place sold. The accomodation and food has been booked, and a financial commitment undertaken. Your daughter has thrown this opportunity away, those financial commitments won't go away - the hotel bed will be there, but empty that night. The same with the ferry. It's her own fault she's not there to enjoy it.

I can see no reason to fall out with the school over this - it's her problem, and the reason it is all cost and no gain is entirely down to her. I'd be cross with her, and it would be the last time for a very long time I risked investing any more money in her.

I think the best you can do is ask whether or not there's a waiting list for the trip, and whether there's any chance the place could be sold on to another child who doesn't disagree with teachers.

*and breathe*

poet123

halibut2209 wrote: »

But that is due to behaviour AT THE TIME, not to do with an separate incident.

Could you be refused a boarding because you were drunk the week before?

If that was in their t&c's that you had accepted by buying a ticket and ticking a box, and they could show they had good reason for that clause, then yes.

System

halibut2209 wrote: »

I don't think the OP is coming back, so we may never get the resolution to this one.

Shame really as I've been enjoying the debate.

The debates been about your belief that there are absolutely no circumstances where the school is the innocent party. You seem to believe no matter what the child's done the school should refund the money back.

The OP could come back with the fact that her daughter has turned out to be high ranking member of Al-Queda and you would still demand they are refunded!

System

halibut2209 wrote: »

But that is due to behaviour AT THE TIME, not to do with an separate incident.

Could you be refused a boarding because you were drunk the week before?

You can be on a plane the week before and banned from that airline for life. Depends what you do

mynameistallulah

mynameistallulah wrote: »

You failed to answer, who is the innocent party in the given scenario, who is in breach of contract?

Still no answer to this halibut2209 ... Employee or employer?

halibut2209

What's Al-Queda got to do with it? It's much easier to have a debate/discussion without resorting to silly extremes.

The school is not "innocent" as they have made a decision to deny the child the trip based on something unconnected to the trip.

Do they have the right? Yes, they do. I am not denying that.

But the fact that it is due to an unrelated incident means that the school is not 100% innocent. They have taken a risk-assessment and decided that they no longer wish to proceed with this contract. Their choice. If that ends up costing them a few quid then that's fair enough. That's the price they have to pay to cancel the contract.

DVardysShadow

mynameistallulah wrote: »

I agree with everything you have said, except that the clause would not necessarily need to be in the holiday contract. Most schools have behaviour policies, which would also detail consequences of very poor behaviour, and this would simply be an extension of that.

* Goes to look at said policy to see if cancellation of trips/ holidays is listed *

If such a clause is explicitly part of a holiday contract, that is one matter.

But if the school wants the clause in a holiday contract, it would have to put it there explicitly and they would be on a very sticky wicket to argue that the behaviour policy provided a basis to cancel the pupil's place on the holiday without compensation.

At most, they could argue that a behaviour policy clause stating 'sanctions may include [blah blah] or exclusion from school activities' gave them the power to exclude the pupil from the holiday - but I cannot see that they would escape a claim to pay back the cost of the holiday in full if the behaviour policy was the main plank of their argument.



Thinking on this some more, I would bet that having the holiday taken away was a totally disproportionate and bad tempered reaction to the daughter talking back to the teacher. And that the Deputy Head is struggling to find a way to deal with the problem without being seen to overrule the teacher and without having to refund from school funds.

I would be interested to see OP post again with more details of what actually happened, to see if there are some more appropriate ways to deal with it.

halibut2209

goater78 wrote: »

You can be on a plane the week before and banned from that airline for life. Depends what you do

How is that relevant?