sia renewal fee, a ripoff?

eharkin1

Can anyone help me please? Apologies if i have put this in the wrong thread but i wasnt sure where to put it.

My husband has been registered with the SIA as a door supervisor for the last three years. He was one of the very first to receive the licence when it was introduced and we paid over £200 for it as well as him completing the courses and police check

Now it has expired we have checked with SIA again onhow to renew it and have been told we have to pay the same as a new registration which is £245!!!

When we queried the price apparently it is to cover admin charges!!, (thats some good wages those people are on or they must be using conqueror paper for every memo)

My argument is that if he has been registered with them for the past 3 years why would it still cost the same if they already have his details, police check record etc.

Could this come under the same argument as the bank reclaim costs scenarios?

£245 is nowhere near in my opinion a plausible amount for admin costs. This is a lot of money to be paying out in one lump sum as they wont let you pay each month etc but as we need to rely on him earning money we cant as he is no longer allowed to work the doors.

Any advise would be greatly appreciated

MarkyMarkD

No, it couldn't come under the same argument as the bank reclaim costs scenarios. And there has been no legal ruling that bank charges are invalid in any case!

It's a membership fee for the SIA and they can charge what the heck they like.

skylight

Its a "forced" membership and they can charge what they like. But if your OH does not renew it, then he does not work (on doors).

OH and I decided that its not worth it, so he won't be renewing his. But yes, we both agree with you that it certainly does not cost that much for a full CRB disclosure, a bit of admin work for it and laminating a bit of card. (I know, there is more to it than laminating........... ;-) )

MarkyMarkD

I presume that SIA is a non-profit-making organisation, and hence the amount charged does fairly reflect their total administration costs.

eharkin1

I presume that SIA is a non-profit-making organisation, and hence the amount charged does fairly reflect their total administration costs.

Certainly doesnt look like it to me, there had been talks about them making people do the courses again at full cost as well.!!!

Luckily the exam boards said no way as there was no point.

So methinks the SIA body is just another government scheme to make people pay them for the privalege of working their butt off to pay them tax.

This is really gonna cripple us now as he wont be able to earn anything. I swear we would be better off claiming benefits but we have way too much pride than to skive off everyone else.

Like skylight said, how can a new crb disclosure, a laminated card and a person doing 30 mins of admin be justified at £245??

dmg24

eharkin1 wrote: »

Certainly doesnt look like it to me, there had been talks about them making people do the courses again at full cost as well.!!!

Luckily the exam boards said no way as there was no point.

So methinks the SIA body is just another government scheme to make people pay them for the privalege of working their butt off to pay them tax.

This is really gonna cripple us now as he wont be able to earn anything. I swear we would be better off claiming benefits but we have way too much pride than to skive off everyone else.

Like skylight said, how can a new crb disclosure, a laminated card and a person doing 30 mins of admin be justified at £245??

Many professions require paid registration to a certain body on an annual basis. Why should this be any different?

eharkin1

oh and surprise surprise, the sia body reports directly to the home office

eharkin1

im not denying that he should be licenced, have to pay a fee etc. My grumble is about the cost of renewal.

How can they justify that amount? simple answer is , they cant!

I can see this becoming a real issue as my husband is one of the first having to renew his licence. ALot of people i have spoken too have refused to renew based on the cost.
As pubs/club are now open longer hours i can see a shortage of door supervisors happening simply because we cannot afford such a huge fee upfront to renew it.

dmg24

eharkin1 wrote: »

im not denying that he should be licenced, have to pay a fee etc. My grumble is about the cost of renewal.

How can they justify that amount? simple answer is , they cant!

I can see this becoming a real issue as my husband is one of the first having to renew his licence. ALot of people i have spoken too have refused to renew based on the cost.
As pubs/club are now open longer hours i can see a shortage of door supervisors happening simply because we cannot afford such a huge fee upfront to renew it.

Why should bouncers (sorry, door supervisors!) be paid the amount that they do? Because someone decided that it was justified, in the same way that someone has decided that this fee is justified.

You have a choice, pay the fee or the hubbie finds a new job. Moaning about it isn't going to change the fact that it needs paying!

eharkin1

wow, have i offended you in some way?

I'm sorry but I dont think your response was very polite. My husband is only paid £6.80 per hour so isn't exactly earning a massive wage. Due to childcare costs that job was the only job he could get to fit around my work hours so i could then look after the kids.

I came on here to ask for advice, yes i have grumbled about it a bit too much but when its affecting our income i wanted to make sure that i was exploring every possible way around it.

If any moderator would like to remove this thread then i am happy for this to be done.

MarkyMarkD

eharkin1 wrote: »

oh and surprise surprise, the sia body reports directly to the home office

So what?

The SIA has in fact, if you had checked the figures rather than simply criticising them, run at a loss for the four years from 2003/04 to 2006/07 inclusive. It is targeted to reach a break-even position but it's not intended to make a profit.

The costs of regulating the industry are clearly more significant than you think.

The fee you are talking about isn't intended to cover merely the administrative costs of issuing a licence. They are intended to cover a share of the whole running costs of SIA. Exactly as membership of any professional/regulatory body requires the members to pay their share of the organisation's entire cost-base.