Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Taking action against a private school? Any advice? In dispute with Moorlands, LS16

20 replies

HappySquirrel1 · 23/09/2014 14:57

This is a long story so I’ll try to keep it concise! I’m looking for a solicitor in Leeds, Yorkshire that specialises in claims against private schools. Or for advice from any parents who have been in a similar situation to ours.

We have had ongoing problems with Moorlands School at Weetwood LS16 this year and are looking into legal action.
They state that a clause on their contract means they can get rid of any child for any reason so long as they give a terms notice. This clause means they don’t have to pay costs or credit parents for any financial losses caused by a child having to change schools suddenly.

History: We moved our son (now 12) to Moorlands for year 4 with the intention of keeping him there 5 years, until the end of year 8. Moorlands is an independent primary/prep school so provision went to year 8. He sat Common entrance 11+ and was due to stay and sit 13+ over two years.

At the end of year 6 we were called in to see the head as there were problems with small class numbers going through from year 6 to year 7. The head was meeting with parents individually to persuade them to keep their child in Moorlands for the 2 year Prep Schools Baccalaureate course in y7 &8. I repeated our intention to support the school and commit to the final 2 years. I asked the question “What if my son is the only child in year 7?” and the head assured me the year would go ahead with just one child! As it happened, a class of 5 made up year 7. During Y7, the school dropped the prep schools bac certificate without even telling us. But it still meant that our son would gain Common Entrance at 13 over the 2 year course.

However, just before Easter 2014, I had a call from the head to say they had already decided to close for year 8. This meant that our son’s class must find other schools, ie leave Moorlands a year early, half way through their common entrance course. The Moorlands decision came very late, after all the other schools had closed for applications. We reacted well and were very reasonable about the situation. We understood the school were in financial difficulties and needed to ditch the years that had the lowest pupil numbers, 7 & 8.

As we are both self employed this sudden need to find a new school so late in the academic year meant we had to take time off work unpaid to visit schools and take our son for entrance exams, taster days etc. We had to take him out of Moorlands some days for these visits. It was a very stressful time for us and our son. We had to cancel our summer holiday (mid July) because the start date for the new school’s year 8 was 30th June and we didn’t want our son to miss out by keeping him back until September. (The new school’s term time overlapped with when Moorlands were on summer holiday.)

We had always paid full fees at Moorlands and so wrote a long letter to the chair of governors to complain and request an unspecified amount to be offset against our final terms fees in lieu of lost income, missed days (whist on school visits), stress and inconvenience. I paid £1000 of the final terms fees and expected them to offer maybe £500 off, which we would have been happy with. Then we would have settled the remaining balance.

Our request was denied on the grounds that Moorlands had met their contractual agreement of giving us 1 terms notice of having to leave. As far as we could see, they simply wanted to get as much money as possible from us before our son left. There was no fairness or acknowledgment of our losses. The outstanding amount was around £2300, but Moorlands refused to make any allowance to us. Their written response did not address the matters we raised, it just said they were not able to give us a discount because they had given us a term’s notice.

Moorlands gave special dispensation to two families who were allowed to take their sons out of the school in the aftermath of the announcement – they were not forced to give the required term’s notice of leaving (They left for local state schools). Moorlands also made special arrangements for another child to be moved down into year 6 (instead of year 8) so she did not have to leave a year early.

At the end of the summer holidays we had still not reached agreement or had any further correspondence from them, so as it had been a while I just paid the remaining balance of £2300 to close the whole matter. A few days after this (early September) I started going through a pile of junk mail that had accrued over the holidays. In that pile, in a plain brown envelope, I found a county court judgement! Moorlands had instructed their solicitors, DWF, to sue us for the outstanding balance over the school holidays. But they hadn’t told us. We had not had any contact from Moorlands since June when I received an email reminder about the fees.

As the balance had already been paid, I contacted the court to discuss the judgement. Staff informed me that despite my payment, the school had not informed the court that the matter was closed. I complained to the school and they blamed DWF for not informing the court.

Today, 23rd Sept, I phoned the court again. They still have not been informed of our previous payment! They gave me a phone number for DWF and I left a complaint message and emailed Moorlands again.

Due to the way we have been treated we would like to discuss whether it’s possible to recover the fees we paid for Year 7. Had there been a possibility of our son being ejected from the school during the 2 year course we would never have kept him there! He could have gone to high school for year 7.

We feel that we were far too reasonable and understanding towards Moorlands and that they have taken advantage of our good will.

OP posts:
prh47bridge · 23/09/2014 15:15

I don't know any lawyers who would help but based on the information you have posted I don't think you have a case.

You say their contract says they can get rid of any child with one term's notice and that they are not liable for any losses you incur as a result. You signed up to that contract. Now you are asking them to compensate you for losses. I don't see any case for compensation, let alone your new demand for recovering a full year's fees. Your son has received the education for which you paid. If you had paid for something and not received it you would have a case but that isn't what has happened.

Clearly the situation with the court judgement should be resolved. You can apply to have the judgement set aside.

HappySquirrel1 · 23/09/2014 15:33

The issue for us is that we were "sold" a 2 year course and started our son on it in good faith. The school then cancelled the course after taking around £10,000 from us. Half of the course has no value at all!

Also, due to the cancellation, we suffered financial losses. We believe we have not been treated fairly and we also believe we have not been treated equitably with the other families affected.

OP posts:
FabulousFudge · 23/09/2014 21:02

I think independent school contracts tend to be watertight. I am sorry for all the stress and inconvenience caused to you and your family.

senua · 23/09/2014 22:02

You are probably flogging a dead horse trying to get money off the school. Concentrate instead on getting the CCJ removed, and maybe getting some compensation for that. There are deadlines for getting CCJ removed (wiped off, not merely marked as satisfied) from credit reports so get cracking.
Govt webpage on CCJ

HappySquirrel1 · 23/09/2014 22:21

Thank you. I didn't know there was two ways of marking a CCJ, we have never had a CCJ before!

If I had known they were going to court I would never have paid the money. We wanted to go to court and have a judge look at how they had treated us and how they were using a clause on their contract to treat us unfairly.

I only paid the £2300 because we'd been so busy over the summer that I thought I'd left it too long to do anything.

OP posts:
homebythesea · 24/09/2014 12:43

If at any stage you had CHOSEN to change school, you would have incurred the same costs voluntarily. The school gave a terms notice as provided in the contract. Yes it's a bugger the school closed in terms of bad timing for your son, but you must have realised there were issues with viability with only single figures remained in the year group. I really don't think you have a case for compensation. With regard to the CCJ you definitely do need to pursue that as it could have far reaching effects on your credit rating. I'd be at the school (not emailing) and getting my own solicitor involved

MillyMollyMama · 24/09/2014 14:05

I think there is a real warning here that very low numbers are just not viable. Nor is the education likely to be high quality because there are just not enough pupils to promote competition or sporting quality, for example. Normally people doing 13+ common entrance really know what school they are aiming for and go to a prep school with a track record of getting children to that school. If you could have sent your DS to another school at 11+ I cannot understand why you did not do this. What did you have in mind for 13+ entry? If this was not vital, then continuing at this school seems to have been a major mistake and your loyalty was misguided as they are a business first and foremost. You say that many other children left so clearly many people thought it was risky to stay.

I think they have fulfilled their contract and I would focus on your new school and getting the CCJ removed.

HappySquirrel1 · 24/09/2014 14:37

Thanks. You're right, our loyalty was misguided! But we were repeatedly reassured by the head and chair of governors that years 7 & 8 would continue. (As I mentioned initially, this went as far as being called in individually to meet the head to receive these assurances!)

Just to clarify re the searching for a school: As Moorlands gave us so little notice of the closure, we had to apply to other schools after they had closed for applications. This meant we missed the Saturday & evening open events they held for prospective students. We had to take time off work to visit head teachers during the school day and then return with our son separately.

The application process we went through (as an emergency) was different, more time consuming and more stressful than what we would have gone through a year later.

OP posts:
Shootingatpigeons · 24/09/2014 15:41

I doubt you have any legal redress and I would only be looking at that as a last resort anyway but in this situation I would be pointing out to Chair and Governors that if they want to continue running a school with a reputation for treating it's pupils and parents with respect then this is not the way to behave. Whether or not you were guilty of naivety you, and indeed all the parents who stuck with years 7 have been treated in a shoddy way purely focused on the schools interests not those of the pupils. I presume that their website does not include this in their account of their vision and ethos? Whilst the bleakness of a school's financial situation may not become apparent in accordance with the time tabling of the admissions round when similar changes happened in local schools they made arrangements for the affected pupils to be looked after by local schools with minimal disruption.

I honestly think that getting litigious is just going to back the school into a corner but pointing out the honourable way to preserve the school's reputation and talking it through might be a way through to agreeing a solution. If not I would be going on every school forum, to the local papers etc. etc. to point out how the school has offloaded it's responsibilities and not fulfilled the promises you were made (and presumably are still made on the website, actually I would probably do that anyway)

Shootingatpigeons · 24/09/2014 15:52

I would also approach the Methodist Independent Schools Trust who have stated aims on their website for their pupils which have apparently been undermined. I don't understand why they did not arrange for the pupils to be automatically transferred to Woodhouse Grove? This is the membership www.methodist.org.uk/downloads/conf2011-pc-40-board-of-management-for-methodist-independent-schools-0812.doc

HappySquirrel1 · 24/09/2014 17:23

That's a good point Pigeons! I think the reason they took the decision to close years 7 & 8 was that MIST assumed the kids would transfer to Woodhouse Grove! However, they lost 4 of the 5 of them (one moved down into Y6 at Moorlands, the others left for state schools). My son refused to even go on a day visit to WG due to the bullying problems he witnessed there. His friend went for the visit but refused to attend the school. The Moorlands School kids travelled to WG in years 7/8 every Friday afternoon for sport last year. They saw what it can be like there and just didn't want to go.

Also, WG is a fair distance for us, although where we live is served by the school bus. We preferred Fulneck and they offered our son a place. He was keen to go there but in the end we chose a closer school due to the travelling time. Part of our complaint to Moorlands is that moving a year early we felt Fulneck was out of reach due to travelling time alone. My son presently has other commitments after school that made Fulneck difficult... it would have amounted to him being out 12 hours a day, which we thought was too much for a 12 year old.

OP posts:
Shootingatpigeons · 25/09/2014 14:06

Then, if they would have facilitated WH then I think you have less of a leg to stand on. I had not heard negative things about WH, and my DD has friends who were there recently. But of course all our DCs want to be able to choose the school they feel they will be happiest but it gives you less leverage.

I still think you should be talking/ should have been talking to them all through. Even if you did have a legal leg to stand on, and I am sure they will have taken advice, any court will look very dimly on using court action as a threat and not having actively sought a conciliation at every stage. I would as a matter of urgency write a letter seeking a meeting, possibly with a skilled mediator, and set out your grievances in an objective unemotional way and make it clear that treating parents in this way is not what you would have expected of the school and emphasise how bad, if they continue with this attitude, publicity would be for the reputation of the school and the MIST. Be careful to copy it to the Head and other members of the governors / members of the MIST who are more likely to appreciate how important the reputation of the school is over £s. It may well be that thus far the whole thing has been dealt with by the Bursar / governors employed for their financial / legal expertise. Keep it positive, in other words appeal to their better natures, what you value about the school being undermined etc. and have realistic expectations for a negotiated compromise. Removal of the court judgement and some compensation. good luck.

HappySquirrel1 · 25/09/2014 14:29

I have already written to the school outlining our objections. The chair of governors responded and did not address the points we raised.

He just said that the contract allowed them to end provision so long as they gave a terms notice. They did just give a terms notice, but we had "signed up" for a 2 year common entrance course and we had been assured that there were no plans to end years 7 & 8. So, out of a 6 term course, we were told at the end of the second term that it was finishing a year early.

There was no real attempt to facilitate a move to WG, it was more along the lines of them offering to match bursaries. But we had always paid full fees anyway. We had made complaints re the bullying at WG - on one occasion a WG boy tried to drown our son in the pool there. (He was a particularly problematic child and I believe he has since moved on to another school)

OP posts:
Shootingatpigeons · 25/09/2014 16:59

The thing about negotiation is to weigh up the power you have versus the power they have and appreciate it is a process. They probably think they can put you off by leveraging the legal position, where they appear to have all the power, and maybe they are even prepared to ride out bad publicity. In fact I know of a few schools that have treated parents shoddily over fees when there were good reasons why they should have made a dispensation, it is an important principal for them. However this is different, the school was apparently disingenuous with you.

However you can only leverage what power you have and that is the impact on their reputation. I would write again, point out their letter only addressed the legal position and not the points you raised and therefore was not a moral / honourable response consistent with the good words they have on their websites about valuing their pupils . Make it clear that if they do not make a gesture that demonstrates that those words are more than window dressing that you will want to make sure other parents are warned about the way in which they and their children are likely to find themselves being treated, and will seek publicity, as indeed you have here. Obviously I do not know the full facts but taking your situation as you present that is what I would do.

You may get only as far as getting the court judgement sorted out and then I would go to the Press / post it on forums anyway. Prepare a short press release with an attention getting opening paragraph along the lines of Schools breaks promises to parents and pupils and then lands them with a court judgement for fees they had paid, explaining the facts in bullet points and then add how it made you and your son feel, send off to local, Bradford T&A etc. and national press. It will be more powerful if you can get other parents to add their story. You might get someone pick it up, it can depend on whether they are looking for something / have a low week or whatever but copied to the Governors and MIST it might budge them..... As I say I wish you luck but it does pay to hold your line. And if what you says is true actually you do have a moral duty to warn other parents and frankly a Methodist institution should be going out of it's way to act morally.

MillyMollyMama · 25/09/2014 17:55

My DDs went to a Methodist School. They run their schools as a business and each one stands and falls by its business acumen and individual set of rules. We had no input from the MIST at all and most parents would have had little inkling the school was Methodist it was so low key. Sadly, the moral aspect when dealing with parents can be sadly lacking! I could write a book on it!

I didn't mean to be accusatory regarding small numbers, but there have been quite a few school closures in recent years and small numbers are a cause for concern,whatever the school says, because these schools depend on fee income. They are not richly endowed and as a result,parents pay for everything, and that often includes bursaries for other children. If they had a few of these, there were even more danger signs. Ensuring enough teachers to cover the curriculum for common entrance at 13+ would present them with great problems with so few children and little income. It is just not feasible. The day boarders at my DDs old school pay in excess of £7000 per term and they nearly do a 12 hour day at 12 years old if they travel a bit because prep is done in school and there are so many after school clubs.

What I don't really understand is why you wanted 13+ common entrance as this does not really seem to be what this school is about. I think I would have looked at a boarding prep school from this September and do a full 2 years there. I can see you have been extremely messed about and appealing to their better nature, if they have one, might be the best course of action.

HappySquirrel1 · 25/09/2014 18:16

Milly, I believe the reason we have been treated so badly is that we were extremely reasonable and understanding about their decision to close the years. We are both in business ourselves and understood their financial reasons. I didn't even give the head a hard time when he phoned to tell me about the surprise decision! I felt sorry for him and thought he would get mauled by some of the other parents who might be more emotional, rather than rational, in their responses.

Interestingly, the chair of governors letter to us mentions a "consultation process" but whatever this process was, it was kept completely secret from the families involved.

OP posts:
HappySquirrel1 · 25/09/2014 18:19

I should also add that Moorlands placed a huge emphasis on staying to sit CE at 13+
There was a special parents evening in Year 6, dedicated to convincing parents to stay and selling the benefits of the new Prep Schools Bac course they were doing in association with Beacon School. (This PSB was quietly dropped during Y7 without us being told)

OP posts:
Viviennemary · 25/09/2014 18:24

Is there not a professional type body all these private schools belong to. You could try contacting them and say you feel you have not been treated in a fair way.

wackadoodle · 25/09/2014 21:30

I don't know whether previous posters are right about you not having a legal case.

But if you have any intention at all of pursuing one, what I would certainly NOT be doing is discussing it on the internet. Every single word you are typing is available in black and white for all eternity, to potentially be used against you in ways you can't possibly imagine.

Asking for a "recommendation for a litigation lawyer in Leeds, with experience of the education sector" is plenty information enough.

HappySquirrel1 · 26/09/2014 15:51

I can understand you saying that, wackadoodle. However, I did tell Moorlands 2 weeks ago that we would tell people what is going on, and they have never challenged any of the facts relating to our complaints re years 7&8 being closed.
The information here is mainly what we have already put in writing to the school.

I have phoned the court again today and they confirm that Moorlands have still not told them of our payment. They have also not replied to my complaint made this week regarding their failure to communicate with the court.

DWF have responded to my complaints and have given me a letter stating that we have paid. However, the court say it's no good because they haven't written the date of payment on it!

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page