Driving School Entity; employed, self employed, franchisee
Discussion
My son is having problems with a driving school who are using their 'legal entity' to avoid refunding him. I think there is something dodgy, but was sure how driving schools are structured and how they are seen for tax purposes.
Post lock down my son decided (finally in his 30s) to learn to drive. He googled and found a local driving school. He emailed from their web site and an instructor responded from their own Gmail address. Long story short, he booked and paid for an intensive 2 week 40 hour course (£1600). The instructor then basically didn't turn up, went sick, went on holiday 3 times and he had to cancel his booked test (twice). He did eventually get some instruction crammed into 6 days sometimes at 6 hours a day but not enough to pass and he has had to go elsewhere.
He has now made a complaint to the driving school who are saying it is nothing to do with them as their instructors are self employed and he needs to take it up with the instructor directly (if he can find them). Their web site boasts that they 'only employ fully qualified instructors' although their recruiting page says they are seeking 'franchisees', with 5 weeks a year to work off franchise. I think that is an attempt to avoid HMRC's IR35 TBH.
Quick Companies house search suggests they are a Limited Company (his instructor is not a director) but they have basically submitted 10 years of accounts showing they have £10 in assets.
Anybody any thoughts on the driving school liability? Who should be take to the small cliams court, and is he likely to succeed?
Post lock down my son decided (finally in his 30s) to learn to drive. He googled and found a local driving school. He emailed from their web site and an instructor responded from their own Gmail address. Long story short, he booked and paid for an intensive 2 week 40 hour course (£1600). The instructor then basically didn't turn up, went sick, went on holiday 3 times and he had to cancel his booked test (twice). He did eventually get some instruction crammed into 6 days sometimes at 6 hours a day but not enough to pass and he has had to go elsewhere.
He has now made a complaint to the driving school who are saying it is nothing to do with them as their instructors are self employed and he needs to take it up with the instructor directly (if he can find them). Their web site boasts that they 'only employ fully qualified instructors' although their recruiting page says they are seeking 'franchisees', with 5 weeks a year to work off franchise. I think that is an attempt to avoid HMRC's IR35 TBH.
Quick Companies house search suggests they are a Limited Company (his instructor is not a director) but they have basically submitted 10 years of accounts showing they have £10 in assets.
Anybody any thoughts on the driving school liability? Who should be take to the small cliams court, and is he likely to succeed?
Not sure on the legalities of the school.
But you can make a complaint direct to the DVSA.
https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-a-driving-instru...
But you can make a complaint direct to the DVSA.
https://www.gov.uk/complain-about-a-driving-instru...
singlecoil said:
Cogcog said:
Who should be take to the small claims court, and is he likely to succeed?
The person who he gave the money to, only if he can trace that person and only if they have some money.As for 'only if they have some money' well normally yes, but if over £600 is awarded then the High Court can take over and start taking possessions away for sale. The instructor would be pretty foolish to let it get that far.
Fully qualified instructors means fully passed out as a instructor as opposed to a trainee who can still teach but on a trainee's licence.
Franchise instructors just work under the advertised driving school name and pay for the privilege as that's who they generally get their work.
I would chase the instructor who they paid as they are the one that they have a contract with regarding lessons and probably self employed.
Hopefully you can get it sorted.
Franchise instructors just work under the advertised driving school name and pay for the privilege as that's who they generally get their work.
I would chase the instructor who they paid as they are the one that they have a contract with regarding lessons and probably self employed.
Hopefully you can get it sorted.
Oggs said:
Fully qualified instructors means fully passed out as a instructor as opposed to a trainee who can still teach but on a trainee's licence.
Franchise instructors just work under the advertised driving school name and pay for the privilege as that's who they generally get their work.
I would chase the instructor who they paid as they are the one that they have a contract with regarding lessons and probably self employed.
Hopefully you can get it sorted.
The instructor has had 3 holiidays including a cruise in 6 weeks so thye must have some money! Franchise instructors just work under the advertised driving school name and pay for the privilege as that's who they generally get their work.
I would chase the instructor who they paid as they are the one that they have a contract with regarding lessons and probably self employed.
Hopefully you can get it sorted.
I suspect the 5 week 'franchise free' is to get around being an 'employee'.
Simpo Two said:
singlecoil said:
Cogcog said:
Who should be take to the small claims court, and is he likely to succeed?
The person who he gave the money to, only if he can trace that person and only if they have some money.As for 'only if they have some money' well normally yes, but if over £600 is awarded then the High Court can take over and start taking possessions away for sale. The instructor would be pretty foolish to let it get that far.
Simpo Two said:
singlecoil said:
If the defendant is skint he will ask for time to pay and get it, OP's son will be lucky to get £5 a week, and that will dry up shortly.
If that was your experience, was it via the High Court?Cogcog said:
The instructor has had 3 holiidays including a cruise in 6 weeks so thye must have some money!
I suspect the 5 week 'franchise free' is to get around being an 'employee'.
Sorry I don't understand your reply as I didn't say about money.I suspect the 5 week 'franchise free' is to get around being an 'employee'.
5 week franchise free sounds like they don't have to pay their fee for 5 weeks ie a break for holidays etc, not to get around being an employee.
My post was just to clarify how a lot of driving school franchise model work and the difference with fully qualified to not.
As said hope you get it sorted.
Oggs said:
Sorry I don't understand your reply as I didn't say about money.
5 week franchise free sounds like they don't have to pay their fee for 5 weeks ie a break for holidays etc, not to get around being an employee.
My post was just to clarify how a lot of driving school franchise model work and the difference with fully qualified to not.
As said hope you get it sorted.
I had thought the franchise thing is a HMRC dodge but holiday sounds about right (5 weeks). But I stil think franchise has the potential to be a tool get around HMRC.5 week franchise free sounds like they don't have to pay their fee for 5 weeks ie a break for holidays etc, not to get around being an employee.
My post was just to clarify how a lot of driving school franchise model work and the difference with fully qualified to not.
As said hope you get it sorted.
"He did eventually get some instruction crammed into 6 days sometimes at 6 hours a day but not enough to pass and he has had to go elsewhere."
How many hours did he get? Presumably you are only wanting to claim for the difference between what he got, and the full 40 hours.
Maybe you could take him out for a while to get some more practice in and then he could rebook the test and try again?
How many hours did he get? Presumably you are only wanting to claim for the difference between what he got, and the full 40 hours.
Maybe you could take him out for a while to get some more practice in and then he could rebook the test and try again?
ok so i do the tax for a typical driving school
the instructors are self employed. they pay a weekly fee to the "school" basically for referrals bus sometimes for the car.
complain to the school as well as seeking a remedy against the instructor. i would tell the school that you will post your experience on facebook/social media which they will hate as driving schools are very localised and extremely competitive so any bad local reviews really hurt them.
the instructors are self employed. they pay a weekly fee to the "school" basically for referrals bus sometimes for the car.
complain to the school as well as seeking a remedy against the instructor. i would tell the school that you will post your experience on facebook/social media which they will hate as driving schools are very localised and extremely competitive so any bad local reviews really hurt them.
wheelerc said:
"He did eventually get some instruction crammed into 6 days sometimes at 6 hours a day but not enough to pass and he has had to go elsewhere."
How many hours did he get? Presumably you are only wanting to claim for the difference between what he got, and the full 40 hours.
Maybe you could take him out for a while to get some more practice in and then he could rebook the test and try again?
In matter of fact you may only be able to claim for the hours you didn't get. In actuality it may be that had he got 40 hours he'd have passed. But we'll never know and it can't be proved. The contract, which is what law goes by, was for 40 hours, not to pass the test.How many hours did he get? Presumably you are only wanting to claim for the difference between what he got, and the full 40 hours.
Maybe you could take him out for a while to get some more practice in and then he could rebook the test and try again?
Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff