Smart funding

[Unregistered]

I have a friend who resigned from their training provider after the cadetship for various reasons. The company is now trying to recover costs due to him signing a return of service agreement at the start of the cadetship. The company are threatening civil action and have provided a list of costs that were incurred for their training. The MCA website states that Smart funding covers approx 50% of actual training costs and is paid directly to the training provider. Should this be considered in the companies list of costs incurred as at the moment they are asking for the full amount of costs? Does my friend have a leg to stand on to argue this point? Does anyone know if there is any way of him finding out exactly how much funding the company was given for him on his own?

Thanks.

[Midge]

I think you will find the answers here I wrote something a few months ago that has the information. The MCA website may have updated info so check the MGN just in case.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/mca/mgn455.pdf

[EH75]

Might be worth speaking to Nautilus (if they are a member). I remember them trying to sell the union to us when we were at college by saying this is one of the things they could help you out with.

[Unregistered]

Thanks that information is useful.

They are a member of Nautilus however it doesnt seem to be something that is within their powers. Only time will tell as it develops but my friend just wants to make sure they know the ins and outs of it themselves too.

Thank you.

[Midge]

Thanks that information is useful.

They are a member of Nautilus however it doesnt seem to be something that is within their powers. Only time will tell as it develops but my friend just wants to make sure they know the ins and outs of it themselves too.

Thank you.

How odd I thought that what unions did! What about citizens advice they at least might be able to direct your friend to where they could get some advice.
Sometimes household insurance etc gives access to legal help up to a given figure worth checking.

[alistairuk]

You don't specifically mention it, I assume they did obtain their CoC & supplied a copy to their training organisation? If they didn't then the company would not have received the final payment.

i. First year trainees (weeks 1-50): ?80 per instalment
ii. Second and third year trainees (weeks 51-150): ?100 per instalment
iii. Final Payment2950

You don't actually mention how much the company are claiming, but if Smart covers approximately 50% of the cost, the company can claim Smart funding up to a maximum of ?16,850 per cadet, meaning the company pays roughly ?16,850 of their own cash per cadet.

Either way, they are best to speak to a lawyer if they plan to dispute it.

[Inland Pirate]

Figures I've been quoted for a cadetship range from ?55,000-?70,000, so in that case I don't think the smart funding does quite come to 50%.

I suppose their argument would be that the smart funding could have been spent on a different cadet, who would be fulfilling the return of service clause, so they're entitled to recover that too? Not a lawyer, just playing devil's advocate!

[GuinnessMan]

Might be worth speaking to Nautilus (if they are a member). I remember them trying to sell the union to us when we were at college by saying this is one of the things they could help you out with.

Hmmm, that sounds really odd. I'm probably being a bit bone here, but surely the union isn't going to help you get out of something perfectly legal that you signed up and agreed to are they?

Anywho, to the OP. Without identifying you, is it possible to give a bit of a reason as to why you don't want to continue with your employer, as surely doing that is better than trying to find a job afresh?

[HolyNougat]

All sounds rather thin to me.
From the sounds of it, they have received a nasty letter saying 'pay us back all the money' - without actually specifying how much, or without any breakdowns as to what it is all for?
These agreements are quite hard to enforce and as a newly qualified officer you probably don't have any money to pay it back anyway or assets. When trying to peruse a civil action it's always worth while checking that the person you are going after will be able to pay you back if you win.
As usual, Nautilus have left you 'out to dry' which is exactly what they always do.
Try www.justanswer.co.uk for a legal opinion, or go and see a solicitor - they usually give you 30 mins free advice in the hope you will instruct them if push comes to shove

[Unregistered]

If you were not qualified would you also be expected to pay back all the costs? Even if the contract specifies limited liability of ?3000?

[EH75]

Hmmm, that sounds really odd. I'm probably being a bit bone here, but surely the union isn't going to help you get out of something perfectly legal that you signed up and agreed to are they?

Yeah I know seems strange to me as well but I'm sure that was what they said. It might not have been that they can get you out of paying it entirely but I think they got it reduced to a much more affordable amount. Something like that anyway.

[GuinnessMan]

Yeah I know seems strange to me as well but I'm sure that was what they said. It might not have been that they can get you out of paying it entirely but I think they got it reduced to a much more affordable amount. Something like that anyway.

Not being rude or anything, but i'm sure there are better things they should be off doing...

[EH75]

Not going to disagree with that.