SFT No longer???
Guest
Posts: n/a
SFT No longer???
I have just found out via a phone call that SFT have ceased trading! I am currently a student there and have several thousands of pounds invested in the company as do many others of my collegues down there.
Can anyone shed any more light on the situation or offer some advice???
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: Midland Maniac ]
Can anyone shed any more light on the situation or offer some advice???
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: Midland Maniac ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
no, i was on a payment plan, and the final instalment was when i started my IR a week ago....and you know how much an IR costs. I have only flown 10 hours of the IR so it looks like i am shafted good and proper!!!
I am hoping that some of my other mates are not in such a desparate position!!!
I am hoping that some of my other mates are not in such a desparate position!!!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Florida/Bahamas
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to hear SFT going under, if you do a Search in the 3rd week in August you will see 1 or 2 people brought the very fact up that SFT had financial problems, after Sept 11th i'm sure that was the final blow for them.
But i'm curious to know before they shut there doors did they have a many students there.
And what about all the expanasion "Send Clowns" was going on about. Like the distance learning and for integrated courses,and acquiring more aircraft, there Connection with Flordia Air etc.....
I was a 509 student back in the Mid 90's over all was very pleased and enjoyed my time there. But comes to no surprise especially the way things are at the moment
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: F900B ]
But i'm curious to know before they shut there doors did they have a many students there.
And what about all the expanasion "Send Clowns" was going on about. Like the distance learning and for integrated courses,and acquiring more aircraft, there Connection with Flordia Air etc.....
I was a 509 student back in the Mid 90's over all was very pleased and enjoyed my time there. But comes to no surprise especially the way things are at the moment
[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: F900B ]
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm.......
Looks like there was some truth to my post back on August 21st!!!
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...c&f=2&t=010499
Even though Lightening Ace completed a credit check on SFT that came back great, it goes to show that credit checks mean absolutely nothing!!!!
A little quick to close the thread though - some automatically think foul play!!!!!
A note to everyone - no matter how good the school is pay by Credit Card - you then have recourse.
I feel for all the students that have lost out - I would check with the banks that loaned the money, the schools closing procedures, and then some schools are helping out students that got burned.
Good luck fellow aviators.....
Looks like there was some truth to my post back on August 21st!!!
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...c&f=2&t=010499
Even though Lightening Ace completed a credit check on SFT that came back great, it goes to show that credit checks mean absolutely nothing!!!!
A little quick to close the thread though - some automatically think foul play!!!!!
A note to everyone - no matter how good the school is pay by Credit Card - you then have recourse.
I feel for all the students that have lost out - I would check with the banks that loaned the money, the schools closing procedures, and then some schools are helping out students that got burned.
Good luck fellow aviators.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not sure if it is as bad as first thought at SFT (trying to be optimistic!!)
From the information I am being given, it seems that the company has closed its doors to prevent them going into liquidation. If a buyer can be found then hopefuly (he says with his fingers crossed!!) business can resume. Not too sure as to how much truth there is in that but i suppose it gives some of us some hope!!!
From the information I am being given, it seems that the company has closed its doors to prevent them going into liquidation. If a buyer can be found then hopefuly (he says with his fingers crossed!!) business can resume. Not too sure as to how much truth there is in that but i suppose it gives some of us some hope!!!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Up In The Sky...
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to hear the bad news guys. We've just finished our ATPL ground school there, after having the same happen at PPSC.
Unfortunately when called into the classroom nextdoor to ours (when at PPSC) our surprise meeting with the insolvency suit caused us to believe that PPSC might just be bought and that everything would be fine.....
It wasn't, It isn't and it never shall be, Studies without end AMEN!
Unfortunately when called into the classroom nextdoor to ours (when at PPSC) our surprise meeting with the insolvency suit caused us to believe that PPSC might just be bought and that everything would be fine.....
It wasn't, It isn't and it never shall be, Studies without end AMEN!
I have just paid them 5000 for training with ambassador over 6 weeks ago, ambassador have had nothing from them,
did they know all that time ago things were going to go pop and did they take my money knowing that
i am due to leave on sat for florida for 2 weeks, i am now stuck with tickets and a hire car with no hotel of flying :-(
what are the chances of getting any money back ??????
How does a bankruptcy work????
did they know all that time ago things were going to go pop and did they take my money knowing that
i am due to leave on sat for florida for 2 weeks, i am now stuck with tickets and a hire car with no hotel of flying :-(
what are the chances of getting any money back ??????
How does a bankruptcy work????
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Far too often at Big Airports
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sometimes wonder why we bother with having a rumour network.
It was mooted back in August that SFT was in trouble and was pretty much an open secret to those of us in the training arena. Unfortunately our esteemed moderators checked around the industry and could find no evidence to back up any claims:
Taken from this thread: http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...2&t=010554&p=2
Had WWW been in the training loop he would have heard enough rumours and speculation.
Of course I understand the need for a bit of discretion and the potential legal ramifications but when there were so many rumours going around away from PPRuNe why were we gagged?
Unfortunately I no longer see any point in this Forum if information that may have saved some trainees time money and heartache is to be blocked from public view.
It was mooted back in August that SFT was in trouble and was pretty much an open secret to those of us in the training arena. Unfortunately our esteemed moderators checked around the industry and could find no evidence to back up any claims:
Sometime in the last week I had to damp down specualtion that SFT were going bust on another thread here somewhere. I have dug around the FTO industry and can find nothing to support such rumours.
Had WWW been in the training loop he would have heard enough rumours and speculation.
Of course I understand the need for a bit of discretion and the potential legal ramifications but when there were so many rumours going around away from PPRuNe why were we gagged?
Unfortunately I no longer see any point in this Forum if information that may have saved some trainees time money and heartache is to be blocked from public view.
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TF,
the thread you refer to was closed mainly because of the somewhat-bad tempered (but legally relevant) spat between the Silver Fox and myself, although it wasn't me that closed it. However, the point was made in that thread and others that speculation about FTOs, especially without supporting evidence, could have a direct negative and unjustified effect on those FTOs. We at Pprune, of course, didn't want to be the cause of any such effects, and we saw and heard no evidence to support the speculation.
You and others may have had evidence at the time, but you didn't (as far as I know) present it here (or directly to the Moderators), so we couldn't really support the allegations by continuing the thread. We had no grounds for warning people off SFT, and we could have been in deep legal doo-doo if we'd been seen to be unjustifiably casting aspertions on an ostensibly-healthy company.
Even now, I've seen no evidence that SFT was in any trouble in August (although that doesn't mean there isn't any such evidence), and it would seem to me that their demise is closely related to events in the market since 9/11 - which, of course, hadn't happened at the time of the original discussion.
At the end of the day, it's quite a difficult judgement call as to whether 'rumours' are actually damaging speculation, and you'll have to forgive us if we err on the side of caution.
the thread you refer to was closed mainly because of the somewhat-bad tempered (but legally relevant) spat between the Silver Fox and myself, although it wasn't me that closed it. However, the point was made in that thread and others that speculation about FTOs, especially without supporting evidence, could have a direct negative and unjustified effect on those FTOs. We at Pprune, of course, didn't want to be the cause of any such effects, and we saw and heard no evidence to support the speculation.
You and others may have had evidence at the time, but you didn't (as far as I know) present it here (or directly to the Moderators), so we couldn't really support the allegations by continuing the thread. We had no grounds for warning people off SFT, and we could have been in deep legal doo-doo if we'd been seen to be unjustifiably casting aspertions on an ostensibly-healthy company.
Even now, I've seen no evidence that SFT was in any trouble in August (although that doesn't mean there isn't any such evidence), and it would seem to me that their demise is closely related to events in the market since 9/11 - which, of course, hadn't happened at the time of the original discussion.
At the end of the day, it's quite a difficult judgement call as to whether 'rumours' are actually damaging speculation, and you'll have to forgive us if we err on the side of caution.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: England
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spitfire747, sorry to hear of your difficulties (and all the other students). You asked how a bankruptcy works and as there are so many training establishments going under at present, I'll try and give the brief outline. I'm not an accountant, just someone who has run many companies (none have gone bust!) so I've seen it happen several times and I've lost money several times. Please excuse spelling but its late and I havent time to check everything...
Limited companies don't go bankrupt, they go into either receivership (liquidation) or administration. The process is started (usually) by one of the major creditors who decides that their best chance of getting some money is to apply for a receivership or administration order.
With receivership, the receiver sells all the assets he can get his hands on to raise the max amount of cash. The preferential creditors i.e. the government (inland revenue and vat and National Insurance) get paid in full. If there is anything left the next lot of preferential creditors (the banks) also get paid in full, or whatever is left. If there is still any money left it is shared between the "unsecured creditors" i.e. you and I. Oh I forgot, the receiver takes his fee (large) first.
With Administration, the system is slightly different in that the large creditor who has applied for the administration order thinks that the best chance of getting his money back is to run the company (perhaps for a limited time) himself. In other words, it is a pretty blunt statement that he thinks the current owners can't do it properly. The company can sometimes be sold in this state, allowing some of the creditors to get their money back.
The chance of any unsecured creditors (you and me) getting anything at all are very small (but not zero). Sometimes a distribution of, say, 3p in the pound is made. Remember, if there was enough money to pay the creditors the company would not have gone bust.
As far as I know, it always has been a criminal offence to carry on trading if the directors are aware that the company is insolvent. This legislation has got tighter over the past twenty years but getting fraud convictions is not easy - remember the Maxwells?
The above is the approximate version. If someone in the insolvency business wants to correct any errors, please feel free to do so.
Tips for future students (or anyone else):
1. Don't pay in advance. Resist the pressure. The more pressure they give you, the more likely they are to be having cash-flow problems. Remember, the only reason companies go bust is because they run out of cash. There is no other reason.
2. If you can, pay by credit card. Be very suspicious if they don't accept visa and mastercard. They may give spurious reasons like it would add to their costs, but a well run business pays very little for accepting credit cards, particularly with high average transaction values. One reason a company might have difficulties in taking cards is if any of the directors have a poor track record. Because the banks have to re-imburse they don't like to give card facilities to companies whose directors might not be completely pukka.
3. Don't confuse all plastic cards with credit cards. The protection you get is only with credit cards. A Debit card (Delta or Switch) might have the Visa or Mastercard logos on it but it gives you no protection against the company being unable to supply the goods or services you have purchased. This is an easy trap to fall into and I haven't seen it mentioned here before. In Law, a credit card is something very specific and it doesn't include debit cards and charge cards. Be careful !
Limited companies don't go bankrupt, they go into either receivership (liquidation) or administration. The process is started (usually) by one of the major creditors who decides that their best chance of getting some money is to apply for a receivership or administration order.
With receivership, the receiver sells all the assets he can get his hands on to raise the max amount of cash. The preferential creditors i.e. the government (inland revenue and vat and National Insurance) get paid in full. If there is anything left the next lot of preferential creditors (the banks) also get paid in full, or whatever is left. If there is still any money left it is shared between the "unsecured creditors" i.e. you and I. Oh I forgot, the receiver takes his fee (large) first.
With Administration, the system is slightly different in that the large creditor who has applied for the administration order thinks that the best chance of getting his money back is to run the company (perhaps for a limited time) himself. In other words, it is a pretty blunt statement that he thinks the current owners can't do it properly. The company can sometimes be sold in this state, allowing some of the creditors to get their money back.
The chance of any unsecured creditors (you and me) getting anything at all are very small (but not zero). Sometimes a distribution of, say, 3p in the pound is made. Remember, if there was enough money to pay the creditors the company would not have gone bust.
As far as I know, it always has been a criminal offence to carry on trading if the directors are aware that the company is insolvent. This legislation has got tighter over the past twenty years but getting fraud convictions is not easy - remember the Maxwells?
The above is the approximate version. If someone in the insolvency business wants to correct any errors, please feel free to do so.
Tips for future students (or anyone else):
1. Don't pay in advance. Resist the pressure. The more pressure they give you, the more likely they are to be having cash-flow problems. Remember, the only reason companies go bust is because they run out of cash. There is no other reason.
2. If you can, pay by credit card. Be very suspicious if they don't accept visa and mastercard. They may give spurious reasons like it would add to their costs, but a well run business pays very little for accepting credit cards, particularly with high average transaction values. One reason a company might have difficulties in taking cards is if any of the directors have a poor track record. Because the banks have to re-imburse they don't like to give card facilities to companies whose directors might not be completely pukka.
3. Don't confuse all plastic cards with credit cards. The protection you get is only with credit cards. A Debit card (Delta or Switch) might have the Visa or Mastercard logos on it but it gives you no protection against the company being unable to supply the goods or services you have purchased. This is an easy trap to fall into and I haven't seen it mentioned here before. In Law, a credit card is something very specific and it doesn't include debit cards and charge cards. Be careful !
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Far too often at Big Airports
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ToTM,
I have heard, as a RUMOUR that SFT will finish their current students off.
Scroggs, I did hear many rumours in the middle of August about SFT, from some very well placed sources. Unfortunately, the sort of vibes you and WWW were sending out effectively stopped anyone from posting anything further on the subject. I saw no point in contibuting to a topic that would be stomped on by the Admins. I no longer see this as a rumour forum. It seems that only provable fact that will stand up in court can be posted, which is a shame. Changed days indeed.
I have heard, as a RUMOUR that SFT will finish their current students off.
Scroggs, I did hear many rumours in the middle of August about SFT, from some very well placed sources. Unfortunately, the sort of vibes you and WWW were sending out effectively stopped anyone from posting anything further on the subject. I saw no point in contibuting to a topic that would be stomped on by the Admins. I no longer see this as a rumour forum. It seems that only provable fact that will stand up in court can be posted, which is a shame. Changed days indeed.
Guest
Posts: n/a
lets just hope that the rumour about finishing current students off is correct. Not quite sure how they would do it though if they have no cash flow!!!
I believe that we will know a little more possibly by the end of today.
Thanks for the info on bankrupcy, very useful!!!
mm
I believe that we will know a little more possibly by the end of today.
Thanks for the info on bankrupcy, very useful!!!
mm
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: England
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rich Tea, You asked a very good question and although I'm not a lawyer I can tell you what the lawyer's answer would be.... They would say 'It all depends'
Let me explain. Assume you are entitled to reimbursment for the goods or services you have not received. So you paid 12k for a course to get you (say) an Instrument Rating. When you have only half completed, the establishment goes belly-up. So what haven't you received? Have you not received the rating that you paid 12k to get and are therefore claiming back 12k, or have you got half of the service, therefore only being entitled to 6k back? This is just the sort of uncertainty that lawyers love as its what keeps them in business.
One way to resolve this is to go to another establishment and get a quote from them to train you from your present standard up to and including the rating. If they quote 8k, then thats the amount of service you have not received.
Now then, what if the original 12k was not a quote for the rating but was just an estimate based on average ability? Now the credit card company, or anyone else you are suing, can argue that you wouldn't have got your rating for 12k anyway because you were sub-standard, so what is your loss now? Obviously its less.
My (free) advice:
1. See if anything emerges from SFT or anyone else taking over the training for those in the lurch.
2. If that produces nothing, start your claim for the full amount you paid. Your arguement is that there is no such thing as half a rating. It is all-or-nothing.
3. I don't know if SFT arranged loans for students, but if they did, (e.g.loan companies forms in their office with SFT stamp on the introductions box) you might have a claim against the finance company on the basis that it was a linked agreement. Can't remember the legal term but I did once successfully sue Chartered Trust using this legislation after some sub-standard building work.
All the above given in good faith, but remember I'm not a Lawyer so please make your own checks before acting.
Let me explain. Assume you are entitled to reimbursment for the goods or services you have not received. So you paid 12k for a course to get you (say) an Instrument Rating. When you have only half completed, the establishment goes belly-up. So what haven't you received? Have you not received the rating that you paid 12k to get and are therefore claiming back 12k, or have you got half of the service, therefore only being entitled to 6k back? This is just the sort of uncertainty that lawyers love as its what keeps them in business.
One way to resolve this is to go to another establishment and get a quote from them to train you from your present standard up to and including the rating. If they quote 8k, then thats the amount of service you have not received.
Now then, what if the original 12k was not a quote for the rating but was just an estimate based on average ability? Now the credit card company, or anyone else you are suing, can argue that you wouldn't have got your rating for 12k anyway because you were sub-standard, so what is your loss now? Obviously its less.
My (free) advice:
1. See if anything emerges from SFT or anyone else taking over the training for those in the lurch.
2. If that produces nothing, start your claim for the full amount you paid. Your arguement is that there is no such thing as half a rating. It is all-or-nothing.
3. I don't know if SFT arranged loans for students, but if they did, (e.g.loan companies forms in their office with SFT stamp on the introductions box) you might have a claim against the finance company on the basis that it was a linked agreement. Can't remember the legal term but I did once successfully sue Chartered Trust using this legislation after some sub-standard building work.
All the above given in good faith, but remember I'm not a Lawyer so please make your own checks before acting.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Surrey, England.
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a little info that may help. Some weeks ago, when SFT and Four Forces ceased operations, I understand that the CAA got together with the remaining schools and arranged with them to assist students whos colleges had gone belly up. One school to my knowledge was authorised to increase the number of students over the number for which it was normally certified. I don't know what the financial arrangements were though. If you are currently in the porridge I suggest you contact one of these remaining schools and see what deal you can make.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
News from the Front (well, from the Horns Inn and Andy's house)
Sorry to hear about those guys that have lost more than I have (a job and some money, as they still owe me some training).
However, Midland Maniac is right there are promising signs for a purchase. Unlike PPSC, SFT have some worthwhile assets and have maintained the goodwill of many students. Partly this is because SFT have not banked any checks for a while (not sure how long, about 10 days), so there is less feeling that "they knew it was going to happen, still took the money". Partly it is because the MD was there to tell students, a sign of the existing goodwill between students, staff and management. Partly it is because staff liked the management - were occasionally in disagreement, but basically did not have the antipathy toward senior management shown in some recently-deceasd organisations, that split the team as soon as the company had problems. SFT's team is still together, pulling for the business.
In a show of loyalty today from both sides there is an attempt in progress to keep the groundschool running until various courses can sit exams or at least arrange alternative instruction. If this comes off then the bills to keep groundschool running will be paid by students and the instructors will work for free for three weeks. Most of the instructors (I included, and I was already redundant last Wednesday) have already agreed to work for nothing.
This has various advantages beyond the obvious help for the students involved to complete courses. It keeps part of the company operating. It keeps student goodwill, and more of SFT's good name. It proves staff and student loyalty to the company. All of these will help towards our ultimate aim : sale of the business.
We, the staff of SFT Aviation have faith in what can be done with the company. The company has a good name, never had the problems of certain other FTOs. The problem is of cash flow, and that is being worked on now by a dedicated team of administrators and directors. When this is sorted we will be the same organisation, with I hope much the same team. As a student and then an instructor I felt that the instructors at SFT are the best team I have ever worked with, and though it may have to be slimmed down, it will still be a great training organisation. Please no dragging the company's name through the dirt, no wild speculation. Wait and see : if the money comes through, which we all expect to happen, SFT will keep up their reputation as perhaps the best flight training provider in the UK.
Thank you for your patience and forbearance.
Sorry to hear about those guys that have lost more than I have (a job and some money, as they still owe me some training).
However, Midland Maniac is right there are promising signs for a purchase. Unlike PPSC, SFT have some worthwhile assets and have maintained the goodwill of many students. Partly this is because SFT have not banked any checks for a while (not sure how long, about 10 days), so there is less feeling that "they knew it was going to happen, still took the money". Partly it is because the MD was there to tell students, a sign of the existing goodwill between students, staff and management. Partly it is because staff liked the management - were occasionally in disagreement, but basically did not have the antipathy toward senior management shown in some recently-deceasd organisations, that split the team as soon as the company had problems. SFT's team is still together, pulling for the business.
In a show of loyalty today from both sides there is an attempt in progress to keep the groundschool running until various courses can sit exams or at least arrange alternative instruction. If this comes off then the bills to keep groundschool running will be paid by students and the instructors will work for free for three weeks. Most of the instructors (I included, and I was already redundant last Wednesday) have already agreed to work for nothing.
This has various advantages beyond the obvious help for the students involved to complete courses. It keeps part of the company operating. It keeps student goodwill, and more of SFT's good name. It proves staff and student loyalty to the company. All of these will help towards our ultimate aim : sale of the business.
We, the staff of SFT Aviation have faith in what can be done with the company. The company has a good name, never had the problems of certain other FTOs. The problem is of cash flow, and that is being worked on now by a dedicated team of administrators and directors. When this is sorted we will be the same organisation, with I hope much the same team. As a student and then an instructor I felt that the instructors at SFT are the best team I have ever worked with, and though it may have to be slimmed down, it will still be a great training organisation. Please no dragging the company's name through the dirt, no wild speculation. Wait and see : if the money comes through, which we all expect to happen, SFT will keep up their reputation as perhaps the best flight training provider in the UK.
Thank you for your patience and forbearance.