Thomas Cook In Financial Trouble

[rudds1 102]

Been reading that travel agent Thomas cook are in some financial trouble and they are trying to raise around £200 million  .if they go under it would mean the tax payer would have to pay to repatriate some estimated 180000 people back home and also there is approximately 20000 jobs at stake of which 9000 are in the uk .should the government help them out with a loan or something similar or should the government not get involved with a private company ?

[El Cid 212]

2 minutes ago, rudds1 said:

If they go under it would mean the tax payer would have to pay to repatriate some estimated 180000 people back home.

Why on earth is the tax payer liable for the downfall of a private bussiness? With motor insurance there is a levy on insurance companies for uninsured vehicles.

[rudds1 102]

10 minutes ago, El Cid said:

Why on earth is the tax payer liable for the downfall of a private bussiness? With motor insurance there is a levy on insurance companies for uninsured vehicles.

The government helped the banks out who were largely private business 

[Lockdoctor 10]

9 minutes ago, El Cid said:

Why on earth is the tax payer liable for the downfall of a private bussiness? With motor insurance there is a levy on insurance companies for uninsured vehicles.

Because their customers are protected by ATOL.  The downfall of a normal private business doesn't end up with British people being stranded in a foreign country.

[Longcol 594]

ATOL - which would cover repatriation of people on package holidays, is funded by the travel industry.

 

https://www.caa.co.uk/ATOL-protection/Consumers/About-ATOL/

Funding and administration

ATOL is run by the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). It is funded by contributions from ATOL holders, who must pay £2.50 into the schemes back up fund, the Air Travel Trust, for each person they book on a holiday.
This money creates a fund that is used by the CAA to ensure consumers either complete their holiday or – if they cannot get away – receive a full refund.

[hobinfoot 25]

2 hours ago, rudds1 said:

The government helped the banks out who were largely private business 

We need the banks. We don’t need travel companies.

[Albert the Cat 0]

3 hours ago, rudds1 said:

The government helped the banks out who were largely private business 

If you can't differentiate the difference between a global bank and high street travel company, then you need to do a bit of reading.  The consequences of one of the main banks failing was far more severe than the likes of Thomas Cook failing.  In fact, there could have been an argument for national sercurity made for saving a bank.

[Janus 28]

3 hours ago, rudds1 said:

if they go under it would mean the tax payer would have to pay to repatriate some estimated 180000 people

Are we sure that the government have a duty of care for this sort of thing?

 

I read that TC is asking the gov for cash to keep them afloat only.

 

  I would have thought that the fee that each traveller pays to ATOL within their ticket price should cover the issue of bringing travellers home.

[Albert the Cat 0]

3 hours ago, rudds1 said:

Been reading that travel agent Thomas cook are in some financial trouble and they are trying to raise around £200 million  .if they go under it would mean the tax payer would have to pay to repatriate some estimated 180000 people back home and also there is approximately 20000 jobs at stake of which 9000 are in the uk .should the government help them out with a loan or something similar or should the government not get involved with a private company ?

Wrong on so many levels.  It will not cost the tax payer a penny from bringing holiday makers home.  The cost of this will be absorbed by a fund managed by the Air Travel Trust.  It is sitting on about £167m which can be used.

[Obelix 11]

2 hours ago, Albert the Cat said:

Wrong on so many levels.  It will not cost the tax payer a penny from bringing holiday makers home.  The cost of this will be absorbed by a fund managed by the Air Travel Trust.  It is sitting on about £167m which can be used.

I think the figure to repatriat them is a bit more that the available assets... something like a half billion is needed to get them all back.

[Bargepole23 337]

2 hours ago, Obelix said:

I think the figure to repatriat them is a bit more that the available assets... something like a half billion is needed to get them all back.

Half a billion would be £2750 each, seems high?

Edited September 21, 2019 by Bargepole23

[Obelix 11]

Thats the number that was being chucked about, I agree it does seem a bit steep.