[abhorson]

Originally Posted by sampvt

for everyone else except demolition

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/...p2Ga3foXRXFUqW

No insurance WTF.. I despise that.

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

She is entitled to it, no question about it

But it leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth tbh that people with millions are doing stuff like this.

Ill bet she doesent get it after this. She will be told to do like the rest of the 45 mums and dads did. Accept whats offered and if there is any outrage, aim it at the schools and the government that provide this system, not us on here that think that all people, no matter how rich they are, should be given preferential treatment

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by abhorson

No insurance WTF.. I despise that.

If I was to get pulled for no ins, I would be charged. She used her wealth to get off and even though she broke the law, she still got off. That's wrong.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by sampvt

If I was to get pulled for no ins, I would be charged. She used her wealth to get off and even though she broke the law, she still got off. That's wrong.

Money speaks.

[bots]

i think we are missing a lot of facts tbh, and that's why i say it needs a proper investigation.

This is not just about Harvey, this is about a school closing and the effects it has had on a community, with many children being affected. What I hope is that the other affected children received similar care and treatment to Harvey, given that it is all state funded. An investigation is the only valid route at this point.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by sampvt

Ill bet she doesent get it after this. She will be told to do like the rest of the 45 mums and dads did. Accept whats offered and if there is any outrage, aim it at the schools and the government that provide this system, not us on here that think that all people, no matter how rich they are, should be given preferential treatment

45 mums and dads? I'm not watching the loose women thing so can you explain what this is about?

I do aim my outrage at the government tbh. There are disabled kids being forced to uproot and move hundreds of miles away because their parents have a 'spare' bedroom...those people are the ones that need help, not those with millions who can afford 1000x over to do it themselves. I don't blame her for taking what she is offered, but the system is so ****ed up to allow things like this to happen in the first place

One of my mates with an income of 90k, and her husband works too (I dont know what he earns, only hers as shes always bragging) was kicking off about losing 20 pound a week child benefit when the new rules came in about that. I mean, really...wtf

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i think we are missing a lot of facts tbh, and that's why i say it needs a proper investigation.

This is not just about Harvey, this is about a school closing and the effects it has had on a community, with many children being affected. What I hope is that the other affected children received similar care and treatment to Harvey, given that it is all state funded. An investigation is the only valid route at this point.

Ah I see, Im guessing this is the other 45 parents thing...

I would bet they dont get the same treatment...I would like to be proven wrong though

[Josy]

Here is a statement from KP's management about all this

The statement from her management in full:

'Harvey's school placement was assessed and agreed by the Local authority. When this was done transport costs were included in the calculation.

'This was done because Harvey has a Statement of Special Educational Needs because of his disabilities. Within this Statement it includes the name of the school Harvey must attend.

'Where any child that is placed in a school out of their immediate home area it is the Local Authorities DUTY to provide transport that meets the child's needs. This is common practice for all disabled children as there are not enough suitable schools available to them.

'The cost of the school placement together with transport is not means tested as it is provided for the child. Local Authorities do not have special needs schools locally as these have been closed during the last 15 years as it was deemed a cheaper option to transport children out of borough. If Harvey's school was on his doorstep, as with schools for healthy children, then this would not apply but it was the Governments choice to close the special needs schools.

'The education law states that the local authority must provide transport to and from the school that is named in the statement. This must be appropriate to the child’s needs and include the provision of an escort (in Harvey’s case a nurse) who is trained to cope with the child’s medical needs.

'The escort (nurse) is because Harvey’s condition is life threatening and he has to have someone capable of giving emergency injections to save his life.

'Kate's calculation of Ł1000 per day is based on hiring her private driver and a private nurse, to drive to and from her home to Harvey’s school twice a day (which is 1.5 hrs drive each way). This is not the sum that local authority pays.

This has been posted on her official website.

[sampvt]

It would appear and on first reading the info out there, that Priceys sons school closed and 45 kids were left to find other schools. Pricey took the stance that she wasn't interested in what was on offer and decided to go further afield to get better care for her son which is ok and I applaud her. But the crux is why is she being funded as the other kids were all re sited in other local schools. Pricey is getting preferential treatment and is getting public money to fund her decision. That's what the hoohah is about.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by sampvt

It would appear and on first reading the info out there, that Priceys sons school closed and 45 kids were left to find other schools. Pricey took the stance that she wasn't interested in what was on offer and decided to go further afield to get better care for her son which is ok and I applaud her. But the crux is why is she being funded as the other kids were all re sited in other local schools. Pricey is getting preferential treatment and is getting public money to fund her decision. That's what the hoohah is about.

She never decided where Harvey would go to school, why do you keep saying otherwise?

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by Josy

Here is a statement from KP's management about all this



This has been posted on her official website.

So what you are saying is that Pricey lied and misled us.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by sampvt

So what you are saying is that Pricey lied and misled us.

No because she never said that she decided where he should go, you seem to have decided that all by yourself.

The child has to attend a school that fits his needs.

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by Josy

She never decided where Harvey would go to school, why do you keep saying otherwise?

I read somewhere this morning that Pricey herself decided to go outside her borough and it was also her decision to hire a nurse and driver to take him to and from his school. That seems to be what all the other posts are inferring but if its wrong then I hold my hand up but I am only saying what everyone else is and it all sounds very strange that the government would be willing to fork out 45 x Ł1000 a day for all these kids to go to a school 50 miles away. Its not logically economic.

Do the maths, a new school would be peanuts in the face of this scenario, so we can only assume that either Pricey was wrong, her web site is fudging or the other 44 kids are taking second best. You decide.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by sampvt

I read somewhere this morning that Pricey herself decided to go outside her borough and it was also her decision to hire a nurse and driver to take him to and from his school. That seems to be what all the other posts are inferring but if its wrong then I hold my hand up but I am only saying what everyone else is and it all sounds very strange that the government would be willing to fork out 45 x Ł1000 a day for all these kids to go to a school 50 miles away. Its not logically economic.

Do the maths, a new school would be peanuts in the face of this scenario, so we can only assume that either Pricey was wrong, her web site is fudging or the other 44 kids are taking second best. You decide.

The statement from her management in full:

'Harvey's school placement was assessed and agreed by the Local authority. When this was done transport costs were included in the calculation.

'This was done because Harvey has a Statement of Special Educational Needs because of his disabilities. Within this Statement it includes the name of the school Harvey must attend.

'Where any child that is placed in a school out of their immediate home area it is the Local Authorities DUTY to provide transport that meets the child's needs. This is common practice for all disabled children as there are not enough suitable schools available to them.

'The cost of the school placement together with transport is not means tested as it is provided for the child. Local Authorities do not have special needs schools locally as these have been closed during the last 15 years as it was deemed a cheaper option to transport children out of borough. If Harvey's school was on his doorstep, as with schools for healthy children, then this would not apply but it was the Governments choice to close the special needs schools.

'The education law states that the local authority must provide transport to and from the school that is named in the statement. This must be appropriate to the child’s needs and include the provision of an escort (in Harvey’s case a nurse) who is trained to cope with the child’s medical needs.

'The escort (nurse) is because Harvey’s condition is life threatening and he has to have someone capable of giving emergency injections to save his life.

'Kate's calculation of Ł1000 per day is based on hiring her private driver and a private nurse, to drive to and from her home to Harvey’s school twice a day (which is 1.5 hrs drive each way). This is not the sum that local authority pays.

.

Numerous posters commented throughout the thread about Katie NOT being the one that decided where he would go

[Pink Pegasus]

Originally Posted by sampvt

I read somewhere this morning that Pricey herself decided to go outside her borough and it was also her decision to hire a nurse and driver to take him to and from his school. That seems to be what all the other posts are inferring but if its wrong then I hold my hand up but I am only saying what everyone else is and it all sounds very strange that the government would be willing to fork out 45 x Ł1000 a day for all these kids to go to a school 50 miles away. Its not logically economic.

Do the maths, a new school would be peanuts in the face of this scenario, so we can only assume that either Pricey was wrong, her web site is fudging or the other 44 kids are taking second best. You decide.

That was just Katie's estimate of what it would cost her to do it privately, it says in that statement:

Kate's calculation of Ł1000 per day is based on hiring her private driver and a private nurse, to drive to and from her home to Harvey’s school twice a day (which is 1.5 hrs drive each way). This is not the sum that local authority pays.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by sampvt

I read somewhere this morning that Pricey herself decided to go outside her borough and it was also her decision to hire a nurse and driver to take him to and from his school. That seems to be what all the other posts are inferring but if its wrong then I hold my hand up but I am only saying what everyone else is and it all sounds very strange that the government would be willing to fork out 45 x Ł1000 a day for all these kids to go to a school 50 miles away. Its not logically economic.

Do the maths, a new school would be peanuts in the face of this scenario, so we can only assume that either Pricey was wrong, her web site is fudging or the other 44 kids are taking second best. You decide.

The 1,000 was an example that KP gave about her own transport costs, this is not what it is costing Harvey, when they say "a driver" they mean a local mini cab firm, and when they say a nurse, they mean an escort trained in administering either epi pen or injections who will be a normal wage, it will cost no where near 1,000 a day and obviously it is far less than building and staffing a local school so obviously it is the cheapest option for the Local Education Authority.

[sampvt]

TBH I am not interested in what her management company says, a 50 mile taxi twice a day does not cost 1000 quid. Bit \I will await the local councils report on this as I reckon their phones are pretty hot at the moment.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by sampvt

TBH I am not interested in what her management company says, a 50 mile taxi twice a day does not cost 1000 quid. Bit \I will await the local councils report on this as I reckon their phones are pretty hot at the moment.

No one said it cost 1000 quid.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by sampvt

TBH I am not interested in what her management company says, a 50 mile taxi twice a day does not cost 1000 quid. Bit \I will await the local councils report on this as I reckon their phones are pretty hot at the moment.

who said it cost 1,000 quid, nowhere has the cost of Harveys transport costs been mentioned

[*mazedsalv**]

OK, usually I'm one to say "Well, you have money so why don't you do this and that", but when I say that, it's for other things, smaller things for example, eg. when celebrities get into nightclubs for free even though they have lots of money and the average person needs to pay...

BUT

That's it on that part. Those are the sort of times where I think celebs should be paying as they have money.

But this is different. I completely agree with Katie Price here. Why is she not allowed to be helped out? She pays her taxes like everyone else, yes, she has money, BUT that doesn't mean anything. Lets say Harvey falls down and breaks his arm, Katie Price rushes her son to the hospital and they say, "Ermm, sorry Katie, we can't help your son because you have money, pay for it yourself"... that would be appalling. Everyone is entitled.

[Cherie]

[QUOTE=*mazedsalv**;7539736]OK, usually I'm one to say "Well, you have money so why don't you do this and that", but when I say that, it's for other things, smaller things for example, eg. when celebrities get into nightclubs for free even though they have lots of money and the average person needs to pay...

BUT

That's it on that part. Those are the sort of times where I think celebs should be paying as they have money.

But this is different. I completely agree with Katie Price here. Why is she not allowed to be helped out? She pays her taxes like everyone else, yes, she has money, BUT that doesn't mean anything. Lets say Harvey falls down and breaks his arm, Katie Price rushes her son to the hospital and they say, "Ermm, sorry Katie, we can't help your son because you have money, pay for it yourself"... that would be appalling. Everyone is entitled.[/QUOTE]


superb example.

[Denver]

My views is she pays her taxes which is probaly millions over the years and is entilted to get something back to help her son son.

what would you rather it was spent on?

A Disabled child?

or

Funding people Drug and Drink addictions?
People eating far to much then being to lazy to loose it themselves opt for surgery?
People who have no willingness to work and happy to spend there life on benifits

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by sampvt

Baiting threads like this show you for what you are stop them. The show was seen by thousands so don't try and be clever. Google it and you will find it,

I've googled "Katie Price prosecuted for no motor insurance" and I've come up with zilch. I then tried, "Katie Price caught on camera whilst driving without insurance" and again it came up with nothing.

Baiting!! I wouldn't dream of posting accusations against anyone without a link and expect them to believe me...duh!

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by sampvt

TBH I am not interested in what her management company says, a 50 mile taxi twice a day does not cost 1000 quid. Bit \I will await the local councils report on this as I reckon their phones are pretty hot at the moment.

I await the trial!!

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

I've googled "Katie Price prosecuted for no motor insurance" and I've come up with zilch. I then tried, "Katie Price caught on camera whilst driving without insurance" and again it came up with nothing.

Baiting!! I wouldn't dream of posting accusations against anyone without a link and expect them to believe me...duh!

Don't let the fact that I have already posted the thread sway your judgement, lol. You might need to scroll up a but and its the post....for everyone except you but you didn't need to take that literary.

Post 72 I think