The below was posted on one of my club's Facebook pages (private details retracted):

For various reasons the club is classified as a business and therefore qualifies for the government grants designed to help businesses who are suffering hardship during the Coronavirus lockdowns. To date we have received ?XX,XXX from these grants.

The club will probably qualify for the next grants totalling ?X,XXX. These grants will soon be available and claiming is obviously subject to committee approval.

The club is well funded and has savings to pay for long term maintenance projects.

Our subscriptions cover the general costs of the club so unlike many businesses we do not need grant money to keep operating.

If we assume this most recent grant is approved the question arises of what do we do with the money?

Click to expand...

A few good suggestions have so far been made as to what to spend the money on, but is this actually the conversation we should be having?

I've highlighted the key bits:

government grants designed to help businesses who are suffering hardship during the Coronavirus lockdowns.

we do not need grant money to keep operating.

Click to expand...

I appreciate that all clubs have been affected differently, but is claiming a windfall (amounting to tens of thousands of pounds) morally justifiable? It is our taxes and our children's taxes that will pay for government spending during the pandemic and if everyone milks the system, we're all going to end up even more screwed.

Sure, I know there are thousands of businesses who have claimed furlough while still working, there are thousands of businesses who have fraudulently claimed on the "eat out to help out", there are thousands of businesses booming during the pandemic and claiming all the free money, so why shouldn't we get on the bandwagon too?

It just doesn't sit right with me...

This particular business (a single-person limited company) hasn't received a penny in aid yet, and with almost zero work in nine months, so I'm not too happy about that! I'm just dribbling away my meagre savings on food and bills at the moment, which is infuriating when other self-employed workers can claim emergency relief and still work, if they have the work of course. Though I did hear the first rumblings of what may be progress on that score this morning on the news.

I think if clubs have genuinely lost significant revenue (ours has) from the lack of visitors, then I think it's justified to claim, especially if the government are encouraging organisations to. The businesses our members support indirectly via us caving will probably have been able to. Also many of our members, myself included, don't have the facilities at home to go caving effectively, and the loss of the hut has been a huge blow to our caving activity and social life - we've hardly done any of either in ten months. But it is largely a conscience issue if there's been no hit to a club other than mild inconvenience.

You make a very good point here Pete.

At least one club I'm a member of had this very discussion. It was decided to apply for the grant but set it aside, with a view to giving it back potentially, if it turns out that it's genuinely not needed, once the pandemic is eventually defeated.

I would imagine such an approach might just stand a club in good stead if ever there was a dispute with a council in the future over the amount of business rates which should be paid. Reminding them of a return of the grant, which could have been kept, might just make the difference when an officer has to make a judgement on a case. (But I'm no expert on business taxation.)

"a single-person limited company" which in a large number of cases is set up to reduce tax payments, which would otherwise have been due under Sole Trader or other self assessment tax.

I should know, I also have one for this purpose.

Not saying this is the case with you, or everyone, but if you pay less into the system, expect less back.

Could consider using the money to support local outdoor centers/instructors who have been sold down the river? loosing outdoor education provision will hit clubs down the line. Getting some training provision booked in in advance for when the pandemic recedes would benefit a club and get the money to where it is needed.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that claiming grants to cover the costs that have been incurred to make a hut "Covid-safe" are not legitimate claims that should be made. Likewise where visitor fees have been lost that are needed for maintenance that is still required, that also seems reasonable.

The fact is though, that nobody's income/livelihood depends on the club making a profit, so lost revenue in visitor fees in itself does not hurt a club, if there aren't expenses that need to be covered from these fees.

The idea of a club profiting financially from the pandemic grants, at the expense of future generations (I know it is a drop in the ocean compared toe everything else), and then using it for upgrades that otherwise would not have been made, just seems wrong.

Pitlamp's comment above about taking it and paying back if not genuinely needed seems a pretty honest approach and I'm glad to hear clubs are having this discussion. 

alexchien said:

"a single-person limited company" which in a large number of cases is set up to reduce tax payments, which would otherwise have been due under Sole Trader or other self assessment tax.

I should know, I also have one for this purpose.

Not saying this is the case with you, or everyone, but if you pay less into the system, expect less back.

Click to expand...

In my case it's mainly as I'm multi-skilled, and do different kinds of unconnected work, which a sole trader designation would make more restrictive. I don't make enough for tax dodges, sadly

I had the same thoughts as Pete when I read this information on the FB group. But seeing as I haven?t paid my membership for this coming year I didn?t feel able to comment in the group.

(Rationing caving club memberships is the reason for not paying - don?t need two in one region especially when there isn?t any caving going on currently)

I like the idea that the club could claim the money and then invest in local businesses that are likely to have lost out during the pandemic, obviously it is hard to know how to choose but I?m sure even just a few hundred pounds being spent like this would help.

If someone doesn?t call up the morality of claiming for money not incurred/lost/required then the thought might not cross peoples mind - after all this moral questioning needs to start somewhere.

Does a hut really ?need? a new car park, an extension, new roof, improved drying facilities etc etc. Or are these things we want? Should the government money be allowing us to do this and how much more money have we gained as a club from the grants over and above the money from hut fees?

maxb727 said:

I like the idea that the club could claim the money and then invest in local businesses that are likely to have lost out during the pandemic, obviously it is hard to know how to choose but I?m sure even just a few hundred pounds being spent like this would help.

Click to expand...

This is an interesting idea, but it is pretty much fraud isn't it? Regardless of the good it could do for a local business, it is effectively claiming tax money for a purpose that the government hasn't designated it for.

Those local businesses that have suffered should be able to claim their own funding and if cavers are that worried that the government isn't giving them enough, shouldn't we dig into our own pockets to support them, rather than fraudulently claiming extra from the government?

I run a business, and thank goodness we've not been too affected so far.  We had to furlough one employee, and have claimed his wages etc which have been a god send. 

Of course being a director myself, me and my business partner have received no aid, but as I said, we've not been adversely affected. 

However, I have absolutely no doubt what so ever, that there have been all sorts of chancers taking all sorts of money left right and centre.  I heard tell in the first lockdown of a guy going straight for the big money and getting himself a multi million pound loan, when they were offered.  Not that he needed it, but he must have had a good plan to invest it in something or other and presumably make a killing.

Interestingly, the government are about to publish lists of all companies that have claimed furlough.  I guess they are relying on our propensity for snitching to try and get to the fraudsters.

SamT said:

I run a business, and thank goodness we've not been too affected so far.  We had to furlough one employee, and have claimed his wages etc which have been a god send. 

Of course being a director myself, me and my business partner have received no aid, but as I said, we've not been adversely affected. 

However, I have absolutely no doubt what so ever, that there have been all sorts of chancers taking all sorts of money left right and centre.  I heard tell in the first lockdown of a guy going straight for the big money and getting himself a multi million pound loan, when they were offered.  Not that he needed it, but he must have had a good plan to invest it in something or other and presumably make a killing.

Interestingly, the government are about to publish lists of all companies that have claimed furlough.  I guess they are relying on our propensity for snitching to try and get to the fraudsters.

Click to expand...

If you put the money in a fairly standard UK small to mid cap investment trust in April, you would be up 60-70%. All you needed was confidence in the future and the propensity of central banks to print money.

https://www.youinvest.co.uk/market-research/LSE:THRG

I have always liked this one. Blackrock are no mugs (they manage $8tn, gosh). The scary bit is that it is higher than before the pandemic by a fair bit. My finger hovers on the sell button periodically. It?s an issue.

The grants are proportional to what you pay in business rates, so can just consider them a rebate. Low rate payers getting a much bigger percentage than those on high rates.

The Government have told us to close / restrictive opening. The Govt are re-imbursing us for this.

Cave huts are under thecategory of bunk houses, still have out goings that need to be paid. I would envisage a current 12 monthly income from a cave hut hut to be nearer 10% of its usual income. The hut still has bills and running costs that need to be paid. I would imagine most of the grant money will be taken up covering these losses, and how long before we are back to a usual hut income?

I not sure people realise how much it costs to run cave huts, i don think there will be much left from th grants by the time this is all over

The Govt have told us to close, morally the govt are re-imbursing us for this

The government are only making these payouts because they don't want to shell out even more in unemployment benefits... (We just don't fit their business model)

PaulW said:

I not sure people realise how much it costs to run cave huts, i don think there will be much left from th grants by the time this is all over

Click to expand...

Funnily enough, we do have to replace a roof, as mentioned earlier - it's been an ongoing issue for years and we finally decided this year it's happening. Ironically we'd never stop caving or hosting guests long enough to do it if we were open as usual, so there are some benefits to being forced to shut. It's not going to be cheap, but we'd factored the cost in long before we heard about any grants. But this is why you have to build up a long-term reserve, which isn't being greedy, it's just being sensible, as a facility like this doesn't grow on trees - we own the building and half the land around it and we have a responsibility to keep it in good condition, given its prime location. Something really terrible can always happen, and if we can't fix it the repercussions will be felt for a long time. Imagine trying to open a new caving club in Castleton now, and how much money you'd need, if you could even find a suitable venue.

PaulW said:

The Government have told us to close / restrictive opening. The Govt are re-imbursing us for this.

Cave huts are under thecategory of bunk houses, still have out goings that need to be paid. I would envisage a current 12 monthly income from a cave hut hut to be nearer 10% of its usual income. The hut still has bills and running costs that need to be paid. I would imagine most of the grant money will be taken up covering these losses, and how long before we are back to a usual hut income?

I not sure people realise how much it costs to run cave huts, i don think there will be much left from th grants by the time this is all over

The Govt have told us to close, morally the govt are re-imbursing us for this

Click to expand...

I'd be intrigued to know more detail about this in terms of how much the running costs drop when there is nobody use it. I assume that electricity drops to near nothing, heating/gas/water etc must drop to near nothing. Council tax etc will obviously remain, so possibly this is the biggest expenditure for a club hut.

Any running repairs/renovations should surely have been accounted for in a 'shit hits the fan' fund as pwhole suggested below.

The other difficult decision is, given caving clubs accommodation is bunkhouse, when can you deem it safe enough to go back to "full capacity", I can be sure that the government will say "go" and huts will get some visitors, but will visiting clubs feel like filling a bunk room with 16 or so people.

We 'could' say go back to normal tomorrow. But the customers may not have the confidence to come back to the hut. I ran some numbers and am projecting a loss for 2021 and a small profit for 2022, based on my best guesses of returning percentages of visitors to the building (%of pre-Cov), obvs subject to change.

As has already been discussed we still have costs and the money that we been given has gone some way to ensuring that the funds in the club have not been reduced by 1/3 in 2020 alone, never mind the 2nd third in 2021.

Our funds come from various sources, but for some clubs their reserves have come from a lifetime of hard earned savings from a member who wrote a will. It is difficult to say that money from a loved member of a club should be used to sustain a club while their doors are shut. Similarly, members subscription fees are given to a club to ensure there are good levels of tackle in good condition, so that they may carry out their past-time.

Caving clubs will do their bit for bringing the economy back think of all the 1. pubs you drink at, 2. service stations you call at, 3. supermarkets (all over the country) for food for the weekend, 4. local shops, the list goes on. (And yes it can include public transport or fuel)

Fag packet maths: Say you spent ?10 in each per weekend, ?40 by the end of the weekend.
X say 26 weeks of the year =?1040 per caver per year.

As a starter for ten I'll say 100cavers in the U.K. Share these habits. So that's ?104,000 in revenue for local shops.
20% vat=?17,333
Say proportion of wage bill is 10% of sales and tax and NI are 10% of that=1%x Rev paid in staff taxes=?1,040

So for caving huts the government will see the funds they have provided paid back in trickle benefits in a handful of years, not hundreds

Another fixed cost.
Building insurance.  I don't know what it is now for the chapel, but it isn't cheap.

Wanted to get rid of the at the end of my last post, oh well.


Aardgoose, its of the order of ?900 of the top of my head, without looking it up I guess that's about what you were paying when you were treasurer of the best caving hut in the s33 postcode.

Just shy of ?700 in 2004 ruddy inflation