ESS SIMS 3 Year Contracts

[mavhc]

It definitely does that, or at least it did a few years ago.

 

It says it does, doesn't work, or give me a useful error though, as usual

[Ditto]

Seriously poor ethics shown by ESS! The cheek of saying they need to pay in full too.. it is disgusting behaviour.

I'm not doubting they said this at all, but where was it stated - was it in an email or elsewhere?

[mthomas08]

Only need to pay annually. You should have received this quote separately like us.

[enjay]

I'm not doubting they said this at all, but where was it stated - was it in an email or elsewhere?

 

From their email about the break clause:

 

"If you take up this offer, you are still required to pay your annual invoice in full. However, should you subsequently invoke the break clause, we will refund you 50% of your 2022/23 charges within 60 days of 1st October 2022."

[msi]

Okay - own up - which one of you reported ESS to the Government Competition and Markets Authority? It wasn't me

 

This is big news and I for one would be absolutely delighted if ESS were;

 

a) to be investigated as a "Dominant Firm" in the market (to qualify, market share must be over 40% which it is however you look at it)

b) found to have abused that dominance

 

All of us here know that Capita and now ESS have been rubbing their hands together for a long time;

- providing little to no genuine innovation or development in the "platform" that is SIMS

- refusing to answer directly to schools and preferring to provide support through a network of Local Authority employees, whose jobs depend on schools continuing to use SIMS

- more recently, pushing schools directly into signing up for 3 years

- offering a 6 month break clause out of the goodness of their hearts (their words "if you'd like to take us up on this offer") when they know full well that most schools purchase SIMS through the Local Authority or at the least purchase support through the LA, the contracts for which almost ALL run by financial year, i.e. LAs are looking to sign schools up well before the end of March. Which means schools actually have - oooh - 1 month to make a fast and major decision. How many schools have the capacity for that?!

 

Of course, schools have been able to switch to another provider for years. But how many of us here have worked for schools who don't want to stick their neck out, who are given scare stories by their local authority about what could happen if they switch, etc... and have - understandably - not wanted to rock the boat?

 

If you feel as strongly that schools have been under the cosh for long enough then please fill in this official survey from the CMA: link here

 

Now is the time to come out of the woodwork, people!

 

EDIT: Sorry I should have provided some kind of reference for this. An email came through from the Director of Antitrust at the CMA to the school I am currently working with. I don't want to post his name here as it was a direct email to the school. I will contact him and ask if it's okay to make his details - or those of a colleague - available here.

 

Mat

School Computer Geek - Supporting the UK Education Sector

Edited February 4, 2022 by msi

[DrCheese]

Hi - Where are you seeing that they're being investigated by the CMA please? (That form is generic & could be anyone)

 

Edit: - There's nothing on their twitter or under cases either https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases

Edited February 4, 2022 by DrCheese

[Andycat]

Not sure I trust that that form doesn't just go straight to another provider...

[msi]

Not sure I trust that that form doesn't just go straight to another provider...

 

Valid concern - although it should be no surprise that the CMA may wish to get involved. I have just updated the original post with more info. Will report back here.

 

For now, will say that I just called and spoke personally to the director within the CMA who sent the email (official email contact form and can google his name), quizzed him on the process of deciding the outcome of cases like this and was extremely knowledgeable about the process.

 

Hi - Where are you seeing that they're being investigated by the CMA please? (That form is generic & could be anyone)

 

See above. Will report back once I have asked for permission to publish the contact details of someone at CMA who can confirm this.

 

For now, see redacted email:

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by msi

[Ex-MGSTech]

https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/montagu-slash-parentpay-merger-inquiry

 

Is all I can find which was the initial acquisition

Edited February 4, 2022 by Ex-MGSTech

[paulkerton]

Doesn't Microsoft Forms report back who the owner of the form is? Google Forms will say at the bottom "This form was created inside XXXXXXX"

I'd expect Microsoft Forms to do the same, because I have zero reason to trust that form as it stands.

 

This feels, off...

Edited February 4, 2022 by paulkerton

[tmleafs]

Does anyone have any updates on the 400 schools that took legal action?

[asteer]

For now, will say that I just called and spoke personally to the director within the CMA who sent the email (official email contact form and can google his name), quizzed him on the process of deciding the outcome of cases like this and was extremely knowledgeable about the process.

 

I dont wish to assume anyones gender but the CMA website currently says that the senior director Anti-Trust is called Ann Pope who I would have to assume may identify as female, but you said you spoke to "him"

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cma-structure/cma-structure-chart-as-at-march-2019

[msi]

I dont wish to assume anyones gender but the CMA website currently says that the senior director Anti-Trust is called Ann Pope who I would have to assume may identify as female, but you said you spoke to "him"

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cma-structure/cma-structure-chart-as-at-march-2019

 

Definitely didn't say I spoke to the Senior Director, see my screenshot above

 

This feels, off...

 

You are more than welcome to take anything you read online with a pinch of salt - I do the same. All I can say is that I contacted the person from whom the email originated and spoke in detail about the preliminary investigation. If you don't want to take it from me then hopefully they will provide an official release in the coming days. It was me who pixelated the screenshot above out, and I didn't do this to hide the fact it came from a dodgy source, because I personally confirmed it didn't! I am sure those reading this can understand I don't wish to publish a civil servant's work email address and phone number on a forum post...

Edited February 4, 2022 by msi

[msi]

*combined comment with above* Edited February 4, 2022 by msi

[msi]

From their email about the break clause:

 

"If you take up this offer, you are still required to pay your annual invoice in full. However, should you subsequently invoke the break clause, we will refund you 50% of your 2022/23 charges within 60 days of 1st October 2022."

 

Nasty tactics in my view

Edited February 4, 2022 by msi

[psydii]

I'm wondering that if this was only sent to a limited (probably) small number of schools with direct contact details of a director within CMA and this isn't yet in the public domain, we should be careful about how it is talked about. Perhaps BTRD for now?

[msi]

I'm wondering that if this was only sent to a limited (probably) small number of schools with direct contact details of a director within CMA and this isn't yet in the public domain, we should be careful about how it is talked about. Perhaps BTRD for now?

 

Perhaps wise at least here... I have tweeted and blogged on our website about it though (am I permitted to link here?) and have contacted the person in question to let him know of this.

[paulkerton]

So I hear the new trick is... (figures are made up, but needed for the point)

ESS "So, for SIMS and FMS, that'll be £10,000 please"

School "We've decided we dont want to continue with SIMS, but we'd like to keep FMS a little while longer"

ESS "So FMS on it's own. That'll be £10,000 please"

School "We only want FMS, not SIMS anymore"

ESS "Yes, £10,000 please"

School "But in that case, we may as well keep SIMS"

 

Gross behaviour. Horrid.

[Tones]

Confirming this is a real form - OP's URL matches the one we were sent by the CMA.

[Chclark]

So I hear the new trick is... (figures are made up, but needed for the point)

ESS "So, for SIMS and FMS, that'll be £10,000 please"

School "We've decided we dont want to continue with SIMS, but we'd like to keep FMS a little while longer"

ESS "So FMS on it's own. That'll be £10,000 please"

School "We only want FMS, not SIMS anymore"

ESS "Yes, £10,000 please"

School "But in that case, we may as well keep SIMS"

 

Gross behaviour. Horrid.

 

As far as I know this isn't new. School we had before ESS owned Sims moved to integris but wanted to keep FMS only but had to pay full price of Sims just for FMS

[Andycat]

Yes, we had the email late on Friday.

[enjay]

Yes, we had the email late on Friday.

 

Nothing here yet, but I'll keep an eye out for it.

[Seb1780]

Yes, we had the email late on Friday.

We got it late Friday too; survey completed.

[supportman]

Why would you keep FMS? So many better options out there like Sage 200, HCSS and Bromcoms own system.

[Rob_D]

Why would you keep FMS? So many better options out there like Sage 200, HCSS and Bromcoms own system.

For maintained schools, it's the exports into the County database, which otherwise would have be done manually. (At least that's what I've been told)