Great Little Escapes ceases trading as Atol holder prompting CAA advisory to agents

The CAA is standing by to deal with agent queries after Great Little Escapes ceased trading as an Atol holder late last week.
The company, based in Sandhurst, ceased being an Atol holder on 13 June. It held the brands Your Holidays, Great Little Escapes, Tunisia First and websites themaldives.co.uk, yourholidays.co.uk, thecaribbean.com and greatlittleescapes.co.uk.
It is a wholly separate company and brand to Great Little Breaks.
The CAA said: 'If you are a travel agent of Great Little Escapes and you are currently holding consumer payments which you have not yet paid to Great Little Escapes, you must not use these funds to refund consumers until you have received instructions from the Air Travel Trust.'
It added: 'Travel agents will be individually contacted by the CAA with specific instructions for these bookings.'
The authority also told agents not to submit fresh claims while waiting for more information 'as these will be rejected'.
Great Little Escapes specialises in city breaks, while Your Holidays has a diverse portfolio, ranging from hen and stag parties, LGBT holidays and packages for bridge players.
Its latest financials show the company lost nearly £77,000 last year and recorded a deficit of £186,000 in 2023.
Details of its latest Atol were unavailable from the CAA on Monday. The Great Little Escapes website currently redirects to yourholidays.co.uk.
The website carries the Advantage Travel Partnership logo and states it is "part of the Advantage Travel Partnership". TTG has contacted Advantage for comment.
The group's Facebook page has been inactive since October 2023, while activity has paused on several of its other social media pages.
Its Your Holidays brand was continuing to post almost daily to Facebook until Wednesday (11 June).
Previous Article The agent getting her face out there – on the side of the local car wash, plus 8 other TTNG conference tips Next Article 'This is how I go the extra mile for my clients – I go with them on holiday'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Sun

14 minutes ago

• The Sun

90 Day Fiance UK series four line up revealed with two age-gap couples, secret Mormon and proposal after single meeting

90 Day Fiance UK series four cast has been revealed - including age-gap couples, a secret Mormon and shock proposal. The hit show will be returning to screens from July 13 on discovery+. Its premise follows seven Brits who have been navigating long distance relationships. Over the course of 90 days, the couples will decide whether they're ready to spend the rest of their lives together. Adnand and Shorna The first couple taking part this series is Adnand (25) and Shorna (45). Londoner Shorna met Albanian golf buggy driver Adnand while on holiday with her daughter in Greece. Having been in a long distance relationship ever since, Shorna has a surprise in store for Adnand. Shorna has converted to Mormonism since they last saw each other, meaning she can longer have a physical relationship with Adnand. She has put off revealing this - believing Adnand won't take the news well. Only if they become man and wife could they revisit physical intimacy. Shannon and Mete 7 Shannon, 25, from Liverpool, went on holiday to Marmaris, Turkey in 2023. She met hotel entertainer Mete, 32, from Istanbul, with an attraction sparking into a relationship. Watch the awkward moment woman jets to Jordan to meet her husband for the first time AND marry him in the same day Since then, Shannon regularly makes return trips to Turkey to see Mete - but he is very jealous. With her nearly-all male circle of friends at home causing tension, what will happen next? Arrah and Andy 36-year-old Andy, from Watford, admitted to 30-year-old Arrah, from The Philippines, about his disability when they began talking. Andy told her: "I have a disability. I've got brittle bones. I've broken over 200 bones in my life." To which Arrah replied: "I don't care, it's what's inside that counts." Having only spoken for a month over the phone, Andy has flown to the Philippines to propose - but is this the right decision? Phin and Sandra Phin, 33, from London and Sandra, 33, from Brazil have a love story dating back several years. However, life took them in different directions - with Sandra getting married and had a family. By 2022, with both single, Sandra accidentally called Phin and the pair reignited their bond. Incredibly, 15 years after having first met, the pair finally became a couple. But will Phin be able to embrace the role of stepfather? Ebrima and Zena Zena, 65, from Oxted, holidayed in The Gambia two years ago. While there, she caught the eye of Ebrima, 44, a local waiter. Ebrima wooed her with flowers and sweet talk, with the pair having been in a long distance relationship ever since. However, Zena's family are concerned that Ebrima's intentions are financial. Sarah and Marco Following a painful break-up, Sarah, 31, from Kent, went to Italy with a friend for some R&R. While swimming in a lake, Sarah bumped into local hunk Marco, 37. The pair have now officially been together for a year - and visit each other's country at least one a month. Unbeknown to Sarah's friends and family, the couple have recently got engaged. But having been engaged before, Sarah is nervous to share the news with her loved ones. How will they react upon finding out? Sam and Ali Rounding out the line-up are Sam and Ali, who are returning from series three. Sam, 30, from Newcastle met 24-year-old Turkish girl Ali on a holiday resort in 2022, falling in love quickly Although Sam was concerned about Ali's intentions, the couple married in Turkey and have been long distance. Having found it difficult to save for a visa, Sam tries his hand at living in Ali's rural Turkish hometown. But this is much to Ali's frustration, as she dreams of a new life in the UK. 90 Day Fiancé UK series four is available to stream on discovery+ in the UK & Ireland from Sunday 13 th July.

Times

21 minutes ago

• Times

Insolvencies rise as firms face tariffs and higher costs

The number of businesses becoming insolvent rose sharply last month as companies faced higher staff costs and continuing uncertainty over trading arrangements with the United States. Business insolvencies in England and Wales rose 15 per cent to 2,238 in May compared with the same month a year ago, according to data from the Insolvency Service. The figures showed that the number of creditors' voluntary liquidations, through which a director chooses to close down the business, rose by 13 per cent to 1,734, while the number of company administrations, which usually involve larger enterprises, was up by 12 per cent to 136. Businesses started paying higher national insurance contributions for employees in April and also faced an increase in the national minimum wage. The corporate environment has also been hit by uncertainty over tariffs, although Britain has now signed a trade deal with the US. Tom Russell, president of R3, the UK's insolvency and restructuring trade body, said the uncertainty over trade costs had made 'medium and long-term planning more difficult' for companies. Mark Ford, partner in the restructuring team at S&W, the professional services firm, said: 'The impact of sluggish economic growth, high borrowing costs, low consumer confidence and high inflation in recent years has eroded cash reserves for businesses and left some in a perilous position. 'Businesses are now facing newer challenges that threaten their viability and this means we are likely to continue to see a steady stream of company insolvencies in the coming months. 'Higher costs resulting from increases to employer national insurance contributions, the minimum wage and business rates are all heaping considerable pressure on businesses, particularly those that feel they are unable to increase prices for fear of losing customers.' Kathleen Garrett, partner at Reed Smith, the law firm, said the Bank of England's decision to hold interest rates on Thursday showed that while borrowing costs were falling, they were facing 'a much more gradual descent than many would have hoped'. She added: 'Businesses are facing a raft of challenges which have caused insolvencies to start rising again. The headwinds from additional business costs such as the recent increases to national insurance and a fraught geopolitical environment in terms of tariffs and unrest appear to have had an effect on business.'

The Independent

22 minutes ago

• The Independent

Why is Angela Rayner shifting the council tax burden from north to south?

When Angela Rayner took over her department, the first thing she did was to delete 'levelling up' from its name. But she insisted that she was committed to the idea behind the phrase, and now she is about to announce a change in local government funding to prove it. The new funding formula is expected to allocate money from central government according to local needs, including population, poverty and age, with extra weighting for rural and coastal areas with higher transport costs. The effect will be to force local councils in London and the home counties to put up council tax. Many of them are expected to increase tax by the maximum 5 per cent a year for several years, and more than before will ask Rayner for permission to hold a local referendum on an increase greater than 5 per cent. Councils in the north, the Midlands and east London, on the other hand, may be able to cut their council tax, or at least increase it by less. Is this fair? Labour argues that the Conservatives have fiddled the funding formula for 14 years, resulting in artificially low council taxes in places such as Westminster and Wandsworth – former Tory councils that attracted disproportionate media coverage in local elections. In the end, this attempt to cook the books could not hold back the electoral tide, and Labour won control of both councils in 2022. Clobbering those councils is going to make it harder for Labour to retain control, so it could be argued that Rayner is motivated purely by wanting to rebalance the national distribution of resources according to need. The new system will probably be fairer than the current one, if not perfectly fair, but any attempt to adjust local government funding throws up winners and losers – and the losers always make more noise than those who quietly pocket their gains. How quickly will the change happen? Even if the change were totally fair in principle, any sharp fall in central government funding and big increase in council tax is likely to cause hardship. That is why Rayner is expected to adjust her new formula by putting a limit on how much any council's income from central government can fall in a year. David Phillips, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, says: 'It's been 20 years since we've had an effective system to allocate funding between councils so it is out of whack and the changes are going to be big.' That means any changes will probably be phased in over several years. What could possibly go wrong? If Rayner delivers a funding system for local government that is more closely aligned with local needs, she could deliver more radical policy substance than the Conservative slogan of 'levelling up' ever managed. But Phillips points out a philosophical problem. The more the government tries to redistribute resources from 'leafier places' to deprived areas, the more 'it is making a trade-off to prioritise need over incentives for councils to tackle need and grow their council tax base', he says. If councils receive more funding the higher their indicators of deprivation are, there is a danger of perverse incentives for them to keep those indicators high. Shouldn't council tax be revalued from scratch? Of course it should. It is based on notional property values in 1991 (in England; in Wales the reference date is 2003), so it is hopelessly out of date. But revaluation would produce even more dramatic individual winners and losers than changing funding for whole council areas. Rayner's redistribution is already what Sir Humphrey would describe as 'very brave, deputy prime minister'; a full revaluation would be several times braver – in other words, a guaranteed political disaster. The most that is likely to be politically feasible would be to revalue council tax for more expensive properties, such as the one in 20 UK homes currently on the market for more than £1m. A similar policy, called a mansion tax, was considered by the coalition government – George Osborne and the Liberal Democrats wanted it but David Cameron vetoed the idea, saying the Tory party's donors wouldn't wear it. Given that Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is likely to be looking for new sources of revenue in the autumn Budget, this may be an option. She did rule out a mansion tax before the election, but I don't think it has been mentioned since. Look out for even greater 'fairness'.