To think that if an activity is payable per term, some parents shouldn't be allowed to PAYG?(25 Posts)
Most of us at my son's swimming club pay for the full set of lessons at the beginning of term as requested, but there are always a couple of parents who insist on waiting until the end of term and then only pay for the sessions that their child attends. My child also attends a full day activity which is cheaper if booked and paid for in advance, but there is one mum who books in advance without paying and then insists on being given the reduced rate on the day. It really annoys me, mainly because it's always the parents with the most money who are so tight about paying for their children's activities. The ones who send them to private schools and go on exotic holidays every year suddenly can't afford to pay a fiver in advance, and they do a very good job at pleading poverty. What do you think, AIBU to get so pissed off about this?
i was about to say ybu, untill i read that they didnt pay for the sessions that their child didnt go to?
ubnless that is actually allowed?
kick boxing is pay as you go or pay it all at the beging...
where as rugby training you have to pay it all even if they dont go.
I think the woman who runs the swimming club hasn't really got the heart to say that they have to pay for the whole term even if their child didn't attend all the sessions. The thing is, some children only come for a couple of sessions each term, which means they are taking the place of another child (it is a popular club) and the parents have the bloody cheek so only pay for those two lessons. Anyway, it just makes me mad. We know that there will always be sessions each term that we can't attend, but we pay for all of them up front without asking for any kind of deduction.
I clicked on this because I thought it would be about Brownies TBH
I am a leader and we ask parents to pay termly.
However, we do pride ourselves on being inclusive and don't want to exclude girls because of financial difficulty and many leaders will come to private arrangements with parents who are genuinely struggling.
IME, parents who are honest about not being able to afford a lump sum at the beginning of term can often be the most reliable about paying weekly, as they budget so carefully.
However, the parent whose Brownie is dropped by a nanny with a merc is usually the last to pay, because it's "only Brownies". I bet she pays for the gymnastics/horse riding/ballet becuase those activities won't tolerate it.
In the case of swimming, I bet the instructor has to be paid the same regardless of how many children turn up.
Obviously, I think that if parents are struggling financially, other arrangements should be made so that children can attend. But in my experience, it is always those who have less than everyone else who are the first to pay the fees and to pay in full. The rich ones make every excuse in the book. They say that they just survive from week to week, yet they can find £5,000 per term for school fees and have a skiing holiday every winter and a couple of holidays in the summer.
I agree SAHM
I run Brownies in a wealthy area, girls mostly going to private school. You wouldn't think I would have to chase for subs, camp money, have parents moaning that they want a refund because they didn't come one day, but I do.
It isn't acceptable, but I don't know why you are getting so upset about it - it's not you losing money, is it? As long as your child isn't being disadvantaged then it's none of your business what other parents get up to. More fool the swimming teacher for not enforcing the rules.
If the organisers are letting them get away with it then more fool them!
Clobbered, I get upset because it just isn't fair. Often people who are running these activities are not making a great deal amount of money and sometimes nothing at all. I just don't like people taking advantage of the situation, especially when they can easily afford to pay up front. I suppose I'm also totally fed up hearing those who are well off moaning about how bloody poor they are.
I do feel for the organiser in this situation. A middle-class mummy on full persuasive/complaint/entitled mode is a scary thing.
Pianodoodle, I think that most the organisers do want to be inclusive and find it difficult to challenge parents, even when it's pretty obvious they are just being tight.
When my DD was a toddler, I was invited by a neighbour with a child of similar age to go to a mother and toddler group with her. She insisted that we arrive half an hour late because that way we wouldn't have to pay the 50p donation ("it all adds up"). Then at the end, she grabbed all the left over biscuits and stuffed them in her bag! This is a woman who husband has a very successful business, has since moved to a house worth close to a million and sends all three kids to a very expensive private school! Needless to say, I never accompanied her to any other groups!
We have this problem with cubs. At the AGM we were told only 3/5 of he subs were paid and the were £2k in the red. So effective the ones who paid up were subsidising the ones who weren't paying
Mumzy, that just isn't right, is it? Why should those of us who play by the rules subsidise those who don't? I honestly wouldn't mind doing that if I thought that those who hadn't paid were in need, but I bet the vast majority could easily afford to pay.
no money up front no lessons that is how my sister runs her business if not they would be bankrupt
It affects the OP because the organisers have to factor the shortfall into their costs. This will ultimately drive the cost of lessons up for everyone.
I had a similar situation when my children started at karate- we were asked to pay monthly, by dd, which I duly did, but others were paying as they went. Eventually I got a bit hacked off, because even when the karate was off, during holidays, I was paying, and when the karate teacher took time off to get married/ go on honeymoon, the classes were off and I was paying! They also changed the time of the class so my kids could only go when my dad was able to take them, which wasn't every week, so I stopped the dd and went to payg.
On the other hand, the gymnastics asks us to pay for the no of sessions in the term in advance, and I am happy with that. If we miss as session, that is our fault, and the places in the club are limited, so I understand why we should pay the full course. But I wouldn't expect them to charge for a class that they didn't put on!
I think it's clearer when it is one rule for all, tbh.
if there is a genuine reason the fair enough - like the Brownies example. dd is PAYG because she is hospitalised so often or her Carers dont show up to take her. But if there's no reason then pay up, in advance. YANBU
Yes, it's not fair. This happens with one of the DC ballet classes, though they usually drop out eventually, I find, if they're regularly missing classes.
Though, of course, there are those who have made arrangements to pay weekly (for financial reasons), but they don't seem to miss any classes.
I'm afraid I would have to say more fool the clubs.
All this situation requires is a group newsletter or email stating that if fees are not paid in full, by whatever date, then your child will not have a space.
However, I think that there should be a clause that any lessons cancelled by the club should either be refunded or taken off the next block payment, and there should def be an agreement that should time changes mean people can't attend anymore then those sessions (after the change) should of course be refunded too.
Yanbu to be annoyed though.
My son's gym class is pay up front with a specific cut off date. They make it very clear that there is a very long waiting list of children ready to jump in your place if you fail to pay on time. (i'm sure they make allowances for certain situations discreetly.)
" A middle-class mummy on full persuasive/complaint/entitled mode is a scary thing."
Something MN confirms constantly...
It's not really your concern about how payments are made, as long as you're happy with your own arrangements. If others have places on the course and are not attending, it means your DC will get more attention from the teacher on those occasions.
If it's causing problems financially for the club, they need to deal with it and insist on termly payments in advance.
YANBU. I have a friend who likes to try this, whereas when I did PAYG for my DC1's private lessons, I paid for those she didn't attend as well. My friend thinks I'm a mug as I shouldn't pay for things I don't benefit from. She actually dared to argue that she shouldn't pay for her DC's when they were on holiday as they didn't attend.
My point was that it was her choice to have a holiday and by acting that way, she was denying another child a place in the singing/swimming group. It's not like she doesn't pay her mortgage or bills whilst she's on holiday, so why should any opted in extra-curricular groups be any different?
Not sure how this affects you exactly?
If the people who run the club are allowing it, and you're not brazen enough to only pay for the sessions you've had yourself, I would just take it on the chin.
I always pay by the terms and conditions, but those with the most money are used to haggling where they can and frequently do. It's how they are so wealthy. I've seen women haggle at the deli-counter for crying out loud.
It leaves me feeling a mug, but if I've agreed to pay, I pay!
It's up to the club to sort out payment. Raise it with them, or yes YABU to moan about it.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.