Public Liability Insurance

Day 3 of phone calls in search of answers and explanations !!

Ofsted are reading from a text book ( that is what the guy was doing yesterday when I called) where it says 'parctitioners must have PLI'
agreed....
but as we are told that the EYFS 2012 is up to us to interpret I would think that what Mr Anchovy says is true no liability = no insurance.

No reply from the Ofsted manager, no reply from NCMA yesterday.... so today is a day for raising concerns rather than calling and politely asking for clarification

back alter

PS: you are aware that DfE is asking to 'reduce' the burdens for practitioners...I would say the PLI issue is a burden if it applies at all times even when not practising and it will not lower the cost of childcare? ...will it?

Anyone on Twitter ? could spread the word there

Mr a sounds like your connection is the stuff of boy scout legend - I am impressed!

Ofsted appear to have been saying insurance must kept on whether you are minding or not since at least last November so I am not sure it has anything to do with EYFS 2012.

Don't worry italiana. You haven't had experience of Mr A's help. It is right that we should challenge this ourselves and also accept any help offered. In some hands a little knowledge can be a problem, which is why we come here to debate.

I for one think there is no point in liability insurance when there is no liability.

Mr Anchovy I am sure your advice and support has helped many but I am not in the habit of checking credentials... I too am my own accountant and business adviser...have been for many years with success
I am in this forum to share information with everyone respecting everyone's views

I am more than sure you are right about many things..it just comes across as if you can solve all problems while we idle away..no one is patronising anyone and you should try to respect everyone's knowledge....is it really that dangerous in childminders' hands (mostly women)???
That sounds a tad patronising to me and very disrespectful

I am an NCMA member and member of many organizations... that does not mean I do not have my own independent views

I am sorry everyone I was unable to get through to DfE as the lady seems to be away, will try again as DfE are the only ones able to explain.....Ofsted gave me a confusing answer and NCMA have not replied to my request to clarify the matter raised about PLI...when they do I will report to you or you can check on NCMA Local for yourself...somehow we will sort it out in the end

Thank you for all your input

ChildrenAtHeart I am sorry we seem to have our wires crossed - almost certainly my fault as apart from anything else I am currently connected to the Internet by a piece of damp string and even that is only available for about 20 minutes at a time at random intervals.

Italiana it is no secret who I am, you can find my real name and address and the name of my professional practice in five minutes of research. I am an accountant and business adviser and have on a number of occasions advised childminders on matters in contradiction of 'official' information, sometimes saving them thousands of pounds and in each case my advice has been found to be sound. Official guidance has also been changed following my actions. I am also quite used to being patronised by childminders in some of whose hands a little knowledge and power can be a dangerous thing.

I have also made my opinion of the quality of some of the information and the outcome of certain actions of the NCMA known in the past and have no confidence that they are able to achieve a sensible result in childminders' interest in this case: I would be delighted to be proved wrong.

I have just called Ofsted to tell them I am going on maternity leave from September 2012 and will not be officially minding any children for the next 9 months. They said that I must keep my Public Liability Insurance current....

I have just paid £79.49 to renew my NCMA membership and PLI. I am not happy!!!

Again this is 'your interpretation' and I totally respect your view....the only way to have it clarified is by DfE itself...
I am not talking about those dipping in and out ...see above for explanation

Have already spoken to Ofsted not DfE...must wait until 9.30am...speak later

I hate to disagree but you CAN and DO get inspected whilst not minding as hundreds of CMs have been discovering over the past few of months. If you have 'no children on roll' as it's called (ie still registered but no children currently on your books/'dipping in and out of childminding' Ofsted call it) they will normally defer your inspection until you have but if there has been a complaint made against you (which can happen even if no children on roll) or it is coming towards the end of the current inspection cycle like now you would get an inspection. Ofsted have to inspect everyone within the 4 year cycle irrespective of whether they are currently minding. In these circumstances you can only be given one of 2 grades, satisfactory or inadequate.

This is now out of control...Mr Anchovy I do not know who you are or what you do but please allow us to deal with this...
I have emailed one of the Ofsted managers and am just about to ring DfE.
Have also put another blog in NCMA Local to ask them to clarify for us.

Come on everyone...some people may get that dreaded call from Ofsted next week for an inspection and we have had little support or training on this framework...lets pull together not fight for individual interpretations...there are far too many spins on this....

Gardenpixies32 I do understand what Ofsted told you...
I strongly believe if you are taking maternity leave you should not pay PLI as there is no public in your home !!!!!...
the only people benefitting will be those you pay it to because they do not want to give you a rebate???...look at page 25...all it says practitioners must have PLI...AGREED but you are taking a break (would you continue pay for your Oyster card to travel to work when you are not catching the train ?)

I will be back later after speaking to DfE and Ofsted...bye for now

The thing is, Children, the guidance for inspectors is specifically for inspections. If you're not minding, you don't get inspected (there's nothing to inspect!!) so therefore the provisions don't (can't) apply. It is of course entirely correct that inspectors would need to see a current insurance certificate when you're inspected, but you don't get inspected when you're not minding. Therefore the guidance for inspectors is irrelevant at this point.

PS please pardon my poor grammar - it's late & I've had wine...

Well pardon me for speaking!
I was just quoting Ofsted's guidance for inspectors, not implying anything. It doesn't say 'criminal offence', just 'offence' as I'm sure you are 'well aware'.
In my previous reply I believe I stated that failure to comply with this condition was not a criminal offence. Such offences are made very clearly in the EYFS in fact.
I have always had the highest admiration for you in the past and have much appreciated the valuable information you have contributed to this forum. I don't want an argument that ends up with us insulting each other so I wonder if we could, at least for now, agree to disagree?

I am well aware of everything that you say ChildrenAtHeart, what I was trying to point out was that the text that you quoted referring to a criminal offence does not relate to non-compliance with provisions of the EYFS as I believe you were implying.

Mr A
Complying with the EYFS is a condition of registration for all registered childcare providers and failure to do so can result in an inadequate grade and or action imposed. Additional conditions are imposed which are specific to individual settings and these are the ones that are currently stated on a provider's certificate (eg which rooms can be used, number of children allowed, overnight care etc.). From September however Ofsted will be removing all conditions from certificates where they are already covered by compliance with the EYFS eg EYFS states how many children can be cared for based on available space, cm own children, maximum in a particular age group etc. The only conditions that will still appear on certificates will be those not covered specifically eg if a cm has numbers restricted due to a medical problem

Gardenpixies - for what it's worth you can get 5 different replies from 5 different Ofsted help desk folks if you ring 5 minutes apart. The clarification for this needs to come from higher up the Ofsted ladder, in writing on headed paper & in a guidance doc online.

I would be more than happy incidentally, just in case anyone has the wrong idea btw, for the DoE to investigate this & decide that PLI, First Aid etc can be lapsed during time out but I'd want it in writing before I'd act on it

...just checked my registration certificate ...it says nothing about PLI because that is covered in the eYFS...

Well well...a simple statement has degenerated into so much guessing and individual interpretations...Ok I will call Ofsted and clarify to end this debate on a positive note....
I am sure but will double check that when you are taking time off childminding, for instance on maternity leave, you can remain registered but do not need to pay the PLI or if you have paid get a rebate...lets ask the experts

Just to clarify PLI is a welfare requirement of the EYFS (page 25) not a regulation issue...Ofsted only act on what is in the EYFS which is written by the DfE..if they find out you are uninsured they will act accordingly

Mr Anchovy what is it you are going to do when you return? we are quite capable of sorting this out...
The post has gone in the NCMA Forum and I will make sure they clarify once they get back to work tomorrow...if necessary I will also contact the DfE as I have done on several occasions for clarification

please can we stop interpreting and getting things right....it is all very confusing !!!

Precisely ChildrenAtHeart, there are two possible interpretations; one which leads to a common sense result (you don't need insurance for something you are not doing) and one which leads to a nonsense, increased cost for childminders and threats of cancellation of registration or even prosecution from the uninformed.

It does not matter whether you or I or even Ofsted adopt either of these interpretations, as a court would decide what applies. However it would be more desirable for the DfE to clarify the matter, and this is what I will pursue.

Like I said I am on holiday and i don't have all my references to hand but as I recall it a "condition of registration" is something that is written on your certificate with which which you must comply so the text that you quoted does not mean that Ofsted think that failure to comply with the EYFS is a offence.

I don't think there is much point taking this up through the NCMA, as I say they seem to have tried once and given up. I will take it up when I return, if anyone would like to quote specific conversations or preferably written communications they have had with Ofsted or any publication by NCMA, local groups etc. it would be most helpful, please send CAT or post as a message on my web site.

Italiana I think Nick was simply following up on stomp's suggestion that you could easily find reports of Ofsted threatening termination of registration for childminders without insurance during periods of non-minding whereas the first one Nick found demonstrated exactly the opposite. I am afraid that if someone wanted to find out detailed information about a childminder's affairs they wouldn't bother with Mumsnet.

and there lies the rub as it could be argued that as long as you remain registered you are a provider

I would like to emphasise that I am not supporting this interpretation, just stating that this is the interpretation most LEA's are using in their guidance to CM's and I haven't heard anything to the contrary from Ofsted. I am playing devil's advocate I guess...

I registered with Ofsted just under a year ago, and was NOT required to have insurance as a condition of registration (and believe me, my inspector is known countywide as unbelievably tough). When I had my first inspection visit obviously I had a mindee on roll and then had insurance in place.

I will be on maternity leave from March next year and have no intention of maintaining insurance while I am not working, though I will maintain my Ofsted registration so I don't have to reregister again. I've been told several times that they won't inspect if I have no children on roll so there's no chance of being inspected while I am taking maternity leave. I think it is perfectly ok to use one's common sense in this - they can't require you to be insured against something you're not doing. It's true that the language of section 3.62 says Providers must carry PLI - but if you're not working then you're not a provider.

Gardenpixies32...I totally agree that while on maternity leave you should not need a PL Insurance as no children will be cared for by you
I feel that in these cases c/ms should receive a rebate
I have expressed this view in the NCMA Forum

May I suggest you bring it to the attention of the Committee Chair in your Regional Forum...the next meetings are in September for all areas and it should be on the agenda
If you can access NCMA Local Forum I would also post it there and open the debate in My Business and see how others feel...good luck