Has anyone used Au Pair World?

No I don't think you pay your au pairs too much, I simply pointed out that your au pair should be paying NI or tax. If you had already discussed the matter with your accountant then why weren't you aware of the tax implications? I too self certify but wouldn't dream of abusing the system - I prefer to pay what I owe. Still, we're all different I suppose.

You should treat your au pairs as employees with rights because your want to; not because you have to! They're not entitled to sick leave or annual leave but I give it because I'm not an arsehole! Who wouldn't? Saying you keep the pay low because of tax responsibilities is just laughable though. You don't want to pay more, not because of tax, not because of other mothers ganging up on you, not for the greater good; but because you don't want to. Fine.

Your business. But don't go making out that it's for reasons beyond your control, and then going 'oooohhh HMRC will be out to get you... Oooohh, the other mums won't like you...' Because that's just utter rubbish.

Its a mute point really. You think I pay my au pairs too much and I disagree. HMRC Knock on my door, I'll change the contract and then I'll just pay her the extra when they're gone anyway. It's cash. It's too hard to trace. Not only that; but the agency file the contract with Immigration as part of the Tier 5 Visa they're on, including how much they get paid. HMRC know.

Also, I've gone through all of this with my accountant (self employed) to find any extra tax liabilities and he said it's just not true. If HMRC wanted extra tax money; they'd have knocked on my door years ago.

There's a massive move towards au pairs at the minute because of the whole
pension rights for nannies. HMRC aren't silly; they know this.

WonderingWillow, reading what you offer as payment and BIK, your au pairs are in the NI bracket definitely and possibly for income tax too.

Wonderingwillow, the link itself says: "Au pairs may have to pay Income Tax and National Insurance, depending on how much pocket money they get."

It is a fine line before an aupair becomes an employee, especially with aupair plus. I require good English so many of my aupairs don't need to attend English classes. From a legal perspective, I treat my aupairs as employees just to be safe.

Nanny tax doesn't apply to au pairs but HMRC regulations will apply if their pay, incl accommodation and board, exceeds the threshold amount.

au pairs aren't employees

You're not an employer. I've been corrected on this before.

Yes WonderingWillow au pairs are limited on their income or HMRC implications apply. Their board and lodging forms part of the calculation. If you're an employer you need to know the rules.

HMRC territory for venturing over market rates? Really? BAPAA suggest a minimum, but not a maximum. Plus it's cash.

Hibbledibble, if you pay over "market rates" for your au pair, you're venturing in to HMRC territory. Also with social media nowadays they all hook up together. I've heard of mums getting it in the neck for paying more than standard due to other au pairs feeling short changed.

Ten years ago I paid over the odds for a Polish au pair. She was lazy as hell and ended up up the duff without a clue as to who the father was.

HibbleDibble how much do you suggest we should be paying our Aupairs? The standard rate suggested by the government is 75-120 per week. I think everyone involved is within that bracket. As long as the aupairs are treated well with respect and are made part of the family and the Au pair and children have an amazing time together, does a few pounds feally matter??? I start low and give AP a raise once settled and everything is well. I have had the most Amazing girls from AP world. Recruit carefully and thouroughly (social media is very important, befriend them on every site they use and google them) and make sure that the person you recruit is someone you like and will enjoy hanging out with. For example I tend to like people who are into music as I am, and reject people heavily into fashion (as Im not) . I get lots of interesst and apply to loads of girls rather than wait for applications to roll in. I also build up asocial network for the ap before she arrives as a few of my neighbours/friends have APs and they all get to know eachother. And do they all compare pennies and moan if they are not paid the same? No. Are they all happy ? Yes!

Hibble, sad to see you feel the need to attack my parenting by implying I would prefer my children receive "substandard care" with my "pittance".

Do chill - it is just a difference of opinion and a different way of hiring.

I get amazing aupairs too. And I get rid of the poor ones pretty damn quick. My children are not being raised by wolves hth.

blueshoes you are the one who seems to be frothing at the suggestion that you pay a decent rate. £90 for 35 hours is extremely low, and you have admitted that your pay is low, but you don't want to increase it. I see that trying to get you to see a link between below par au pairs and paying a pittance is like flogging a dead horse, so I will give up now. Personally I would never be comfortable paying a child carer so little, and would not want my children to experience substandard care as a result.

I agree with Blueshoes, the market rate is around £80-90 for 25 hours a week. My standard offer is £80 a week for 25 hours a week. If the aupair works out then I increase to £90 after 2-3 months. I don't offer any perks. For 30-35 hours I pay £100 and increase to £120 after 2-3 months. I have had aupairs now for over 9 years, my current aupair has been with us over a year, the previous one stayed nearly 3 years, the one before that 18 months and the one before that 14 months.

I dispute that I am paying less than market rate or a pittance. What I do offer though is a friendly household, I don't quibble what they do in their free time, I don't set curfews, I stick to their job descriptions and I treat them with the respect I would like to be treated and my children do the same too. I'm pretty sure that is why they stay.

I use an agency, go for slightly older girls and have always had girls from Eastern Europe, mainly Romania. It has been a fab experience and we are still in touch with most of them.

"Market rate" is a question of opinion. Perhaps if you stop frothing you can see that I disagree with what you think of as market rate?

blue yet you have not tried paying market rates, have you? You are paying a pittance.

If you increased what you paid in line with other families you would most likely find you get better au pairs. Paying a market rates is not paying over the odds. I'm personally rather surprised that you cannot see a link between underpaying and quality.

hibble, of course some of my aupairs were below par. That is why I don't pay over the odds for someone whom I cannot truly vet until they are on my doorstep. As of the point of offer, they are excellent in my eyes and appear to be the right fit. But they show their true colours after a few weeks.

I will admit my hiring process is not perfect (whose is?). I am an employer at my work as well and my company pays over market. Are we immune from poor candidates? Of course not. I would not for the sake of making a point insist my aupairs were all peachy. Some of them were average. Their personalities meant they were always never going to be setting the stage on fire. Some were lazy or intellectually challenged but were personable and enthusiastic at the interview stage.

I have no doubt that all of them could have got excellent families. I was not compromising on apparent quality.

You want me to admit that if I paid more I would not have below par aupairs. I say from my experience I have yet to meet the perfect employment strategy for aupairs. I had a run of very good aupairs at the start and thought I was doing something right. Then you get a run of bad aupairs and realise it is not an exact science and a lot of luck. Believe what you like.

I'm pretty sure I used it 3 years ago. I only use an au pair in the summer now for two months to cover school hols. The au pair from the previous year recruits for the following year. They all come from a science uni in northern France and, touch wood, they're always fab. PM me if you need further info.

wondering none taken I have seen some of that on MN!

I agree that au pair world could potentially leave au pairs in a vulnerable situation. I do send my id when we have recruited someone to reassure them, as well as inviting dd on one of the interviews (so they would at least know we are a family), and also put them in touch with our outgoing au pair.

If my DD was going to be an AP I don't think I'd be happy with her using AP World. The agency I use insists on interviews on both sides, proof of ID, quals, a minimum wage requirement, and also a fee on both sides, which I think puts off the potential loons.

I have used AP World and whilst we were lucky, the girl I had said she was approached by a few rather strange people. Whilst there is a report button, she said if she did it again; she'd go with an agency because there's a contact in the country in case it all goes tits up.

hired the pearl clutchy was not aimed at you in the slightest. I was talking about the General MN consensus on AP's

No offence intended.

blueshoes you said yourself that some of your au pairs have been below par.

As with any job, candidates will choose the job with the best terms (to include pay and family etc) when there are several available. In my experience, the best candidates have several offers to choose from. For the sake of a few pounds, I would not want to miss out on a good child carer for my children. I have had several au pairs, so am not at all 'pearly clutchy', but do believe in fair wages and treatment. What you are paying is extremely low.

I think it's different if you are trying to attract a native speaker for sure. There's mure 'in it' for our au pairs from the get go (they leave fluent in a language they need for work) and also require much more oversight and support. I suppose we have this cost implicit on our relationships with them in that regard.

Everyone has their way. i offer excellent terms because I want to, and also if a girl sees a job at £120+ a week with gym membership, or the same job at £80 a week; in my mind, what is she going to go for?

Also, I go for Australian au pairs so English first language and I use an agency, who ask a set 'minimum wage'. If I was a girl's family, I think I'd prefer her to go somewhere with minimum requirements.

It's interesting what you say about an uplift though. And it isn't a bad idea, I'll be taking that one on board. Equally, you're right about mumsnetters being a bit pearl clutchy about the whole au pair thing... Didn't you know it's slave labour and we should all stop being so cheap and hire a nanny per child, plus a housekeeper so that nanny never has to deign to clean a dirty dish?!