To think that if you become a childminder you should not just take 'easy' children

[Introvertedbuthappy]

I go back to work in December and decided on a childminder to look after my baby for the three days a week I'll be working. As I started looking in September I was asked to pay £150 a month until then to hold the place (1 day a week's fees) and as part of that could obviously use that day as childcare (as it was already being paid for). All fine.
Since then he has been there 3.5 days (CM wanted to cut one day short to go on holiday at a day's notice). On Tuesday she called to say that she will no longer look after my 6.5 month old as he is 'a difficult baby', 'cries a lot' and 'needs a lot of attention'. She also described an incident where her 3 year old got so frustrated with my son's crying her child 'screamed in his face, which was distressing not only for yoyr son, but myself and my daughter'. She has 'never seen a baby like it' (not in a positive way).
I am both devastated and angry. He is generally a happy chap, does like a lot of stimulation, but is happy to roll around/jump in his jumparoo/chase a pack of wipes round, but does obviously need to be picked up sometimes (ie like a typical baby). He doesn't sleep much but is generally not grumpy with it.
I'm upset about a number of things - the screaming incident, the language used about my son to turn down the contract and the fact I've pissed £150 down the drain to hold a place I can't take up.
So, AIBU or should she have attempted to settle him better before branding him a 'difficult' baby?

It was to keep the place open until such a time as it was needed in December

I know I'm really thick.

But even I wouldn't elieve that the OP just decided for the laugh to pay child minder to keep a space open for two months when she didn't need childcare.

You need a real scammer's mindset to try to argue that.

Saw CM on school run with additional children. She could not therefore have had my child today regardless. That has made me quite cynical I'm afraid - why call and cancel the place earlier this week then explain on pick up last Friday?
Guess the additional children make sense (plus the not wanting him back and agreeing immediate termination). I am fuming. Obviously I would no longer want him in her care anyway (especially after the wipes not being kept separate), but am very annoyed that I was in effect paying to hold a place that wouldn't happen when someone else came along...

What a surprise.

You really don't want someone that shady looking after your child.

A good CM relationship is a very close one. Trust is incredibly important.

What is it that makes people think childcare providers should work for chicken feed or, even worse, for free? Do you not understand that a childminder is a business not doing you (plural) a favour? It's business sense to charge a retainer.

My business is horses. Client comes to me and says "Flying I'm buying a new horse but I'm not getting it til December, I really want that space on your yard." "Ok", says I "It's £35 a week to retain the stable". Horse comes and is a dangerous psychopath. I tell client that the horse cannot stay. I am not refunding the retainer because it is paid to ensure I don't sell the stable to another client. It would be business suicide to keep spaces for free and turn down paying punters. I'm horrified enough that some of you are childminding for less than minimum wage and I wonder why you do it at all if you get clients who expect you to hold space for free and refund for time you've provided the service. Is there no industry regulation or advice about charging?

Anyway, DS is starting at the nursery near my work. I feel he will be happy there - he enjoyed himself yesterday and I liked the way staff interacted with the children and each other (I was tucked in side room completing some paperwork).
I am glad that this is probably the best for him long term, although annoyed it took me £150 to learn that.
Thanks everyone for the opinions.

Nice straw man Flying, difference is we are talking about a 6mo old not a 'dangerous psychopath'.

I don't understand why she wouldn't have additional children with her today?

She wa talking about business principals not likening your child to a horse! Are you being deliberately offended?

Unless you are suggesting the OP's 6 month old is a "dangerous psychopath", then your comparison doesn't work.

This is closer to you accepting myltiple retainers for the same space and then making up a lie so you could refuse the place to one of the people who paid you whilst keeping both sets of money.

I think she should have made it clear that I would pay the retainer until a better option came along and she would terminate without notice.

I was explaining it was a straw man, therefore the analogy is invalid.

I don't think it was a retainer either. Usually you would pay to retain the space and get nothing much in return except holding the space open. The op's arrangement is more like the childminding contract starting a few months ahead of time. If this issue had come up a couple of weeks after the op had returned to work would anyone expect the childminder to return all the money paid for the childminding she'd already done?! I doubt it!

Sadly there is no perfect deposit/retainer arrangement. I do the more traditional pay a deposit towards your fees arrangement with settling in sessions starting a couple of weeks before I'm needed. So op wouldn't have been out of pocket if I'd decided not to take on her baby but she would be in the horribly stressful situation of no childcare 2 weeks before returning to work. I think she's in a far better position now, she has time to find alternative care and has seen some service for her money. That's not to say I don't understand how upset the op is, the childminder did not handle the situation professionally or diplomatically. She's not a scam artist though and this isn't about cherry picking babies - ridiculous idea, we childminders actually want to make a living you know! It is so hard taking care of a distraught baby when you have other kids to think of.

Cross post! Glad you're sorted op.

It would be like me saying I want to sell my car. I say to someone I can let them buy it in 3 months time, but as I'm storing it for them/upkeep until then I need a fee. I take this fee for the first month then sell the car to someone else. No payment needs refunding as I have provided the service. It is initial client's problem for not asking if this was a possibility.
See, I can make straw men to illustrate my point in a good light too

None of these analogys work though! To be more accurate you should say that you let them use the car periodically over that period and so you want some payment towards that.

So are you saying if it hadn't been a good fit for you and your son after going through the settling in sessions that you would have continued to send your son?
After all you had promised to fill this space and provide the childminder with an income for the future?!

Unless you are suggesting the OP's 6 month old is a "dangerous psychopath", then your comparison doesn't work

Of course she's not saying that the baby is a psychopath! But the comparison does work, in the sense that the baby is not a good fit for her family/childminding business.

Nicknacks I would have given required notice otherwise rightly been chased for payment in lieu.
I agree long, my point was exactly that the analogies given don't reflect the situation - straw man fallacy.

After all you had promised to fill this space and provide the childminder with an income for the future?!

Exactly.

Which is why the retainer was paid.

So that if the client pulled out they woukd not have held the space for no compensation.

That justification does not exist when the contractor is unable to fulfil the role they agreed to take on due to incompetence (and taking multiple retainers for the same space aka being a scammer).

I certainly wouldn't be able to call one afternoon, say I'm not happy with the situation and stop payment immediately.

Ok and what does you contract say the notice period is? This the cm should honour of course.

Have I missed a post? Did she take multiple retainers or is this speculation?

No the comparison does not fit.

If the oerson who had paid to retsin the space brought an ordinary horse and the stabke owner didn't like it or one of the stable iwner's horses attacjed the horse, then the retainer should be refunded.

You need a refund and she should give you one.

Tbh though, it's up to her who she takes.

Looking at it another way, I pulled both of my children out of their childminders because of a 'difficult' baby that started. CM just couldn't deal with the crying/wingeing etc (Mum was very demanding/specific about what the baby wanted/needed/liked etc) and it impacted heavily on my children. This baby also didn't sleep much. Their lovely stress free environment was shattered. I ended up with two upset children who had to tiptoe round in case they 'woke the baby' which in reality, they should have been able to just carry on with their day.

CM lost substantial income from losing my two.

I would think your cm was worried the same thing might happen!

Is your baby 'difficult? Is he your first?

Notice is one month. However she refuses to have him back, and seeing the additional minders this morning I can see why! Certainly if I decided it wasn't a good fit and stopped sending him I would have to pay.