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?

In that case, OP, I believe you were a bit remiss in paying her or using her service before December at all - nothing contracted, bar verbally. So if she hadn't had your child before December, you would be in the same situation then as you are now, except you would have to pay the month's notice and you would still have no childcare. As rude as she was, she has done you a favour with her honesty. Good luck.

I think the arrangement to keep the place open was fair until the moment that the place was withdrawn and the money was not refunded.

Charging the OP for care she d8d not need and woukd not have used in the absence of a now cancelled contract, is pretty shit.

It creates an incentive for unscrupulous CM (of which there are some) to pretend to have spaces and accept "retainers" from people that they then cancel last minute.

I agree with the others that the biggest no no is actually the notice period. Whilst it's been called a retainer, because the agreement was for childcare to be provided on those days care had effectively started albeit at a reduced level.

For a baby a two hour settling session is totally inadequate. I'm married to a CM. Norm here is more like, once they've decided to use us, first visit with mum staying, then next time mum maybe leaves for 30 minutes, then an hour, then 2, then a half day before trying a full day. If baby settles really easily then it can be sped up or slowed down if they are struggling. Settling sessions are free within reason - ie the above would be free but you do get some parents who want say a day a week for a month which is too much to expect for free imo.

A cm should be able to handle most kids but sometimes you do get one who just doesn't work out. They're little people with personalities. You also have to take in to account the wellbeing of the existing mindees - we had one littlie who was about 2 and had been at home exclusively until then and was used to having undivided attention and being carried everywhere. As soon as they were put down they screamed hysterically, despite numerous settling techniques and lots of experience. Not saying that's the case here but I don't think it's reasonable to say a cm shouldn't turn down a child as a good cm will know when it's not working.

Is the first month a no-notice month? I usually agree this with parents that either party can terminate with no notice during the first month to ensure no-one is tied into a contract that doesn't work. It also enables the arrangement to be tweaked to better fit hours and other arrangements.

A retainer really isn't sharp practice and certainly isn't exclusive to childminding - nurseries will do exactly the same. In fact, that analogy is probably the best: a nursery holding open a place for a new child that doesn't want it yet, then finding out during the settling in period that the arrangement is not going to work. As I said, I've taken on children to whom this has happened and surely any parent wants to find the best childcare solution for her child?

You probably won't believe this doinit bug there are unscrupulous parents too - I know, I know, it's incredible isn't it?! Parents who use free settling in sessions and then decide not to use your services after all. This may well be where this weird contract that isn't really a retainer comes from.

Apart from the two children I mentioned I have never taken money and refused someone a place, the two who's contracts were terminated had already paid for time used because my charging policy is paid in advance. However, I have had parents pay me a retainer for the summer holidays (the retainer is only a small fraction of the actual cost of childcare) and not turned up in September after I have turned other business down.

I think episodes like this just go to show that contracts should not be signed until they are fully understood and agreed by all parties and never choose a childcare provider that you can't have a full and open conversation with.

I agree it was my fault for having nothing in writing about the interim period. I feel stupid about that. I would have preferred a deposit system (used for eldest's nurseries in the past). That way both sides are protected.
I guess the new mindees this morning thing has riled me up as I will never really know if my son being 'difficult' was the real reason for instant termination. Indeed I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned last Friday on pick up. I was told he was unsettled. I don't think she's lying about the shouting incident, but really my son does entertain himself here quite happily (as he is now!)

I therefore wonder if she had people who could start sooner/for more days sooner and went with that option. In which case I wish she had said 'you could pay a retainer, but if someone comes along in the meantime with more hours, I will take them on instead'. In which case I could have made an informed decision and would have chosen to look elsewhere.

Anyway, it is what it is. I will stick with nursery. I think it will be a good fit. I will try not to dwell on it, but will be honest about my experiences with this CM when asked. I find it apalling that she would not speak face to face and left his belongings on my doorstep and ran off today when I spotted her on the school run.

Fair enough. No, you will never know. I hope the nursery place works out.

I know there are unscrupulous parents.

I haven't argued against taking a retainer to protect yourself.

Just against keeping it if you change your mind, as has happened here.

She sounds dodgy and unprofessional. Also unskilled at childcare if she thinks it's fine to label a baby who hasn't had enough time or exposure to settle in, as some kind of special 'problem baby'.

Imagine letting a child scream in a baby's face?! And then justify it by blaming the baby!

Not someone I'd want taking care of my child. Shudder.

I think you've had a near miss.

A good childminder should be able to do that. If they can't then they're bad at their job rather than it being the fault of the baby

Sometimes children or babies aren't happy with anyone they're left with however experienced. I was a really experienced nanny and there was one child that just cried the whole time, poor wee soul. Maybe your ds was like this because he wasn't happy? CM definitely needs a lesson in diplomacy though! The nursery sounds a much better place for him if he's happy. Best of luck

But it's not a flipping retainer!!! She paid her for childcare she used. There was always a risk it may not have worked out and she'd have been paying for childcare needlessly - op herself might have decided she didn't want to use the childminder and she'd have been down £150 too. There is always a risk on both sides when you have to book and pay money for childcare quite far in advance. It's a leap of faith for both parties. Childminder has found a way that she doesn't end up working for free. The op could have said straight up, I'm not sure about this, what if I don't end up using you?

A childminder can choose who they look after.....but having agreed to take a child, they owe them and the parents a decent time period of looking after them, before saying they don't want to/can't look after that child. It is unprofessional to take a child and bin them after 3 days.

One of the CMs responsibilities is to know enough about a child before they start caring for them, so they know if they can cope. If a child has any extra needs a parent needs to make that clear. Every CM would expect a new child to be a bit unsettled and is needed for them to settle.

It looks to me as if you were binned because she found someone else she would rather have....perhaps more hours or whatever. Having agreed to look after a child, it isn't illegal to do what she did, but it is immoral to make an agreement as a childminder without having any sense of commitment to that family - being so prepared to renege on the agreement as soon as another option appears. If someone else appeared who she would prefer to look after, give more hours etc, she could say to you that she would look after your child for 3 months, but would then need to stop. This would be disappointing, but reasonable.

The money aside, this is awful and has left you in a hole regarding childcare now.....but long term, you are well rid of her....she isn't the kind of CM you want. In the long term you'll look back and be glad your child didn't spend months with her.

CM can be a brilliant service for parents and a brilliant work option for many. The nature of the individual agreements does mean that many people don't have in place proper paperwork laying out what is expected and required for both sides regarding agreements made months before the start date, deposits, retainers, fees, holidays, notice periods etc. Both parents and CM are known to swing the lead and break agreements (even if written down) and to let each other down. When it happens, there's not an awful lot the other party can do....even if legal action can be taken, it rarely is, due to the bother and potential expense.

CMs can be brilliant. They can offer something that nurseries simply can't in terms of home care and a personal service totally tailored to the times you need. It's so important to get as strong a sense of the potential CM as possible to gauge if they are likely to let you down. You can never know for sure, but taking up references, visiting several times and looking at their paperwork and the contracts they offer helps you judge. Anyone who isn't happy to see you a few times, who doesn't ask in depth questions about your child, who can't give you previous customers to contact for references, and who doesn't offer clear paperwork which covers all the areas I mention above should be steered clear of....because there is just too much uncertainty.

OP, you've had a bad experience, a CM could still be right for you and be the best option. Or a Nursery might suit you more.

I would be clear with that CM that you think their handling of this has been very unprofessional. I would write to her saying that any child takes time to settle and you would expect a registered CM to allow longer than 3 days to make a decision and that in light of that failure, you feel she really ought to return your money.

Only read a few posts but this happened to my friends son. Hardly given a good settling in period. He has some mild additional needs which she knew in great detail before hand. But she changed her mind really quickly. But was also really unprofessional about it and was quite horrible about him.

The child with additional needs that I took on was with his nursery for two years before they decided they couldn't meet his needs and he'd be better off with a childminder.
Really expensive, outstanding nursery, too!

If it helps you feel any better, Op, I got caught the other way in my earlier days through not charging a retainer. It was an existing parent, so I trusted her and held the place open without charge.
We nearly lost our business when she decided to change her working hours and childcare arrangements.
These days, we charge. No-one is forced to pay, but I'll regard the place as unfilled if they don't.

Tanith I don't know why that would make me feel better, I'm sorry that happened to you, you'd expect better of people.

I was told to pay to retain a space which was then given to others at no notice. I don't think I am unjustified in being annoyed.

OP, you are justified in being annoyed. Tanith wasn't suggesting you aren't justified. All she is saying is that parents sometimes behave badly too - there is no suggestion that this was you,nor that your anger is unjustified, simply that it happens both ways sometimes - both parents and childminders can and do behave unreasonably!

Apologies Tanith, clearly still touchy about this situation

Dear X,

I am sorry to hear that you are unable to cope with my son. However as I had paid £150 to secure his place, which is now being withdrawn, please refund my holding fee by x date.

Thank you and good luck

OP

if she says 'oh but you used the days' i would say you used them on the pretence that by payment bf the £150 his place was secure. had you known this was not the case you would not have used them, nor indeed her services at all.

i think 3.5days is way too short a time to tell if a baby will settle. ds2 is just starting nursery at 22mo. he had 8 half day settling sessions as he was struggling and still requires a lot of one on one time. i wasn't asked to pay anything until they had had at least 2 successful sessions with him. your xCM is a piss taker!

The problem is that people sometimes behave selfishly,me specially when they think they can get away with it, without any financial cost to themselves.

So parents accept places with CM and if a CM doesn't ask for a retainer or deposit, many parents then find an alternative and don't think twice about letting down the CM at the last minute...because they won't be out of pocket themselves. And likewise, CM let parents down and pull the plug on the agreement to care for their child with no notice, because they won't face a penalty financially.

The same thing can happen with nurseries - but because they are businesses who have had experience of crappy selfish parents letting them down in the past, they usually have more measures in place and more robust contracts. They hold substantial deposits to mitigate against parents not taking up places they have reserved, or pulling out a child without due notice. They too can let parents down.....but are less likely to do so, being run by managers who follow industry norms and rely on word of mouth to both retain current parents and secure new ones.

The problem with the CM industry or with employing a cleaner, or a Gardner or anyone else who is a small service provider making an agreement with an individual, is that people make individual agreements and often don't have everything they need in writing, plus the fact that following up someone who lets you down is costly and often not worth the effort.....and unscrupulous people know that, leaving the customer (and also the service provider) vulnerable. All you can do is insist on paperwork that lays out absolutely everything and be a good judge of character and take up references....but there are no guarantees.

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

But your baby was distressing other children in the setting, so I think the analogy holds.
Also I don't get your point about the new mindees.When your son was unsuitable she was able to take children off the waiting list I guess

The analogy does not hold.

A proper childminder can prevent a 6 month old baby from distressing one 3 year old.

The baby is not unusual, or dangerous, or badly behaved.

He's a baby.

If you can't manage a baby properly, don't take £150 of someone's money to look after the baby.

The only remarkable thing that happened while the baby was in her care was that she allowed her 3 year old to scream in the baby's face.

In this analogy the "dangerous psycho horse" is not the one the space was retained for, butbone owned by the person who owns the stable.

Which would mean the money should be repaid.

It really is up to the CM how long it takes her to decide whether a child is suitable for her set-up. These people aren't skivvies. They are offering a service but that service isn't suitable for every child.

Like any self employed person it's one of the "perks" to be able to choose what jobs you do...