To have asked for £160 from a single mum on income support

[lucindia]

I'm a childminder. I looked after a child for a single mum on income support. She was doing the 15 hours free hours. She phoned to tell me she would be sending her daughter to the local school in 4 weeks time.

So I contacted the funding department to explain that I would no longer be having the child and the date that would start.

They got back to me and said they would only be able to pay the first week of the notice period and the rest would have to be paid for by the parent.

Even though the mum had given me a months notice, I didn't actually have her child at all during that month. The day she text to say she would be going to school in a months time, was the day she stopped coming to me as the Mum was visiting family for a month.

But I was still entitled to be paid for that month. It was also a compulsory notice period.

So I sent a very polite message to the Mum explaining that she would have a balance of £160 to pay as the funding department could only pay 1 weeks notice.

She said that was fine but would need to wait until her income support payment came in the next day and would then send me that. She would send the £60 the following week from her child tax credit.

I thought nothing of it.

I mentioned it in passing to my mother in law (who I get on very well with) and she said she couldn't believe I made her pay £160 when I never even looked after her child for that notice period month and that seeing as my husband and I have a joint income of 40k we could have easily afford to let her off with the £160 which was a lot for a single mum on income support.

I never considered I was doing anything wrong. I'm entitled to be paid for that month and there's a notice period for a reason.

I really like the girls mum and we always had a great relationship when her daughter was with me. She's been with me from before she was 1 as her mum was finishing university.

What do you think. Was I unreasonable to ask for the money?

She's on benefits but qualified in a professional job and job hunting. So does have options.

Angel then why do companies need to pay in lieu of notice? Or is that just an offer?
I'm confused.

I'm with Frarling in this one

Op not only did you do nothing wrong, I thank you for running your business in a professional manner. You did right by your fellow childminders (who don't all have a dp on 40K), I believe.

The four week notice is to protect your income while you fill the place that is being vacated.

You are not a charity and frankly, offence could be taken by the client if you start making financial concessions for her based on assumptions about her circumstances.

I think mil was unreasonable.

I'm self employed. I wouldn't have charged her because I wasn't looking after her child for those 3 weeks and, well, I would feel like real piece of shit if I'd have charged her.

It seems that you were entitled to charge her, but it was your choice whether to or not. Personally being a decent human being is more important to me than £160.

Personally being a decent human being is more important to me than £160.

I imagine that's what the client said when she decided not to be unreasonable about paying a bill that she owed as per the contract she signed.

I know business is business, you seem to be respected for having a firm boundary here, but people are people and business's at times offer flexibility. They're not necessarily had lined rigid. Given your circumstances and your clients circumstances, I could not have done it.

Your MiL is probably of the mindset and time where they think childminding is just a little thing you have on the side to help out friends and neighbours. It's not, it's your job. You shouldn't feel guilty... she hasn't just booked your care, she's booked a timeslot. That said, if you were able to fill the spot immediately, it would be nice to waive the fee.

Or mimishimmi her MIL may have been of the mindset that if you can afford to then you do good things for other people where you can.

The contract will be like other child minder contracts. A months notice is required by both parties. The parent signed this there for the contract is legal binding. The fact that the parent didn't take the child to cm but went on holiday is her choice. She could have used the hours at the cm but she didn't. But the contract still stands.

Posters on here are all insisting they would pay plumbers etc call out fees for coming to do nothing as it's not their fault they weren't needed after all but a cm gets pilloried for not losing what could be half her months wage and told should just suck it up. Considering tradesmen charge about 10 times what my cm friend charges per hour it's pretty strange that it's ok and even the right thing to do to pay about £70 for nothing for one day but not ok to pay £160 for a month!

NoFucks I'm with you on that one, I am a feminist but don't feel that every last thing need to come down to male privilege. Statistically i'd be just as disappointed at any man if he, in this particular circumstance, chose to take the money if he could afford not to and despite being entitled to it.

Other self employed people can usually find other jobs to fill in for cancelled call outs/jobs cm can't. Notice period is protected for that client who can use those times if they want them. Why should cm give up this time for free?

Phil she doesn't have to, but the mother gave the months notice and did the correct thing, the payment was unexpected due to the govt dept deciding to only pay for one week instead of all 4. No one has said she has too, lots of people however have said that they wouldn't charge if they were financially able to be out that £160, because why wouldn't you choose to support a woman and child who you've known for several years, why wouldn't you choose to do good for your community if you could?

The family income is 40k, not the dp

Would I have charged her? No. There's a reason why I decided not to pursue a photography business. I was going to cut the price for my first customer for no reason at all. Clearly I'm not suited to being a business woman.

OP, you did nothing wrong though. It would have been nice not to charge her but if you were a big business no one would say you were unreasonable. This isn't your hobby, it's a job and you had every right to that money.

Someone here actually called you grabby? Grabby for taking money that you were entitled to? FFS, some people are just bloody stupid.

I raised the plumber thing. I think it would be equally bad and I don't thibk a plumber woukd think it any of his business to waive the charges

So Stealth there are no circumstances where you think waiving a fee is just the right thing to do (if you can afford it)? For example if said plummer has a job and the family member died that morning and had to cancel, you don't think the plummer might just waive that fee? DH did a job for a guy in his building and didn't charge as it was in memoriam of his recently late father. Sometimes people just choose to do what's good. Anyway, i'm now going to stop ignoring dh, so good evening to you all. :)

I dont understand why she didnt just tell the funding that she was stopping at the childminders on the last day of the 4 week notice period. Presumably they would have paid had she actually taken her child there, so I dont really understand this at all.

You tell the CM that you want care to stop on X date, 4 weeks from now, and tell the funding that care will stop on X date, 4 weeks from now. Everyone gets paid, everything is covered, and if she chooses not to turn up for care then thats up to her.

ourblanche - if you actually read OP's description, it doesn't seem like the contract was between the parent and the funding agency. It is the OP who contacted the agency to explain the parent had given notice, and the agency says they won't be able to pay the OP the money for the three weeks. The OP then contacted the parent asking her to pay it. There is nothing to suggest there has been any direct interaction between the parent and the funding agency at all.

That is why it would be useful to know what the terms of the contract were between OP and the parent - e.g. if the contract just said you have to give one months notice and pay full price for that month, it would, imho, be understandable that the parent thought, "I've given the notice, and I normally pay nothing so will continue to pay nothing for the final month." Rather than, "I've given notice but for some reason (which is the part I'd like the OP to explain, not because she is at fault, but because she is the only person, unless there's another childminder on the thread working in the same circumstances, who can) for the final three weeks of the notice period I have to pay full price when I usually pay nothing."

FYI, I would like to know, not because I think the parent is stupid, nor because I think the OP is mean (if you read the full thread you will see I've posted multiple times defending her decision), just because it's a situation I haven't heard of before and would be useful to know how the regulations for govt assisted childcare places work, because it's funding I might be entitled to at some point. Is that okay with you?

furthermore, if OP herself, as a professional that presumably deals with the funding authority regularly, was surprised that it wouldn't fund the final three weeks, it's not a huge stretch to think that perhaps the parent was equally unaware this would be the case.

I think it depends on how the childcare was offered. Did she come to you then ask for you to claim for 15 hours free funded. Or did you offer the free funded hours and she took the childcare because of that. If it's the later then when you phoned them and found out they won't pay you it should be your loss because you were offering something without the full facts and didn't set up a contract or give appropriate information about giving notice and the dates etc.
The pre-schools and nurseries I've used for my three children know fully about the funding and are very clear with me. When I have changed over providers. They knew exactly what to do and I did the relevant notice.
I would not expect to pay for the 15 hours per week if I'd given my months notice and they messed up on not knowing how the funding works. Sorry. If you did did offer government funded hours to her you owe her that money back.

YABU have a heart

So Stealth there are no circumstances where you think waiving a fee is just the right thing to do (if you can afford it)? For example if said plummer has a job and the family member died that morning and had to cancel, you don't think the plummer might just waive that fee?

Bereavement is different than simply having a low income, surely? Business waive fees in the case of bereavement for several reasons; it's unforeseeable, relatively unusual and generally a sound business decision. I don't think the same can be said for voiding contracts just because you imagine your customer can't afford it.

So basically she gave four weeks notice, she didn't know that the govt only pay one weeks' notice. She didn't use you in the 4 weeks but she still has to pay because govt rules don't match your contract. So if she had ibformed you 3 weeks before, woukd you have sorted the bureaucracy or would she always have ended up with a bill?

She said that was fine but would need to wait until her income support payment came in the next day and would then send me that. She would send the £60 the following week from her child tax credit.

I'd be absolutely useless at running a business - I just couldn't sleep at night taking money for a child I hadn't cared for and knowing she was using her full income support and CTC :(

Legally of course you were right but morally? I couldn't do it

I think it was mean to ask, but business is mean right? That's the way we learn that it has to be.