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.

I wouldn't have. Legally you were right but morally I find it a bit lacking if I'm honest.

The mum gave 4 weeks notice & hasn't been paying because of the 15hrs free childcare. She's never been in a position to pay & has done nothing wrong herself & she's also not using the service. It's unfair for either party to be out of pocket as both appear to have been shafted by the authorities. I would double check the authorities as I've never had this problem when swapping between providers when I've moved for instance. Personally I would explain the situation & understand hers & challenge the authorities & if nothing could be done, split the difference. It's awful being a single mum on benefits, I would sometimes live off toast to make sure we were both fed & bills paid. My child's father was not earning at that point so I had no child support either & bedroom tax tho. I'd say you've probably overburdened the mum in this instance. If she has paid that suggests she has managed to cope & but I'd look at this carefully as it'll no doubt come up again in the future & you need to warn parents about this rather strange eventuality.

Sure, you were entitled to take it.

But sometimes that doesn't mean you should do something. Plus, you know, people talk. Word of mouth matters.

I would not have taken it.

I think her financial situation and your financial situation are nothing to do with it.

The point is, you provided a service that she (via other ways) paid for. Then she gave notice (as per the contract that you both agreed with) and you sent her a final bill (again, as per contract...), and she paid it. That's that, surely?

Just because it's legal doesn't make it right.

No but a man would face far less criticism for sticking to his contractual terms

And this is based on your extensive research in to it, yes?

What a ridiculous statement. It's either right or wrong, no matter who is asking.

Was the child starting school or starting a nursery in a school? I'm assuming the nursery and that's why the funding could only be paid for one week (because it would be being paid to the other place instead)? If not then you need to double check with the funding dept why they could only pay one week. If the child was with you, or scheduled to be with you, for four weeks and they were entitled to four weeks funding (ie it wasn't going to a second place) then you should have been funded for it.

AGAIN......why didnt both parties inform the authorities that the child care would end on X Date, that date being 4 weeks after notice has been given?

Perfectly truthful, not fraud or anything else. The OP would have been paid and the client wouldnt have had to find £160.

Am I missing something here?!

All of the pp saying it was immoral. Don't you think it would be immoral to accept a debt be paid for you because you are assumed to be hard up, but the next day you go on holiday?

I know plenty of single Mum's who have their shit together and would be appalled by the stereotype being peddled on this thread.

She didn't have access to the money that day. Our family has a healthy income but as a squirreller and a budgeter I can't put my hand to any significant extra expense until the next pay check without financial penalties.

And FYI, no one died. She didn't charge her for cancelling to go to a funeral. She charged her for a notice period that she didn't attend because she was going on holiday!! (Such poverty, right? )

Well I don't know. Was the child going to start school because of attaining school age, or moving to the preschool?

If she was school age YWBU not to see this coming, and be aware of the discrepancies between your notice period and the paid notice period. It's not very business like to be taken by surprise by a child starting school and only give yourself one month to fill a gap a child has had for years.

It seems like neither of you engaged in much forward planning. Seems odd to claim it's business and you need to be paid £160 if you're so unbothered about filling the gap you don't initiate conversations about school starting months in advance. Maybe put the word around you've a mindee starting school soon. Either the work is important to you so you forward plan, or it's not so surely you could afford to waive the fee.

Good poiny opalfruits about sticking to the terms of the contract being better for her fellow childminders.

So a woman on income support gets 15 hours free childcare. She gives you the required notice but the funder only pays for a week. I am guessing that is because her child wasn't using the service during the notice period. Whenever I have used the free hours, the service provider has made clear how the funding applied. You should have done so and I would suggest next time you make it clearer in your contracts.

I know whenour local authorityy part fund care home places, the contract for private top up has to end at the same time as the local authority one. I am surprised they do not operate the same principle for preschool funding. Op I think if you are going to accept customers on funded hours, you need to bring your contracts with them into line with the local authorities notice periods . you are trying to have youR cake and eat it

Have I missed something? Where does it say this woman went on holiday?

onceandnever The OPs contract was not with the funding agency, they did not employ her. The LP did... You want to know the contract details, why? Like others you are insinuating that one of these women is thick as a brick and the other a greedy bitch! You have evidence for either assumption!

As others have said both of the women involved seem to have understood that some monies would be owed... it is only those who have nothing to do with it who have come over all bleedin' hearts!

Ludicrous!!

Have I missed something? Where does it say this woman went on holiday? Paragraph 4 of the OP... could be read as they went to visit family or family came to visit... but 'holiday' from normal day to day activities is implied

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.

I'm surprised the council said they would only pay for a week. If the parent had sent the child for those four weeks, would they not have paid you then? I'm afraid that the parent should pay, she has agreed to the arrangement, you are unlikely to fill the space at such short notice and you have your own financial committments to pay. Maybe the relation who thinks you are being mean should put her money where her mouth is! You are running a business not a charity!

I was a childminder for ten years, we were advised by the local authority and the National Childminders Association (now changed name) to agree a notice period there was no mention of it being in line with a particular department! Most childminders, in the area I lived in, took the fees up front as we had been advised to do. Most of us taking the full month up front every month, that way during the last month the family decided to leave this was our notice money and we wouldn't end up working for free.
With regards to the nursery funding most of us charged the parents the full fee till the nursery money was paid into our accounts then at that point the parents would have a bonus month where they paid little or nothing. This way the childminders finances are protected. Childminders are professionals who are running a business and have family and financial committments to take care of. Childminding is a hard job that is not the best paid considering the extra hours needed to do accounts, planning, preparation and clearing up! If you work out the hourly rate considering all of this it is very low!

It sounds like this situation was avoidable if the right notice had been given for the funding. I suppose in a way it was her responsibility to find out how this worked, but it would be an idea for you to understand it too so you can advise vulnerable families in the future.
As for whether you should have taken it. Well, personally I would have felt responsible for not understanding or knowing how her notice worked, and wouldn't have taken it to be honest.

The fact she is a single mum, the fact she is on income support is irrelevant. She entered into a contract with you, and rather than default she has come to an agreement in order to pay what she owes.

DH and I have business where some of our clients are not at all affluent. (Others are very affluent.)

Our attitude is that they use our services, so should expect to pay for them. They wouldn't expect Sainsbury's to give them free milk and bread because they are a bit short that week.

Sometimes such people will moan about their financial situation, to try to explain why they are not able to pay us, at the moment. I recently had to explain to one such client that we are not independently wealthy, and that this business is how we earn a living.

As others have said, if you had managed to fill the place within the month, it would have been a nice gesture to refund for the part of the month where you were being paid by the new client. But it seems you didn't fill the place within the notice period.

The client could have given notice earlier, and there would have been no funding gap. The fact that she didn't is not your fault. (It might not be her fault, either, of course, but why should you bear the shortfall?)

No one is disputing the fact that you pay for a service you use. Us 'bleeding hearts' (and long may mine bleed and have compassion for other people) are saying that the mother got a very hefty and unexpected fee that she had never had to pay before and which wiped out her benefits for two weeks and, based on that info alone, we are saying that if we could afford it we would waiver it. Especially for a woman and her child who we'd known and cared for for several years.

I think you were right to ask for the money. People on benefits are already on benefits - paid for out of everyone's taxes. It doesn't mean they should be let off their bills as well. Might be offensive to the lady if you were to suggest she couldn't manage her money just because she is currently on benefits. If you want to be charitable that's nice - but maybe you prefer your charity to go towards other causes. 40k joint income is hardly unimaginable riches anyway, especially if you both work full time.

I have worked in a business where people on benefits request discounts. My reply is 'My taxes are already paying your benefits, I'm not giving you anything else'.

(Doesn't sound like the lady in this scenario was making a request to be let off anyway)

My reply is 'My taxes are already paying your benefits, I'm not giving you anything else'.

I imagine you lighting a cigar with a burning 50-pound note while you say that.