Carer charging me even though I didn't employ her

[NickyNora]

My son is Autistic.
We use a Carer on a regular basis.
One of his friends from college had an outing recently.
The other child's parent organised the activity and the Carers.

We all use the same Carers.

The other child invited my son and 2 other boys to the outing.

I thought my son was a guest.
He needs almost no help socially now especially when he's comfortable with the environment and company.

Yesterday, I received an invoice for £160 from one of the Carers.

I checked with the parent of the child whose outing it was, that they have already paid the Carer.
The other parent didn't know I was being billed.

AIBU to say to the Carer, that I won't be paying her as I wasn't aware I was being billed?

Surely she can’t think she can be paid twice for the same work? If she wanted to be paid more than her usual amount for the birthday event as she was supervising two young people then she should have had that conversation with the parent who bo owed her for the event and not just assumed.
There’s almost an element of fraud there. I know she’s classed as self employed but works through an agency, can you ask them what their usual process is?

I’m confused.
So the parent organising the activity booked and expected to pay for one carer (for their DC presumably).
So who booked this other carer that is now billing you?

I am a bit confused as to why the carer has billed you and not the person who booked her? And also why the person who actually booked her hasn’t just paid her automatically?
The parent who booked the carers is the person who needs the bill and is responsible for paying. Unless organised and communicated in advance, if you book someone for any kind of work you then pay them.
Did you say in one of your follow up posts OP, that you had spoken to the organising parent and they said they didn’t know you were being billed? But what did they say? If they hadn’t received and paid and they booked where on earth did they think the bill went?
You need to discuss this further with the organising parent.

I wouldn’t pay her, she’s trying it on

I think this needs to be sorted by the hosting parent.

Speak to them about the confusion. Ask them exactly what they booked - ie a career for how many boys and how many boys did she pay for.

If she paid for 2 (and other parent paid other carer for her son) then the carer has been fully paid.

If she paid for 1 (her own son) but then your son was there too, there has been a booking error on her part. In that case, the Carer would be expecting to deliver 1-1 care, but turns up to find 2 boys needing care (assuming 3rd cared for by other carer) and on that basis billed for it. She billed Op because she knows OP.

If this is the case, it was a booking error.

It’s impossible to say Op’s DS didn’t need care at all - he needs adult supervision of some level presumably.

In this situation, really the host ought to be footing the bill. They made a booking for care and then sent more teens than she had booked for, but didn’t pay. What did she think would happen - that the Carer would look after Teen 3 without charge? Did she think his own parent would be billed?

Why was carer wrong to charge for the OPs son, who is regularly cared for by her and spent the day with her. Perhaps the usual 2:1 rate is less than 1:1 but given. 2:1 doesn’t sound like it was booked for at all, I think the Carer could be irritated by this - not u reasonably.

So the problem sounds like it lies in the booking. Only 2 boys had carers booked, but 3 were there. The bill needs paying and Op needs to sort that with the host, not the Carer so much.

Imagine if this was a thread from the Carer.
‘My fellow Carer and I were booked for 2 teen boys on a day out, one being billed for each boy. On arrival a 3rd boy who we also care for sometimes turned out to be there too. We looked after the 3 boys all day and a good time was had by all. At the end of the day, we billed all 3 parents for the care their sons received. But now the one who was there but wasn’t booked in is saying she doesn’t want to pay for my services and hadn’t booked me. Is this reasonable to have received my services all day and not pay me’

This all comes down to poor communication mostly in part of the hosting family. Someone needs to pay the Carer. You’d hope the host will offer, having organised the day and organised carers without checking with Op. if however she doesn’t want to, I think OP should pay. Chalk it up to experience - communicate clearly in future.

And sorry, but son needing ‘almost no help’ in the day doesn’t mean that Carer doesn’t need paying. Looking after 3 teens is more work than 2.

It’s unfortunate this has happened, but it really wasn’t the fault of the Carer…they found themselves with more teens to look after than they’d been booked for.

Personally, I’d Id been them, I’d have texted the host and pointed out there were 3 boys and all 3 would be billed for. However, given all are known to them, simply billing for services received (and 3 boys were clearly there) seems reasonable too.

So if you don’t pay her, you loose her as a carer.
If you pay her, the trust will have gone and you will end up loosing her anyway. I mean, are you going to wonder all the time if she will try to trick you again on payment?

Your ds is 17yo. He is getting more independent. I’d say don’t pay. She took a chance and what she did is basically theft. Tough.

I do t think this is fraud.

3 teens who require care and receive care from these carers on other occasions were on a day out with 2 carers.

It probably isn’t possible to have scenarios where the carer is the adult in charge and being paid as carer sometimes and other times to teen who needs care is treated as an indenpendnt adult who is just along for the ride and totally independents of the carer. There were no parent helpers there to take responsibility. Therefore the paid carer became responsible for him. That responsibility has to be paid for.

Given Op thought the hist would be doing the care, she didn’t expect carers involved. It’s odd the host didn’t tell Op she would use carers instead of being there herself. Or perhaps she did.

Either way, the host and OP between them need to accept the Carer spent the full day with 3 boys and so the bill needs paying. The fact the host didn’t clarify what price would be charged for looking after the 3 (or 2 the Ops son was in a group with for carer purposes) is her error. It smacks of an tremor to not pay for the full care to be honest.

Op, speak to the host. Together, recognise the fact that the Carer looked after OPs son. The exact level if care isn’t so relevant but the fact is she was the supervising adult with him. Accept that this bill has to be paid. Come up with a plan - host pays, op pays, they split it….whatever.

It’s irrelevant that OP will find it hard to fund this. The fact is, the service has been provided and now it needs to be paid for. Clearly she’d like host to pay and in the circumstances, I think host should probably - she abdicated responsibility for looking after the teens to carers and didn’t mention it, so she should foot the bill, but if she won’t, Op will have to suck it up.

I’d be cross with host about this I’m not the Carer.

And OP, please can you be clearer about:

• What was agreed with host beforehand about who was looking after kids and any charges
• What host has now said about how many kids she booked carers for
• If she to,d the carers there would be 3 teens or just sprung a 3rd on them
• Exactly what she and other parent have been billed for
• Exactly what they have already paid.

The Carer did the work. They should be paid.
In the absence of host arranging a special 2:1 rate and especially if a 3rd teen was sprung on them, charging th standard 1:1 rate seems reasonable.

@WombatChocolate that would be true of the third child needed supervision too.
As the OP said he didn’t, so the fact the carer knew him is no different than if he had been NT and had happened to be there. They wouldn’t have ask for payment for the NT child. So why for one that didn’t need support (but happened to be ND)

10:21sonjadog
The OP says in the opening post that the carer has been paid by the family who organized the day.

No, she just says that she checked with the other family and their response was that they didn't realise she would be billed. She hasn't said if the hosting family paid or not.

So one parent paid for 1 carer. The second carer - is she charging both you and the 3rd parent? Seems bit off at most her fee for the day should be split between the two parents

Imagine if this was a thread from the Carer.
'My fellow Carer and I were booked for 2 teen boys on a day out, one being billed for each boy. On arrival a 3rd boy who we also care for sometimes turned out to be there too. We looked after the 3 boys all day and a good time was had by all. At the end of the day, we billed all 3 parents for the care their sons received. But now the one who was there but wasn’t booked in is saying she doesn’t want to pay for my services and hadn’t booked me. Is this reasonable to have received my services all day and not pay me’
The carer would have everyone quite rightly saying "why on earth didn't you call the person who booked you to ask why you had an extra child?" and saying it's unfortunate, but next time you really need to talk with the person booking as soon as a problem arises.
It also isn't factual, because all 3 boys were expected. The carer has just decided on her own to bill twice, but 1:2 care would be a different rate usually anyway. It's not defensible.

Because that’s the question isn’t it?
Did the carer did ANY work for the OP’s ds? The OP thinks he was independent hence nit checking carer etc…
The carer seems to think that because they are caring for them some of the time, then they couldnt be independent.

Who is taking a chance there?

I suspect the carer, simply because I can’t imagine the OP being happy to leave their ds in a situation they would struggle with Wo checking the ins and outs first.

Here’s a similar situation.

A swimming teacher teaches 2 kids a 2:1 lesson for an agreed price. One day a 3rd child is brought along too. They go into the pool. The swim teacher cannot ignore them as there would be safety issues and a hazard. When the bill is sent, they bill for an extra swimming lesson for that day.

Parent objects. They say, the 3rd child was a good swimmer and didn’t need input. A specific lesson wasn’t requested for them.

We would think the parent was a cheeky blighter and of course they should pay.

This is the same. The Carer became the adult responsible for OPs son. They were there caring for other teens and it would have been impossible to not be impacted by his presence. It’s not possible to have a day out like that with 3 autistic kids who all receive care at other times and who have received care from these previously, to treat them differently and charge differently, when there is no other adult there to take responsibility. They did a job. They now need to be paid.

With care, there will be times when you feel you’ve got a slightly raw deal. Perhaps that you didn’t get the full minutes paid for, or you had to pay for a bigger slot than needed, or that the circumstances were such that your DC didn’t really need a carer or receive much care. That will happen. Care is expensive. It’s someone’s time and crucially caring for more teens is more responsibility than caring for 1. They must be paid for it.

Childminders are spending the same hour looking after 1 child as much as 1 hour spend looking after 4. They will all pay. It isn’t an hourly rate regardless of the number of kids.
You might get a cheaper rate for larger numbers…but unlikely if you dint book it as that.

The carer cannot expect to be paid by 2 different people for the same working hours. That is not how it works. The OP did not ask her to work those hours. Not the OP's responsibility legally or morally.

How can a carer switch from being adult-in-charge with OPs son on some occasions, to simply having him there as an independent adult on another, WHEN THERE IS NO OTHER ADULT TO TAKE CHARGE?

He might have managed the day fine. He might have needed minimal input. Regardless, he couldn’t have been there by himself. He needed an adult. Fine if that’s a parent or parents friend, but if it’s a Carer, you pay for that service. Someone has to be expected to pay. The Carer isn’t there to have random extra teens hanging round with them for the day who are unpaid for.

It’s like wanting to have extra kids at a party and only to pay for a certain number and expect others to get a freebie. No.

Carers are paid per hour NOT Per person cared for.

Shes been paid shes trying it on

I disagree. I don't think she can bill you for this when she was appointed to care for one child and has presumably been paid for that. She has misunderstood but she wasn't employed by you on this occasion so I don't think you owe her the money. Could you offer to pay her something as a gesture but make it clear that it's just to retain the relationship and not because you agree that you owe her.

I think you need to find out from the host family exactly what was booked and paid for with the carer.
Did they book and pay for 1:2 care and then your ds went as well without the carer being aware he was until the event? If that's the case then points to raise would be why the carer didn't flag this up to the hosts who booked and if she did, what was their response?
And why didn't the hosts inform the carer at the time of booking who would be there and who would require care? So if your son didn't require the input of the carer at all, that should have been made clear to the carer at the time of booking, as you do use this carer regularly to support your son.

If the carer was aware at booking who would be present, then she should have billed those booking her accordingly.

And just a thought, if the OPs ds had needed any kind of support during the day out, and had not received it from the carer as she wasn't booked/paid for him, would it be acceptable for the carer to refuse to support, even at the detriment of the ds?

It’s one thing to be an independent autistic teen on a day out, with a parent, or with the parent of another autistic friend.

It is quite different being out with a paid Carer. It is irrelevant how much care he actually received or had. He’s a teen who needs care sometimes and actually receives laid for care by this particular Carer. Why should she be expected to be the adult in charge all day and not get paid for him. And unless he should go there alone and spend the full day without any extra help or support from any adult, it’s a daft thing to even suggest.

Are you also suggesting that those carers who take the elderly out for a day, should have other non-paying elderly along for the ride and not charge for them - because they’ve already been paid for their hour of work?

Yes, the water is muddied by the fact OP didn’t organise and book this. The Host did and that’s why they really ought to pay. We’re they really expecting that the Carer would be the adult in charge of a teen who regularly needs care, without invoicing for them too? I find that hard to believe and if they did, this is where it all went wrong.

If I’d been the Carer, I’d have billed the host for 2x teens.
I do wonder if the host told the Carer to bill OP instead, or has just always assumed OP would foot the bill.

Surely the bill cannot be a surprise to host?

I could be wrong but she can't legally charge you for services you didn't ask for. You'd need to enter into some kind of written or verbal contract but you were unaware and didn't ask for or need her services.
But it might just be an honest mistake!

A swimming teacher teaches 2 kids a 2:1 lesson for an agreed price. One day a 3rd child is brought along too. They go into the pool. The swim teacher cannot ignore them as there would be safety issues and a hazard. When the bill is sent, they bill for an extra swimming lesson for that day.
Of course they can, they ask whose child it is (removing kid from the pool if necessary and telling them to bring back their adult), then ask the adult if they are paying for a lesson. Get them out of the pool if they start to drown, return to parent if they're disruptive, involve the lifeguard etc.

Its basic law, you have to agree to pay for a service, however oblique that agreement may be, and it is only that way that you can be billed. Otherwise it comes under unsolicited goods and services: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1971/30.

I agree that she can’t insist you any for services you didn’t request.

However, it’s reasonable to expect to be paid for services which were provided and it would have been impossible to avoid providing. What if something g had happened during the day that required adult input, however small? The Carer would have provided that support. It could have been as simple as reassurance about an aspect of the day or instructions about how something worked or timings…..but something OPs son couldn’t manage or would struggle with alone. Instantly, care has been provided. It’s impossible to be with a child with additional needs likewise and totally ignore them, especially when you already have a caring relationship with them. You cannot out Carers in a position to have to do that - to not have any responsibility or Be paid for it…..but actually to be left as the sole adult with a teen who is likely to need some support.

This all comes down to poor communication. However, given that Carer was the adult in charge, and spent a day looking after the OPs son, should she really be denied the pay for the job she delivered?

OP and host and Carer need to learn lessons in communication from this. The Carer should not lose out financially. They did provide a service. Ideally host will pay.

This doesn’t make any sense. Why would you start off saying “I hope you’re well”? What’s her health got to do with anything.

It’s a polite opener.

WombatChocolate the OP did not employ the carer on this occasion. All hours worked have to be agreed between carer and employer. There was no agreement made with the OP. She does not have to pay her. If the carer tried to make any sort of claim for this, she would get nowhere.