To think my cousin should not have to register with Ofsted to look after my child?

[nappyaddict]

Close relatives are supposed to be exempt from registration. In this they include siblings (half or full), aunts and uncles, grandparents and step versions of all of these. So why are cousins not included!! It doesn't make any sense to me.

Um I may be wrong but I think close relatives are exempt because they are not allowed to be paid for the childcare anyway and would have to register for ANOTHER child. My mum used to be a registered minder and we looked into getting her re-registered so I could pay her with childcare vouchers but she still would not qualify if mine was the only child she cared for.

If you dont want the tax credits or childcare vouchers then I am sure you can place your child with your cousin without the need for registration (But she wont be insured etc)

hever I can't if I want to pay her a bit of extra dosh for helping out.

The only time a close relative (not including cousin for some reason) has to register is if you want to pay them through WTC or with vouchers. Then they also have to look after a non-related child. I presume this is to stop people abusing the system and their relatives being paid when perhaps they probably wouldn't otherwise pay them iyswim.

I think thats what I was trying to say. With close relatives there is no way you can pay through vouchers or WTC so they are not exempt but excluded as it would be a pointless effort.

With your cousin - presumably you want her to register so you can pay that way? If not then its no different from paying a babysitter - you dont have to register them but you dont get tax benifits not the legal protection you do with a registered minder.

Oh I am really heavilly pregnant and have a feeling I am missing the point here somehow!! It does not take much to confuse me right now.

Oh I think a lightbulb moment has occured - Is the problem not at your end but HERS? I mean as in she will need to register it as work if she is getting paid and that would have an effect on benefits etc???

If so there is something about "in house" childcare which is for nannies/au-pairs etc which is easier than ofstead I think. Your cousin would have to look after your DC in your house and not have other peoples children etc.

My cousin would have to look after him at her house. That's why she needs to register and can't be classed as a babysitter or nanny. I won't be paying her with vouchers or through WTC - just out of my own money.

There is no legal reason why she cannot look after your son, and you can't pay her a little, like a babysitter. This can take place anywhere.

However, if you want to 'tell' people about it, for the sake of childcare vouchers or Child Tax Credits, then you have to use someone registered.

I have friends that look after DS all the time, and very rarely in my house (I would never expect them to sit in all day anyway). Granted, I don't pay them, but it is not against the law to look after your friend or cousins child for the day.

Could you maybe buy her thank you 'gifts' instead of paying her? Things she would buy anyway, maybe some food shopping or mobile top-ups? Then you aren't actually paying her, but she is still getting 'paid', IYKWIM.

I dont get whys he cant if you don't intend in claiming tax credits. Is it just because if insurance.

What on earth does she need to be insured for?

I don't know I was just trying to think why there was a problem.

I am ashamed to admit this but I can remember a storyline in a soap wher a friend was looking after another mother's child and the child had an accident and there was a problem because she was not registered.

I know when I looked into childminding there was insurance to pay.

I would assume it would only become an issue if the mother decided to take legal action of some kind in the event of an accident, and one presumes that a mother would not do that in the case of a family member or friend, though would consider in the case of a paid carer, such as a childminder, nanny or nursery.

Yes unless they blow up her house and then she cant claim on her house insurance I dont know I dont really understand the problem.

I used to pay someone to look after dd and they were not registered

DSM, It is actually illegal to do what you suggest. An unregistered person caring for a child for more than 2 hours per day for 'reward' is breaking the law. 'Reward' includes chocs, wine, top-ups etc.

Ofsted have told me if my son is under 8 (he is 2) and she will be looking after him for more than 2 hours in her own house and I want to pay her then she will need to be registered.

If you want to pay her, yes.

lou - It is not illegal to look after a friend or relatives child. It is not illegal to give that person a thank you gift.

I really can't see their logic that a cousin isn't a close relative when they include everything else in their list!

Not sure cousins class as close relatives and if she is getting paid she has to be registered.

Surely it is logical that if your aunt and uncle are classed as close relatives then your cousin is aswell?

if she's gettin gpaid and it is considered to be a job then of course she should be properly registered like anyon eelse.

You can't pay her in kind either,she has to be doing it totally for free otherwise she could be taken to court/fined if reported. I know a childminder who was reported,it's horrible but it does happen.

It is totally ridiculous I'm a childminder who had to register to mind my friends dc,my sister employs a nanny who doesn't even need a CRB check let alone insurance,1st aid certs,Ofsted inspections etc etc etc.

As somebody else has said if uncles and aunts can it's ridiculous cousins can't,madness.

But if i was paying my mum or sister they wouldn't have to be regisited.

I'd want them registered even if it was my mother, for insurance purposes, what if your cousin does something to your child which means, you, your husband and the child will never do a days work again, then you'd be glad you paid the registration fee and had something to claim against.