SIL using unregistered childminder - what would you do?

[FrozenNorth]

MIL dropped into conversation over the weekend that SIL has my niece placed with an unregistered childminder (cash in hand) for several days per week. MIL didn't seem too bothered (mainly, I assume, because in the days that MIL used to be a childminder herself Ofsted most definitely didn't exist).

I was a bit alarmed to hear this - as far as I can tell, this would mean that the childminder didn't have to have insurance, first aid training or a CRB. I don't get on with SIL too well so I'm not sure if I'm being unreasonably condemnatory because of this. I thought I'd run the situation past the folks here to get a clearer idea of what this means and if I can or should do anything further.

Thanks for any advice and sorry if I'm overreacting!

Do you think the children are at risk?

is the person looking after your niece a friend of SIL?

how old is niece?

What has it got to do with you ?

FN, we need to know how old she is then we can talk through any implications

Right, sorry for late reply, was putting DD1 to bed.

Niece is 23 months old, I don't think childminder and SIL were friends prior to placing niece with her.

I've got no reason at all to think the children under the CM's care are at risk.

ArseHolio - indeed, possibly nothing. Hence posting here - it might not be a big deal, in which case I'll do nothing at all.

It's not a childcare arrangement I would consider, but I think you should butt out. As you say you don't get along with SIL, how do you think she will react to your opinion on the matter?

'What has it got to do with you?'

Er... someone working illegally? Moral responsibility???

It is a big deal, pisses us registered cm's off. All your worries are founded - uninsured, unqualified, no first aid, no house check, no CRB...

Phone Ofsted.

On one hand I think that people who know and trust eachother should be able to have an arrangement, the same as family, to look after a child if the prohibitive cost of childcare otherwise prevents use of legitimate childcare businesses. On the other, there will be safety implications and also tax avoidance presumably. If I thought the children were at risk, I would do something, otherwise, I'd steer well clear.

okay

uninsured, unregulated childcare means that if something awful happens (rare but possible) the parents will have no comeback

She may not have first aid training, or safeguarding training, thus putting the children she looks after at risk

she may not have correct car insurance

she may not be up to date on child development matters, and the children she cares for may not be reaching milestones, unnoticed; the child may progress at a slower rate and thus their potential to achieve may be compromised

Payment by cash in hand indicates a lax approach to tax matters, so one could comfortably infer that she may be avoiding her responsibilities to the taxman

and of course, she is breaking the law

Now, it's up to you what you do with this information; you could bring up the subject with MIL and explain that her grand daughter could be at risk, for the sake of a few quid

HTH, and good luck

Strix - I definitely wouldn't talk to SIL about it myself. If folks here considered it worth doing anything about it, I'd pass your advice on to DH and leave him to decide what (if anything) he wished to do. His family after all!

SF and BALD - those concerns were what prompted me to post here. I need to show this thread to DH I think.

any more questions, ask away

If this is a case of informing SIL of the risk she has taken on, then that's probably not a bad idea. But, if it crosses the line into telling her what to do with her children, I can't imagine that is going to be productive.

It's funny I work with someone who used to be a childminder. She now send her kids to someone who is not a registered cm and pays her cash in hand. She has another childminder who is legit. But the cih one fills in when regular one cannot. I'm sure she does this out of financial necessity. I don't pass judgement.

It's none of your business

so yes, pass on the information

SIL may not have realised the implications

I cant believe the number of people who think it's not her business!

If your relationship is already strained with SIL, is it worth making things worse? Is your SIL or brother likely to leave their daughter in the care of someone they think is likely to bring the charm to any harm?

People leave their children with grand parents or friends in regular care arrangements, most of whom won't have insurance, first aid or safeguard training, and won't be up-to-date on developmental matters in a professional manner - but no one would dream of telling them not to leave their kids with a grand parent.

So the only issue really is the tax evasion, which is a fair point to raise with your brother, on a moral and legal stand point.

the charm?? What a bizarre idea - charm school for a 23 month old! Obviously meant harm.

boobz you have made me rofl

Thanks folks - will show the thread to DH and leave it up to him to decide what to do. Has been good to get other people's perspectives on this. It's helped me conclude that it's none of MY business but that DH may wish to make it his. Cheers

Giggling at Boobz sending Dniece to charm school.

Some people do it for financial reasons... And maybe she was friends with the cared beforehand. She won't be insured but same risk of something happening to your dd. Carer just won't be covered if it does.

I think you could inform her of the risks but I would leave it. It's her choice. She obviously trusts this person.

I am a bit puzzled here about people saying to report her to Ofsted,

Ofsted deal with registered childminders, if the childminder isn't registered then surely that has nothing to do with Ofsted?

Er yes it has everything to do with Ofsted.

You can report her anonymously.