Nursery says the extras aren’t included in the funded hours but I never realised it would cost this much

[Yluna47]

My ds is 2 and has been at nursery since January. He goes 3 days a week while im at work and generally he loves it there, runs in without looking back at me most mornings so no issues with the actual nursery.

He’s eligible for the funded hours now and I thought it would make a decent difference to what we pay but honestly im a bit shocked by the latest invoice. I know its not completely free and I wasn’t expecting to pay nothing but I thought we’d be saving more than we are.

Before the funding we were paying around £610 a month for the 3 days. Now its just over £360. Which is obviously a saving but when I looked at the breakdown there’s £250 for the extra hours, £55 for meals and snacks, £35 consumables and £20 activities. I thought some of this would be included in the funded hours but apparently not.

The meals one is annoying because you have to pay it, they don’t let you send food from home. The consumables is apparently things like wipes, nappies, suncream and craft stuff. He’s potty training so doesn’t use many nappies now and I do wonder what we’re paying for some months, but I know they still have things to buy for all the children. The activities charge is for things like music sessions and other things they do during the week.

I did read the paperwork when he started but if im honest I didn’t properly understand all the funding stuff. It said there would be additional charges and I signed it, so I know I can’t really say I wasn’t told anything. I just didn’t realise it would still be this much once the funding kicked in. I think I assumed the funded hours would come off the bill and then we’d pay for whatever hours were left, but it seems to work differently.

My partner thinks we should just leave it alone because ds is settled there and we both work, so what else are we supposed to do. He’s not wrong really. I don’t want to move him somewhere else just to save money when he’s happy and knows everyone. But £360 a month is still a lot for us and I was hoping we’d be able to put some of that money away instead.

I’ve asked another mum at nursery what she pays and she said hers was cheaper but her child only goes two days and I don’t know if she’s getting the same hours as us. I don’t really want to start asking everyone what they’re paying because it feels a bit nosy.

Are these charges normal? I know nursery staff need paying and the funding doesn’t cover everything but I can’t get my head around the fact its advertised as funded hours and there’s still so much to pay. Can you ask to opt out of the extras or would they just tell you to find another nursery? Has anyone actually managed to get their bill reduced without changing childcare completely?

Agreed, but it's the law and they can't sign up to provide funded hours and then not follow the law around it. I know all about the finances of early years having been involved in running a pre-school until very recently, and it is not easy (and we were lucky as we didn't have to pay rent as part of a church, so it was just about possible to break even and stick to the law). If every provider stuck to the law then probably the government would have to increase funding rates (possibly by reducing eligibility or total hours available), but at least parents would know what they were getting and whether they could afford it.

The reality is that the nursery has to accept the funded hours at the rate the government offers. This is too low to support child carers. They can't charge an extra fee for the funded hours, so they Either they charge for extras, or close because they can't cover their costs.

Look elsewhere if you want OP. We moved from our London nursery where we paid £695 for 3x a week even with funding and tax free childcare. Now we are in Wiltshire and have a childminder and pay £58. Yes, £58. We do have to provide our own nappies and lunch/snacks but still vastly cheaper than £695!

If every provider stuck to the law then probably the government would have to increase funding rates (possibly by reducing eligibility or total hours available).

I doubt it. Jeremy Hunt, along with every other person in the land with a working brain, was well aware when he introduced the increased 'funded' hours that he was leaving a poison pill for Labour, as increasing funding would have tricky economics and reducing funded hours would be a nightmare for prospective voters.

As you say, it's a rare setting that can break even on the funding, so I am sure there would be a lot more closures before there was any policy change, which would leave working parents up the creek, in a way that might be avoidable if they pay the 'consumables'.

I agree with you philosophically, but pragmatically, we are all a bit f**ked if nurseries close wholesale.

Lol you are lucky. We pay 950 for 3 days a week.

Look to see if any of your local primary schools have a nursery attached. I have no doubt this will be a cheaper option for you.
X

Yes, probably, because it will only cover 6 hours a day and term time only, rather than the 10 hours a day year round the OP actually needs.

I think you should ask a few other nurseries and compare

Reading these posts makes me realise how lucky I was to be a SAHM.
Mine went to a church hall preschool in the mornings from age 3 and I don't remember it costing anything.
They are in their 20's now.
I don't envy you young parents now who need these all day nursery places (for lots of reasons).
X

I don’t think it’s a “young parents” thing! I’m nearly 60, my babies were born early 1990s so over 30 years ago. I returned to work, as did many of my mum friends. Nursery places have always been expensive - a proper nursery which provides care for the hours you need to work is a totally different thing from the church hall type provisions which might run for just a couple of hours in the morning as a freebie or very cheap. I’m not criticising those type of provisions because my eldest went to that too while I was on mat leave with ds2. It was fine but would have been no good for childcare while I was working as it only ran from 9:30-11:30. Nurseries have always been expensive - as I said upthread, our childcare bill was the same as one whole salary for a few years, especially as this was before any childcare subsidies which parents get now.

No regrets though as it enabled me to stay in the workplace while being a mum.

I hear you. That choice worked for you.

I consider myself very lucky that at the time my DH salary was enough and I chose not to stay on the career ladder. My choice.

X

He’s eligible for the funded hours now and I thought it would make a decent difference to what we pay

I know its not completely free and I wasn’t expecting to pay nothing but I thought we’d be saving more than we are.

I thought some of this would be included in the funded hours

I did read the paperwork when he started but if im honest I didn’t properly understand all the funding stuff. It said there would be additional charges and I signed it, so I know I can’t really say I wasn’t told anything. I just didn’t realise it would still be this much once the funding kicked in. I think I assumed the funded hours would come off the bill and then we’d pay for whatever hours were left, but it seems to work differently.

There was a lot of assuming and not much checking for well over 6 months there. Maybe if you’re signing something in future you should make sure you do understand it.

Yes, we could have lived on one salary too (which would have been obvious from my comment that one entire salary went on nursery, which wouldn’t have been needed if one of us had stayed home.) I was responding to the implication that it’s young parents now who have this issue of high nursery costs, but it’s ever been thus for actual nursery which enables parents to work (as opposed to the church hall type groups which don’t offer the flexibility of times.) As I said, I’m nearly 60, loads of us working mums were around when I had my babies. Nothing new!

Yes I remember that. My eldest was born in 1991 and nursery was big % of my income. And I didn't have a second income coming in, just £35 a week from DDs dad in the army