School transported children in a pupil's grandmother's car without my permission

[muppetsmum]

My 8 year old daughter had an away match today which I was planning on going to watch, and I got a phone message from school asking me if I was going, and if so would I mind taking my daughter and one or two others as they were short of seats on the minibus. I couldn't go in the end and left a message in reply to this effect. When my daughter came home, she told me that they had indeed been short of room on the bus and had asked some girls to go with parents/family who were going to the match. She volunteered, and, with two others, had made the 45 minute journey driven by one of the girls' grandmothers!!! We know the family, I happen to have met the lady in question and have no personal problem with them, but surely the school isn't allowed to just send kids off with 'unknown' family members, whose personal/medical history/driving ability/car safety are presumably not known to them? I'm normally very laid back about stuff, but surely somebody should have rung me to check I was OK with this? Not knowing anything about this granny's health, I would certainly not have been happy to have a 70+ year old driving 3 giggly, excited girls a significant distance. Am I going mad or is this totally unacceptable?

this is one LEAs guidance
Legal issues
Transport - If schools have taken responsibility for organising the transport for an educational visit, they are expected to check the insurance documents of anyone providing this transport in a private car

The crux is - if parents (or Grandparent) arrange to give each other's dc a lift, then that is a normal arrangement between parents helping each other out, and comes under normal SDP insurance and no DBS's needed.

If school make arrangements and allocate cars for dc, then the onus is on the school to check the arrangements they are making are safe, so, in theory check the drivers license, the MOT the insurance, the DBS, etc. It's why when most schools ask people to volunteer to help them they have to try to cover themselves by ensuring the parents talk to each other about lift-shares. Of course, then they get into issues about sharing phone numbers (data protection) and duty of care (making sure no child is left behind). It really is a very tricky area when a (usually) full time class teacher is also arranging sporting fixtures, picking the team, sorting kit, sorting fixture, etc. if parents start being awkward about transport.

Thanks Toby yes I do agree that makes sense. My child was driven by someone's granny yesterday, I managed to restrain my panic :)

Smile why would they tell the ops child she couldn't come? Why would she be further down the list than he busload of other children whose parents presumably hadn't even been asked to drive them? Why should she be the unlucky one?

No one has actually answered that yet and I'm sure there's a perception that the op let the shool down at the last minute. I don't think that is the case.

It sounds like a grey area, the insurance that is. It sounds like the school is asking us to take out additional insurance/risk that they aren't willing to fund for teachers. We all volunteer our time and petrol money for the sake of all the children. I feel a bit ill used here.

It doesn't cost any more on my insurance- they just have to be informed.
I am however granny age and therefore a danger on the road and incapable of managing 'giggly excited' girls!

" I'm sure there's a perception that the op let the school down at the last minute. I don't think that is the case."

It was all last minute, because in the opening post it's all about events 'today' OP was known to be planning to attend, but 'in the end' couldn't and left a message to that effect. The transport arrangements were reworked, and another spectator took the DC who wouldn't fit in the minibus.

OP's inability to provide lifts appears to have been based on her diary. She did not seem to object to the idea of girls travelling by spectator's car in principle, nor did she question the school's apparent lack of policy on providing evidence of roadworthiness when she was the potential driver.

Not until her DD was driven by someone old

Pity that ageism is allowed to stand on MN.

OP hasn't come back but I doubt she would have given it a thought had a staff member driven her DD -it was purely because this was a grandmother and by that very fact isn't fit to drive and can't possibly manage 3 little girls!!!

I guess to be fair it depends on your perception/ experience though. I hear 'granny' and think of mil/ dm who are mid 60s so no older potentially than a teacher approaching retirement. No one would describe them as old, they are both experienced, (obviously ) capable drivers who can handle 3 8 year olds..... I guess though if your dc's granny is 85 and frail you have a different picture in your head.

Not how read it mehit. I understood the op was planning to attend but there was no expectation she'd take her dd. They rang that day to ask if she could take her and others and left a message. Op called back to say no she couldn't.

haven't rtft but if my DC were given a lift by another parent /gp at the school, I would be phoning said parent and saying thanks very much and let me know if they need a favour back. Grips all round to the 'children should NEVER get in others' cars' brigade.

The school was at fault for not making the necessary arrangements to ensure that there was adequate transport for all the children who were going to the match. That's basic.

However, given that they found themselves in that situation, there was clearly a time constraint. You couldn't go 'in the end' but had you previously said that you would take your daughter and others? If so, when you couldn't go, I expect they were somewhat at a loss. How would you have felt if your daughter and others had been unable to go to the match?

Transporting children on behalf of the school requires an addition to the insurance policy, so I would be worried if the lady concerned didn't have that. It would invalidate her insurance in the event of an incident. But- I expect she thought she was helping out and the school were grateful to have a solution to the problem.

I've taken children in my car, but only with the correct insurance and with the permission of their parents.

It's the school at fault for not making the correct provision. I don't think you can make assumptions about her state of health or road worthiness of the vehicle. That could apply to anyone, whatever their age and you can't know all the circumstances.

It's the school you need to challenge, or at least find out exactly how it came about.

I always think I'm really OTT about 'safeguarding' re DC, but I wouldn't bat an eyelid at this.
Re insurance, a teacher would presumably need business insurance, a fellow parent wouldn't. Adding business to your insurance is pretty big standard though.

Thanking the other parent for the favour is neither here nor there from the "fault" point of view. The school policy was not followed. If the parent who was assigned your child had had an accident, there would be zero casual thanks and chats of what a nice favour. The school took a risk and, unless the OP has signed to say she accepts her child might be given a lift and the person chosen as chauffeur has had their checks etc, then it's neither here nor there. The transport has to be in place and that's that. If there wasn't enough transport and there were no policies in place to cover it, then yes, the game would have to be cancelled. As a parent, you are allowed to make different risks for your child than a school can. As a parent you can think the neighbour next door is just lovely and can give your kids a lift everywhere, as a school we have to have checks in place. The school is acting in loco parentis, but this does not mean that they need to meet the standards of any parent, it used to mean the standard of a "good, careful" parent. I would say nowadays it means the standard of a "paranoid, keen-not-to-be-sued" parent".

No foxy that's not the way I understand it. Op never said she could take her dd or anyone else. She asked and said no at first opportunity

" I got a phone message from school asking me if I was going, and if so would I mind taking my daughter and one or two others as they were short of seats on the minibus. I couldn't go in the end and left a message in reply to this effect."

I don't think the op had ever said she could. She did not let them down. There was no need for her more than any other parent to make alternate arrangements for her child.

I made it very clear that I felt the school was at fault in not ensuring the proper transport arrangements were in place. It would appear that, either, they did not tak account of the numbers going in the first place, or that there was a last minute mess up resulting in the need for alternative arrangements at short notice. I have not suggested that the OP let anyone down. It does need a conversation with the school though.

Grandmother age is more likely to have correct insurance- we are the ones that volunteer and need it. I have it and would have told the school that- had they been short of volunteers. I would then expect a simple thank you rather than !!! that I should be asked.

I would raise the issue with the school. It was lovely of the GP to help out but this can not happen again with ANY parent/gp/friend etc. I would not look backwards at what happened, as what's done is done and your DD was fine. I would be looking to ensure they change the system for next time.

Also, I would never expect a child of that age to question the school's directions to her to travel in someone's car: yes I would teach my children not to get in cars with strangers etc etc, but we also teach them that when they are at school they are in the staff's care and follow their instructions. Your DD did absolutely nothing wrong, the issue is the school's procedure. Hope you get a good response if you talk to the school :-)

Hardly surprising that state primary schools play hardly any after school matches! Most primary schools do not have access to a mini bus and use volunteer transport and organise the teams into lifts.
I can't see what us wrong with the school's procedure other than they could have been organised the day before to tell children whose car they were going to travel in. Would OP seriously object because a grandmother was giving a lift!!!

I can't see what us wrong with the school's procedure other than they could have been organised the day before to tell children whose car they were going to travel in.

But that's because you're normal and reasonable. Schools have to adjust all their policies to cover worst case scenarios, paranoid parents and an increasingly litigious society.

A boy at a primary near me fell off the climbing frame (aged 9, accident, messing around). He broke a wrist and his parents managed to sue the school for £10,000. Now there is no climbing frame. Risk gone of falling from it!

Now imagine the car situation. Child A gets a lift and there is an accident. Some parents immediately look for fault, who they can blame. As soon as they know it was set up by the school they trot off to the local papers; they slag off the school's procedures; they complain to ofsted. They never gave permission, they didn't realise the driver was over 65 or wore glasses or had a dodgy hip or that their car would get a flat tyre etc etc. Imagine (horrific I know) that the car was driven by a local bloke with insurance but who was also a known paedophile. He didn't have a CRB check, but he was a cousin of the nice secretary and she didn't know there was an issue thought he was fine. Etc etc. Whose fault is that? The school's, because they set it up.

Schools are not able to take risks like this with people's children and that is the bottom line.

Sadly the conclusion is don't play out of school matches. Most primary schools don't. The children are the losers.