I Wonder Why This Number Is Rising So...
ChatterBank0 min ago
paying back a deposit
my daughter is a childminder and recently started minding a small baby. she always asks for a deposit which is used to cover 1 months payments if the child leaves as the parent has to give 1 months notice to take the child out. the parent of the baby decided to take her child out after less than 4 weeks as her working hours had changed but she did not put it in writing to my daughter so therefore it rendered the deposit non refundable as she did not give written notice. she even signed to say she understood the rules on giving notice and the deposit. she is now threatening to take my daughter to the small claims court for the money. my daughter has all the correct paperwork and signatures but is understandably very upset by this as she does not have the money as she has had to use it to pay her bills. any advice please?
Answers
Although she didn't give notice in writing did she give the required notice orally?
09:24 Thu 03rd Nov 2011
Let her threaten
Your daughter will have the full force of the NCMA behind should this go further (it won't believe me) and she also has things like this covered with her insurance. The mother broke her contract and they are legally binding and will hold up in a court of any kind
Tell her not to worry - they are empty threats that have no basis anyway
Your daughter will have the full force of the NCMA behind should this go further (it won't believe me) and she also has things like this covered with her insurance. The mother broke her contract and they are legally binding and will hold up in a court of any kind
Tell her not to worry - they are empty threats that have no basis anyway
thank you for your replies.my daughter did take it up with the insurance company but they were not very helpful.she has done everything by the book as she is running a business and it would not be in her interests to try and diddle someone out of money. the parent did tell her verbally and my daughter was prepared to re-arrange the hours she would have the child but the parent was not interested. the parent has already had the money from the government to pay for the childcare but the grandmother is looking after the child now so surely she is not entitled to the childcare costs??.also the contract drawn up by the childminding organisation clearly states that notice must be given in writting giving 4 weeks notice.
Write back, regretfully confirming that the deposit is not refundable.
Make sure you mention that the opportunity was offered to re-arrange the childcare but that 'you decided to decline my offer'.
Do not mention the business about the partent having had the chilcare voucher money - it may be true but it not relevant to the breach of contract that has happened.
Then see if the silly bs try to go to small claims court or not.
Make sure you mention that the opportunity was offered to re-arrange the childcare but that 'you decided to decline my offer'.
Do not mention the business about the partent having had the chilcare voucher money - it may be true but it not relevant to the breach of contract that has happened.
Then see if the silly bs try to go to small claims court or not.
I am the childminder in question and thought I should clear a few things up.
The parent gave me written notice. She thought she gave the notice within the first four weeks, which would mean that it can take immediate effect. She did not, which means that 4 weeks notice must be given. The 4 weeks notice is paid for with the deposit. She is now asking for her deposit back. As far as I am concerned she is not entitled to it- it has been used to pay for the 4 week notice period. The contract states 'deposit held until termination of contracts' (so I can understand how she has misunderstood and thinks she gets it back, but that misunderstanding is surely her problem, not mine,-she should have read all her paperwork correctly, not just that one sentence?). 'Deposit held until termination of contracts' does not mean that it is returned to the parent. It pays for the 4 week notice period. This is clearly stated in my deposits policy- and she has signed to say that she read, understood and agrees to all my policies.
The legal team from my insurance company have not been able to give a definite answer because of the confusion with dates- I count the 'start date' as the first time the child ever attends. I do this to ensure I am covered by my insurance at this time. The parent has counted it as the child's first full day (which was a week later, and this is why she thinks she was able to give notice with immediate effect) So my insurance company have just said that they can see it both ways which is not very helpful!
The parent gave me written notice. She thought she gave the notice within the first four weeks, which would mean that it can take immediate effect. She did not, which means that 4 weeks notice must be given. The 4 weeks notice is paid for with the deposit. She is now asking for her deposit back. As far as I am concerned she is not entitled to it- it has been used to pay for the 4 week notice period. The contract states 'deposit held until termination of contracts' (so I can understand how she has misunderstood and thinks she gets it back, but that misunderstanding is surely her problem, not mine,-she should have read all her paperwork correctly, not just that one sentence?). 'Deposit held until termination of contracts' does not mean that it is returned to the parent. It pays for the 4 week notice period. This is clearly stated in my deposits policy- and she has signed to say that she read, understood and agrees to all my policies.
The legal team from my insurance company have not been able to give a definite answer because of the confusion with dates- I count the 'start date' as the first time the child ever attends. I do this to ensure I am covered by my insurance at this time. The parent has counted it as the child's first full day (which was a week later, and this is why she thinks she was able to give notice with immediate effect) So my insurance company have just said that they can see it both ways which is not very helpful!
I should also say that I will be informing the relevant people that she is no longer paying a registered childcare provider. I signed her childcare bursary forms to confirm the amount that she would be paying me each week. Not long after her bursary was paid to her, she gave notice and her mother started caring for the child. It might be a coincidence of course but it is not unheard of for people to do exactly as this parent has done, and use the bursary to pay unregistered childcare such as a family member....or even to just keep the money for themselves. If she is still receiving money for childcare costs, it is fraud- and that's something I do not wish my name to be associated with.
Looks that way Evian...
'she always asks for a deposit which is used to cover 1 months payments if the child leaves as the parent has to give 1 months notice to take the child out'
Deposit might be the wrong word. It makes sense because if a child is taken out that gives the child minder a month to advertise the place. Most nursery's do this as well.
'she always asks for a deposit which is used to cover 1 months payments if the child leaves as the parent has to give 1 months notice to take the child out'
Deposit might be the wrong word. It makes sense because if a child is taken out that gives the child minder a month to advertise the place. Most nursery's do this as well.
I think you have every right to keep the deposit. As someone who has used childminders before, I have never got my "deposit" back, and just accepted that this was to cover the childminders loss, if I took my child out early without notice.
With regards to your insurance company, talk about useless! As long as the mother never signed a second contract, after the child started full time, then you would start from the very first day the child attended... whether part time or full time, it makes no difference.
With regards to your insurance company, talk about useless! As long as the mother never signed a second contract, after the child started full time, then you would start from the very first day the child attended... whether part time or full time, it makes no difference.
There was only ever one contract signed. The first 2 times the child attended it was just for a few hours, as settling in sessions. The parent is counting the start date as the first time the child attended all day. But I use the first ever attendance, no matter how long it is for, because I was under the impression that I had to do this to ensure I am ensured for this time. My insurance company have since confirmed that I would have been insured anyway....but either way, the 'start date' written on the contract is what it is. She can't change this.
