Nursery Failed OFSTED should I get a refund?

scompeti

Hi All

Has anyone had an experience of this?

Our child's nursery has just failed an Ofsted inspection (and failed on all counts - a dismal performance). Our child leaves at the end of August so not a problem in terms of future chldcare. My question is - do I have any right to at least a partial refund of fees on the basis they have failed to provide adequate care? If my child was staying there I would be able to extract some leverage by threatening to withdraw her if they did not at least make some sort of goodwill gesture but as she is leaving I have little to hold over them.

Any advice welcome?

Many thanks
Simon

dmg24

Have they failed to provide adequate care? If so, in what way (specific to your daughter)? Did you raise these issues when they occurred?

Will you be keeping your daughter there until the end of August? Surely not, if you think that their care is substandard?

myrnahaz

Have they actually failed in their care of your child or does the report relate to services provided/facilities etc?
If it's as bad as you suggest then I can't believe you've left her there - I would have removed my child immediately if the nursery's care was inadequate - I'd certainly not consider leaving her there at a discounted rate.

scompeti

In terms of taking her out that would be a bit like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. The inspection happened in June and was only made public yesterday, in the last 6 weeks they have changed the senior management, redocrated entirely and out in place new procedures around sending children home when ill which were the key faults.

In terms of my daughters care we had seen nothing that raised alarm bells to the extent of the report and have not had cause to raise a complaint about any specific incident which I guess weakens our case.

Pennywise

I don't think you have a case at all.

You were quite happy with the services as and when they were provided. Redecoration is irrelevant. Procedures for ill children are irrelevant unless your own child suffered due to their poor procedures in which case you could sue for whatever damages you suffered. Poor management again isn't a problem unless you were actually damaged by it. At the end of the day what really matters is whether your child was happy, whether she received adequate care and whether she progressed as expected whilst she was there.

What really matters is how she was looked after. If it's anything like my experience of modern-day regulations, many of the failings are down to the old chestnut of poor paperwork rather than poor service provision. It's easy for regulators to pick up on unsigned papers or the absence of a document that any trained monkey could print off the internet and no-one bothers to read. It's a lot harder for them to properly watch what really goes on where it matters, i.e. at the sharp end in terms of direct contact with customers (children) and staff. Despite failing, it is quite possible that the staff did a damn good job and the children were properly looked after and cared for, just that the back-office paperwork and procedures weren't done - perhaps the staff concentrated more on looking after the kids than on ticking boxes? How is that bad?

At the end of the day, what really matters is the care given to your child.

robpw2

if the nursery had failed ofsted it would not be allowed to continue care untill the things had been sorted if it is as bad as your suggesting.

if however there were some issues that needed looking at then they may be given a timescale in which to improve

jennihen

"then tits or gtfo." ???

Please brighten up my verydull day here in the office by enlightening me. . .

robpw2

ok the second one is get the funky out ... as for the other one is it take it to solicitor ?
or that is tough spit ?

scompeti

Pennywise wrote: »

I don't think you have a case at all.

You were quite happy with the services as and when they were provided. Redecoration is irrelevant. Procedures for ill children are irrelevant unless your own child suffered due to their poor procedures in which case you could sue for whatever damages you suffered. Poor management again isn't a problem unless you were actually damaged by it. At the end of the day what really matters is whether your child was happy, whether she received adequate care and whether she progressed as expected whilst she was there.

What really matters is how she was looked after. If it's anything like my experience of modern-day regulations, many of the failings are down to the old chestnut of poor paperwork rather than poor service provision. It's easy for regulators to pick up on unsigned papers or the absence of a document that any trained monkey could print off the internet and no-one bothers to read. It's a lot harder for them to properly watch what really goes on where it matters, i.e. at the sharp end in terms of direct contact with customers (children) and staff. Despite failing, it is quite possible that the staff did a damn good job and the children were properly looked after and cared for, just that the back-office paperwork and procedures weren't done - perhaps the staff concentrated more on looking after the kids than on ticking boxes? How is that bad?

At the end of the day, what really matters is the care given to your child.

Thanks Pennywise. You are spot on with your comments and I certainly have every sympathy for the poor staff at ground level. I think on balance the fact that we as individual customers did not have a complaint scuppers any chance of a fees refund despite the failure (in OFSTEDs eyes) to provide adequate care.

dmg24

robpw2 wrote: »

ok the second one is get the funky out ... as for the other one is it take it to solicitor ?
or that is tough spit ?

I don't think funky is the word Atermis was thinking of! Tits could be as you've suggested, or may just be tits!

OP, you have no case. You agreed a price for a service and you received that service.

jennihen

Thanx rob - now I can concentrate on work!!!