Nursery given us 24h notice to withdraw son

stugib

Hi,

This is more of a contract question than consumer rights, but thought this would be the most appropriate board.

Our son is nearly 4 so starting school in September, and attends a private nursery. He has learning difficulties causing some behavioural issues (throwing, hitting, lack of concentration, usual types of behaviour you'd expect of a 30-36 month old, which is roughly where he's at in his development).

His nursery have been very good supporting his additional needs and managing his behaviour, but applied to the council for extra funding to get 1:1 support as he was taking up more of the staff's time. This has just been refused and as a result of that they've today told us they won't accept him from next week unless we fund an extra member of staff ourselves. We've had no indication they'd take this route if the funding was refused, so leaves us in a very difficult position with work or finding extra money.

My questions are:

• Can they give us this little notice? There's no clause in the contract about them ending the contract. If we wanted to withdraw him we'd have to give 2 months notice.
• If he stays they want us to pay the full wages of another member of staff dedicated to him (£6ph or whatever) in addition to the normal fees. This doesn't seem right to me, as the normal fees will include paying for the staff. Would you agree, and if so what would you argue for?

Finding him a different nursery will be disruptive and set him back, so that option is our last resort.

System

I can't answer about the notice but the normal fees aren't set at a level that will support one member of staff exclusively for your child. They have identified that this is the level of cover required but the council will not fund it. What option do they have apart from ask you to remove him or you cover the cost of the additional staff member

I they can not get the money from somewhere to fund an extra teacher then it may also be the case that if one of the existing ones is dedicated to your child then they are in danger of breaching the teacher/child regulations. There business model is geared around the legal requirements not having spare money to employ extra

bris

The child will still take up a place which is why they still want the normal fees. They also see that he has special needs that requires one on one support, this is the extra that you would be paying for, without the extra support the place will go to a different child.

Child care is limited to how many kids can attend by strict numbers regarding staff to child ratio so they can keep the same numbers. Your son takes up a place that without the extra staff member to look after him would go to someone else.

unholyangel

Although the short notice they have given may be covered under unfair contract terms - in that a contract should be equally binding on both parties. Having an extensive notice period for you and a non-existent one for them upsets that balance imo.

However, there would be scenarios where short notice would be "reasonable" also imo. If your son was posing a danger to other kids (just for example) then it would be silly to expect notice in that situation.

Are you able to appeal the decision not to fund the extra worker?

Not sure what a new nursery may be able to offer. You'll likely find you'll still have to pay for a member of staff to be dedicated to your son (if the nursery paid, they'd be charging all parents for something which only one child needs/benefits from - not a good business model in any case).

arcon5

I holy agree with unholy above...

But would add in the event they could justify such short notice due to say he was causing a danger to other kids then I would expect a log of his behavior to cover this and possibly an action plan having been attempted before disengaging their services. In the absence of this and in light of them knowing of his additional needs before accepting the engagement then i'd their notice could leave them liable for damages since they hold you to two months notice whilst offering only 24hrs notice to you - thus, unfair.

Saying that, damages would likely be restricted to losses incurred. So if you had to find a new nursery which was more expensive, the losses could possibly be equivalent to the difference in price for say a 2 month period.

All depends if anything is covered in the contract though. And also how much hassle you want.

Hintza

Why are you thinking of sending him to school next year if he is not even 4 at this time?

LilElvis

Hintza wrote: »

Why are you thinking of sending him to school next year if he is not even 4 at this time?

Google "compulsory school age".

My daughter will be 4 in August and will start school 2 weeks later.

kelpie35

Do you receive DLA or some other benefit for his condition?

moaninggit

Your child is of "compulsory school age" on the 1st January, 1st April or 1st September following their 5th birthday.
just saying

Hintza

LilElvis wrote: »

My daughter will be 4 in August and will start school 2 weeks later.

So why are you sending your daughter a year early? As is the OP.

In Scotland the cut off for August entry is March which sounds more sensible and we only have one entry per annum.

stugib

Thanks for your replies.

Hintza wrote: »

In Scotland the cut off for August entry is March which sounds more sensible and we only have one entry per annum.

I'm not in Scotland. He's due to start in September.

unholyangel wrote: »

Are you able to appeal the decision not to fund the extra worker?

Yes, we're going to do that.

arcon5 wrote: »

But would add in the event they could justify such short notice due to say he was causing a danger to other kids then I would expect a log of his behavior to cover this and possibly an action plan having been attempted before disengaging their services. In the absence of this and in light of them knowing of his additional needs before accepting the engagement then i'd their notice could leave them liable for damages since they hold you to two months notice whilst offering only 24hrs notice to you - thus, unfair.

That was my train of thought, that the contract was unbalanced. They were aware of his potential issues when he joined, and they do have a log of his behaviour over the last 6 months, but this has been improving recently through the hard work us and them have been putting in. There's been no warning that his behaviour was so extreme he wouldn't be able to continue going there. It seems entirely down to not getting funding.

arcon5 wrote: »

All depends if anything is covered in the contract though. And also how much hassle you want.

There's nothing there about them terminating. The section on behaviour merely says that they'll discuss any issues with parents, which they have been doing. It's all been about the positive things to try, and starting the CAF process, which might also be disrupted if they wash their hands of him, which is why this has come as such a shock.

You're right though, we can't push it too much on the contract as even if they agree to 2 months notice, that would be even closer to school causing more disruption.