How long is a contract valid for?

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I have just spoken to the PACEY helpline and they say that it is good practice to review/rewrite your contract annually.

However, if you do this and don't make any changes the contract is still valid until notice is given or another one supercedes it.

Therefore your NCMA contracts are still valid after a year and you do not need to rewrite them on PACEY ones just for the sake of it.

If you wish to clarify this yourself please call PACEY ON 0845 8000 443 and press 3

[Ripeberry]

Thanks for the info. Only just purchased some new NCMA contracts. Not binning them for the sake of a change of name!

[hectors house]

On the old NCMA ones I have it gives a space for a review date - I normally write this as 12 months and just review the contract with the parent, we both sign and date and carry on unless significant changes of hours, days, hourly rate (although sometimes I just amend these and get parents to initial and give them a photocopy). But as you say a contract is still legal and binding until one party (minder or parent) ends it. I do everything I can to avoid writing out a whole new one due to cost and time involved.

[The Juggler]

you don't need to rewrite them unless there are changes.

A review of them is good but the continue unless it is a fixed term contract with an end date OR someone gives notice:thumbsup:

[Simona]

I contacted Pacey legal dept on Monday
The present NCMA contracts are valid for 1 year from their rebranding date...as they rebranded in March 12 next year you need to have the Pacey ones in place

At one stage they used to advise we review them every 6 months...not sure about you but my parents do not wish that unless of course the agreement is changed in terms of days and hours...so for me yearly is very appropriate.

[bunyip]

I suspect there is a subtle difference between "valid" in the sense that the contract is legally enforceable, and "valid" in the sense that PACEY will provide legal support in a payments dispute.

I believe Magna Carta is still legally valid, even though it wasn't written on current HMSO stationery. :rolleyes:

[Simona]

Sorry bunyip....a bit unsure about your reply??
Maybe the term valid here applies because the company has rebranded and after a while their previous name is not 'valid' anymore on any paperwork?..rather than the contract not being enforceable
A case that comes to mind is a very famous insurance company that rebranded years ago but still called by the old name ?

I am no expert but that is how I understood it from the legal dept...I am not up to speed at present maybe as agencies and MGC seem to have taken over my brain!!!

[lisbet]

Thank for the info :)

[bunyip]

Sorry bunyip....a bit unsure about your reply??
Maybe the term valid here applies because the company has rebranded and after a while their previous name is not 'valid' anymore on any paperwork?..rather than the contract not being enforceable
A case that comes to mind is a very famous insurance company that rebranded years ago but still called by the old name ?

I am no expert but that is how I understood it from the legal dept...I am not up to speed at present maybe as agencies and MGC seem to have taken over my brain!!!

Hi Simona. I'm not legally trained, so I'm only surmising. If it's critical, check with a lawyer. :) But:.............

I would expect a contract to be legally valid (i.e. legally enforceable) so long as it is correctly drawn up, signed, and all the terms are accepted as 'reasonable'. I doubt if it would matter one jot to a private solicitor or court, if it ever came to that, whether the logo at the top belongs to NCMA, PACEY, WHSmiths, or The Mickey Mouse Club. The important thing is that the contract represents a legally-binding agreement between service provider and client.

I think the point PACEY are making is that there's a condition of a member's insurance/legal protection agreement that we use NCMA/PACEY contracts in order to access legal support over any future contract dispute (and I'm not sure whether this applies to all contractual disputes or only the recovery of unpaid fees.) I understand this is more to do with what goes into their contracts, rather than just the matter of the logo. That is, PACEY legal believe they'd find it difficult to enforce a CM's home-made contracts which might miss out some important Ts&Cs. That's very sensible, but has nothing at all to do with re-branding and fancy logos.

But that's not to say the contract would be invalid even if it wasn't on in-house stationery. A private solicitor might well be able to achieve what PACEY legal team would refuse to try. In fact, MM's approach to non-standard contract stationery proves this point.

Since contracts work both ways, it's actually quite dangerous of PACEY to say contracts on NCMA forms will become invalid. That suggests that, after a year, and if I don't renew my current contracts, I could walk away from my responsibilities to parents without giving any notice. If I tried that, I suspect I would be sued, and I think I'd almost certainly lose and rightly so.

I can see the sense in PACEY saying all contracts should be re-drawn and signed annually, but I don't believe any contract lapses into invalidity after a year, no matter whose logo it bears. For example, for several years I worked for a bookshop chain. It was re-branded once, and then bought out and renamed by another company. But my contract of employment remained the same from the day I joined to the day I left.

Actually, it would be interesting to see if PACEY's insistence on new contracts is, in itself, strictly 'legal'. As a service-provider they can't simply leave behind any of their responsibilities to service-users (i.e. members) just by re-branding, cos PACEY carry all the liabilities, duties and responsibilities over from NCMA. And the new PACEY contracts are not substantially different from the NCMA stationery anyway.

[Kiddleywinks]

Changing to a different insurer doesn't make the contracts invalid so totally agree with Bunyip here, just because a company has rebranded shouldn't mean that current contracts are invalid.

[bunyip]

Changing to a different insurer doesn't make the contracts invalid so totally agree with Bunyip here, just because a company has rebranded shouldn't mean that current contracts are invalid.

Which is a shame if you happen to be running Cyprus at the moment - cos the answer would then be just to rename all the banks. :rolleyes:

[The Juggler]

Changing to a different insurer doesn't make the contracts invalid so totally agree with Bunyip here, just because a company has rebranded shouldn't mean that current contracts are invalid.

i agree - totally a money making condition - they want you to purchase new contracts from them :rolleyes:

[bunyip]

The other worrying thing is the subtle but crucial contradictions in PACEY's answers to enquiries.

Post #1: "I have just spoken to the PACEY helpline and they say that it is good practice to review/rewrite your contract annually."

Post #5: "The present NCMA contracts are valid for 1 year from their rebranding date...as they rebranded in March 12 next year you need to have the Pacey ones in place"

There is a world of difference between "good practice" and "need to".

This whole re-branding thing seems to have brought on a nasty case of "rectal - olecranon ambiguation." :rolleyes:

[christine e]

Please take a look here

Members' Area (http://www.**************/Mypacey/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fmypacey%2fname_and_brand%2 fproducts_qas.aspx%3fpage%3d2383&page=2383)

you will need to log in as a member to access the Q & A but have copied and pasted the question and answer re contracts

Q: Will my contracts be valid?

A: Yes, your contracts will be valid. However, we would recommend that you update your contracts annually to ensure that the information contained within is accurate and up-to-date.

[Simona]

Good points ...all of them
The woman in the legal dept I spoke to on Monday seemed to say the 'brand name matters'...she actually said 'by December we should have the new Pacey ones in place' but added the NCMA logo ones will be valid for a year since rebranding...she was actually extremely nice

I do understand about the validity and the rest of it...it was just a question of clarifying if after March 2013 any contracts with 'NCMA not Pacey' would still be valid...I will mention it at the Regional Forum in April
Frankly this is the worst time for NCMA to rebrand, I think we've got enough on our plate and by the looks of it 4 associations to choose from !

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I have rung again and had have the following information:

Pacey helpline : it is good practice to update your contracts each year, not just with parents but your stocks too. The reasons for this are that all PACEY stationary is reviewed 6 monthly and changed to reflect any changes - legislation etc.. this does not mean that you need to change your contracts with parents 6 monthly or annually.

ALL contracts are valid, regardless of whether they are NCMA/PACEY until notice is given by either party to cease trading with each other. The word valid is bantered about and I feel taken out of context depending on who is speaking to who.

Legal department : just spoke to Sharon and she states categorically that the contracts, regardless of NCMA/PAcey are legal and enforceable/valid until notice is given. She also states that on page 4 under the review date it states this in the contract in black and white.

ALL NCMA contracts are valid regardless of whether they are reviewed or not.

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I contacted Pacey legal dept on Monday
The present NCMA contracts are valid for 1 year from their rebranding date...as they rebranded in March 12 next year you need to have the Pacey ones in place

At one stage they used to advise we review them every 6 months...not sure about you but my parents do not wish that unless of course the agreement is changed in terms of days and hours...so for me yearly is very appropriate.


this validity is because they are reviewed after that date, not because they are not legal.

[Simona]

I really think we are getting our wires crossed here and getting very confused between what the helpline say and what the people in the legal dept are advising
The helpline did not have a clue and passed me to the legal dept...who is right? I posted exactly what I was told

Maybe Pacey should issue an official announcement to inform cms and clear any misunderstanding as we are not clearly agreeing here and looks like we have all spoken to different people?
as the Regional forums are the place and time when the rebranding is official my questions will be directed at them..at present I really do not care whether the contract says NCMA or Pacey

As to the frequency or reviews..that surely is between the cms and parents and up to our professional judgement?...why review if nothing has changed in terms of hours and fees unless of course regulation/legislation dictates it?
How many contracts in other professions are reviewed every 6 months?
This all adds to paperwork...paperwork and more paperwork which may not be really necessary...my view entirely of course!!!

[bunyip]

Please take a look here

Members' Area (http://www.**************/Mypacey/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2fmypacey%2fname_and_brand%2 fproducts_qas.aspx%3fpage%3d2383&page=2383)

you will need to log in as a member to access the Q & A but have copied and pasted the question and answer re contracts

Q: Will my contracts be valid?

A: Yes, your contracts will be valid. However, we would recommend that you update your contracts annually to ensure that the information contained within is accurate and up-to-date.

Thanks Christine. I think that's pretty clear now. The Q&A's are, on the whole, very helpful now we've found them.

I did have to laugh about PACEY allowing us to continue wearing NCMA badges. I'm so glad I don't have to freeze to death in the snow without my NCMA gilet. I'm equally pleased not to have to unpick the NCMA logo and re-embroider it with the new PACEY one that looks like it was crayoned by a child with no concept of the use of capital letters (how very "professional", eh? :( )

Don't you think it would help if the different departments improved their internal communication? I'm not expecting everyone to be an expert on everything, but it seems clear that the 'helpline' is giving out a different message to what to the legal team are saying, resulting in potentially dangerous confusions.

Simona - I agree with you 100% about the bad timing of the re-brand. I'd go further and say it's a totally misguided and costly exercise in vanity. Perhaps they should've limited it to just re-branding the 'helpline' - perhaps by removing the word "help" from the title? :p

[Simona]

Thank you bunyip...I feel many, or in fact the overwhelmimg majority, did not want the widening of the membeship and subsequesnt rebranding but...who are we 'the members' to voice our opposition to them?

Internal communications...you are spot on!
Pacey helpline...it takes 5 mins to spell out Pacey, then you are asked for m'ship number and email when in fact one wants to speak to the legal dept who then says they can only give limited advice because it is the management that is responsible for all the changes in the contract including the wording

Ofsted are the same no one gives the same answer when you ring them hence the continuing confusion about so many aspects of practice

DfE are tight lipped and infuriating

LAs are hiding in their bunkers while the threat of their decimation approaches fast

Local childminding associations...not sure why we pay them to say nothing?

I don't think I have ever wanted to be more indepedent than at this present moment while the associations fight for our costly custom!!

We have 2 threads on this and I have replied to your Pacey post about contracts...

[Smiley]

Of all the childminders I have spoken to nobody wanted the widening of membership, the debate at the forum I attended was not a debate, it was a done deal, the potential new names were fed to us, we were all negative and told it would be mentioned but we knew what the outcome would be. Bad timing for the rebranding, I haven't used NCMA contracts or paperwork for years. In my opinion we didn't need the word 'professional' in the new name it doesn't make me feel anymore professional just because its in a title

[Simona]

Like you Smiley I do not use their paperwork but have started using the contracts recently in addition to my more comprehensive Terms and Conditions and other information provided to parents
I suppose we feel more 'legally' protected by using theirs but not sure it works that way...so it is an added cost
Glad to hear you share the notion that the debate was really leading to a 'done deal'...we all felt like that at my meeting
Professional refers to the associations not to us as 'professional members'...I too would have liked this as referring to us not them...too late now but at least now we have a choice of who will represent us the best???

[rickysmiths]

I contacted Pacey legal dept on Monday
The present NCMA contracts are valid for 1 year from their rebranding date...as they rebranded in March 12 next year you need to have the Pacey ones in place

At one stage they used to advise we review them every 6 months...not sure about you but my parents do not wish that unless of course the agreement is changed in terms of days and hours...so for me yearly is very appropriate.

I don't think this is what Chatterbox has said.

I don't see how the NCMA ones can suddenly expire in 11th March 2014!! They are still valid contracts and they ADVISE you to review them every 12 months but it is not compulsory.

To be honest anyone who still has a 3 page NCMA Contract in use with a parent still has a valid contract.

[Simona]

That is what I was informed and have shared with you...maybe someone wants to check again
If different info is given it will only cause confusion but I hope the legal dept gave the right information?

I have just posted the question of validity of contracts with the 'NCMA' logo on PACEY Local and hopefully we will get a clear answer...

[angeldelight]

No input from me

Just going to say I'm sooooo glad I changed to MM years ago :laughing:

Sounds like your all having a great time with this

Why don't you all change to MM if your going to change your paperwork etc anyway? :clapping: ...problem solved ha ha

Angel xx

[bunyip]

No input from me

Just going to say I'm sooooo glad I changed to MM years ago :laughing:

Sounds like your all having a great time with this

Why don't you all change to MM if your going to change your paperwork etc anyway? :clapping: ...problem solved ha ha

Angel xx


Since you asked.............NCMA/PACEY may be pushing me a little close these days, but:-

1. I don't walk out on an organisation cos they're having a few problems.

2. I refuse to support a company that is actively providing a mouthpiece for the Truss-ite acolytes who wish to promote profit-hungry agencies at the expense of personalized independent childminding as we know it. :(

[Simona]

Angeldelight...we are talking about contracts not 'paperwork'...neither are a necessity to purchase from any association if you can devise your own and put your copyright on them
You can do your own contract and customise your paperwork (anything relating to your business and finance) or documentation (all that relates to children's progress as in the Reggio Emilia model) ..two different things altogether
I think a lot of cms choose a contract from PACEY because they feel legally protected in case of problems?

At this stage I am utterly confused between Home Childcarer, @Home Childcare, UKCMA and Morton Michel...is there a connection between all these???
Hurray for being independent of all of them!!

[sarah707]

2. I refuse to support a company that is actively providing a mouthpiece for the Truss-ite acolytes who wish to promote profit-hungry agencies at the expense of personalized independent childminding as we know it. :(

Where?? :huh:

I have written an article in the latest Home Childcare magazine and i have been asked to write a second one... My articles, as I am sure you can imagine, are not exactly pro agencies!

My understanding is that the magazine is a mouthpiece for anyone who wants to write in it ... so you could submit a piece if you wanted just like anyone else :D

[rickysmiths]

Angeldelight...we are talking about contracts not 'paperwork'...neither are a necessity to purchase from any association if you can devise your own and put your copyright on them
You can do your own contract and customise your paperwork (anything relating to your business and finance) or documentation (all that relates to children's progress as in the Reggio Emilia model) ..two different things altogether
I think a lot of cms choose a contract from PACEY because they feel legally protected in case of problems?

At this stage I am utterly confused between Home Childcarer, @Home Childcare, UKCMA and Morton Michel...is there a connection between all these???
Hurray for being independent of all of them!!

I believe Home Childcarer is produced by MM and MM provide insurance for UKCMA members if they want it but if you add UKCMA membership and MM insurance together it is a lot more expensive than Pacey membership and insurance.

As I understand it Childcare.co.uk are also providing Insurance for Childminder via Blu Fin who used to be linked with NCMA but are no longer linked now they are Pacey thank goodness I always thought that it was an unhealthy relationship.

[bunyip]

Where?? :huh:

I have written an article in the latest Home Childcare magazine and i have been asked to write a second one... My articles, as I am sure you can imagine, are not exactly pro agencies!

My understanding is that the magazine is a mouthpiece for anyone who wants to write in it ... so you could submit a piece if you wanted just like anyone else :D

Sarah, I wouldn't dream of suggesting that your articles were in any way pro-agency.

OTOH, I have it on good authority that MM were "very happy" to publish Yvette's (@homechildcare) pro-agency propaganda in Home Childcare magazine last year. The training wing of @homechildcare are openly pushing MM's "highly supportive" attitude toward agencies. One of their 'learners' (a volunteer at my local Children's Centre who is applying for CM registration) was asked why she would possibly want to join NCMA (as it was at the time) when @homechildcare and MM were "working very closely together" and would soon be able to offer her a support/insurance package with which to work within an agency framework.

I appreciate that one of the editorial strengths of Home Childcare magazine is that it will publish pretty much anything that is childcare related, without needing to follow a policy line such as PACEY's the childcare professional (and as an added bonus, their publishers know when to use a 'shift' key. :rolleyes:) But MM's editorial line seems to be based on an entirely commercial imperative that doesn't reflect the aim of independent CMs to protect quality childcare in the face of Ms. Truss's attempts to undermine our work.

"The first condition of the freedom of the press is that it is not a commercial enterprise."

[Simona]

Well well...one learns new things everyday...thanks for all the explanations as I have been with PACEY since I started cminding and stuck with their PLI/motor/household insurance but I can see there is going to be more choice soon

Has anyone heard of TRIO?...apparently they are another association representing cms but I have not seen anything about them...are they worth adding to the 4 now representing cms?

[bunyip]

I'm thinking of starting a new organisation to help CMs get the lo's to finish their meals. It's called Practically All Children Eat Yoghurt.

Do you think it will take off, or is the acronym a non-starter? :rolleyes:

[manjay]

I'm thinking of starting a new organisation to help CMs get the lo's to finish their meals. It's called Practically All Children Eat Yoghurt.

Do you think it will take off, or is the acronym a non-starter? :rolleyes:

I rather like that acronym Bunyip!! :p:p but then you know I am biased:laughing:

[Simona]

You are awful...bit I like it!!!

For those against agencies and no wish to join I thought we could have
No Child Minder Available ........thus resurrecting NCMA
and to protest at the DfE/Gove/Truss/Wilshaw/Gregory quintet: Please Leave us Alone (in case PLA rebrand and vacate their acronym we could snatch it!!)

Great to have a bit of a laugh today considering the poor teachers at the TUC conference are calling for 'civil disobedience' and strikes against Gove and calling for him to respect them and attacking Wilshaw by calling for a boycott of the inspectorate ...wonder what would happen if teachers and early years decided on a day of action?

If Gove must go Wilshaw should definetely follow...they are two peas in a pod...Truss and Gregory are like the characters in Cinderella...yes you know who I mean???

[bunyip]

You are awful...bit I like it!!!

For those against agencies and no wish to join I thought we could have
No Child Minder Available ........thus resurrecting NCMA
and to protest at the DfE/Gove/Truss/Wilshaw/Gregory quintet: Please Leave us Alone (in case PLA rebrand and vacate their acronym we could snatch it!!)

Great to have a bit of a laugh today considering the poor teachers at the TUC conference are calling for 'civil disobedience' and strikes against Gove and calling for him to respect them and attacking Wilshaw by calling for a boycott of the inspectorate ...wonder what would happen if teachers and early years decided on a day of action?

If Gove must go Wilshaw should definetely follow...they are two peas in a pod...Truss and Gregory are like the characters in Cinderella...yes you know who I mean???

Nothing wrong with a good riot. :happy banana:

[Simona]

I contacted PACEY again this morning...not the helpline, not the legal dept but the dept that offers support to cms.
I asked about the contract and its validity depending on which logo is on the one we use now and in a year's time...that dept will contact the legal dept and put out some information to clarify all this so it is in black and white

I also posted the question on PACEY Local and suggetsed clarification should be posted on there for all to see and refer to...

With regards to renewing a contract every 6 months or every year I was informed it is 'good practice' to do so but not necessary if nothing has changed such as fees, days of attendace or hours...I am fairly happy with that
What would be good is if a contract had a special 'review' section which we could sign again and consider that a review when no other details need reviewing....if you know what I mean?

[manjay]

What would be good is if a contract had a special 'review' section which we could sign again and consider that a review when no other details need reviewing....if you know what I mean?

My PACEY contracts already have this on. I know mine are different as they are bilingual but I am guessing it is on the English version too. Mine have 2 spaces for review dates and signatures but that takes account of the Welsh part of the contract so it may be different on the English ones.

[angeldelight]

Since you asked.............NCMA/PACEY may be pushing me a little close these days, but:-

1. I don't walk out on an organisation cos they're having a few problems.

2. I refuse to support a company that is actively providing a mouthpiece for the Truss-ite acolytes who wish to promote profit-hungry agencies at the expense of personalized independent childminding as we know it. :(

Oooooh my comments were really light hearted and just to make you smile

I honestly could not care what insurance company people choose to have ,I haven't the time to have debates about them either ...

I think mm and pacey both have good and bad points

Everyone is so serious in this forum lately that even I'm starting to stay away

Angel xx

[ChocolateChip]

Well well...one learns new things everyday...thanks for all the explanations as I have been with PACEY since I started cminding and stuck with their PLI/motor/household insurance but I can see there is going to be more choice soon

Has anyone heard of TRIO?...apparently they are another association representing cms but I have not seen anything about them...are they worth adding to the 4 now representing cms?

Trio used to have the contract to provide EY support and training in our area, my DO was employed by them at the time but they lost it to someone else last year. Have no idea what their current/ future plans might be.

[angeldelight]

Trio used to have the contract to provide EY support and training in our area, my DO was employed by them at the time but they lost it to someone else last year. Have no idea what their current/ future plans might be.

Yes I agree with that my friend told me :laughing:

She knows someone who is involved with them ..I will see if she can find out their plans

Xxx

[Simona]

I feel PACEY and MM are rather different...one is a representing association the other a company that sells insurance
Yes you are right that both have good and bad points (can't compare myself because I have always been with NCMA)..as our choice is to be widened it is definetely worth debating as things will never be the same for cms in future

Maybe being serious reflects the mood we are in ...confused and a tiny bit frightened of the unknown??

Re: Contracts...Looks like you may have an updated version...I purchased mine recently and I feel PACEY should update some of the info.
This is what I posted on PACEY Local for those interested who cannot access it:

'Thank you for making the enquiry...I also contacted the support dept and discussed this matter further having spoken to the helpline and legal dept last week but received conflicting advice

I feel we need to have further clarification...I am not the only one debating this and getting a bit confused

Renewing contracts every year is 'good practice' but if hours, fees and attendance have not changed a review is unnecessary...the support dept confirmed this
Parents in the past have asked why a new contract when nothing has changed?

What would really help is if the contracts had a review page that both parties could sign confirming the contract carries on because nothing has changed
It seems a waste of time/money issuing a new contract when everything is copied as before

A review is not necessarily about hours/fees/attendance but possibly different requirements which are not stated in the contract...
so a review can take place without the need to issue a new contract...any changing requirements would be noted in a child's own folder?

If a contract with NCMA logo is used in Sept 2013 will that logo affect the validity in March 2014 a year after the rebranding?

My recently purchased contracts still have old information on it such as the old information line number which can be used by parents
The contract has no reference whatsover to Compliance under Ofsted and EYFS requirements which form part of the Terms and Conditions of registration and law and which we have to add in a separate piece of paperwork and constantly update

The information on a 'deposit' is rather unclear.
A deposit is paid to safeguard the childminder from late payments, which are now very much a worry to many.
A deposit is fully refundable when appropriate notice has been provided in writing, the notice period served and all outstanding fees paid...not clear at all but this advice received from my solicitor

Free legal representation is only available when parents owe more than £100...why? non payment is a serious breach of contract however small the sum may be
It should also be made clear at what point the cm can withdraw care when unpaid

We consistently update our practice but it looks like this contract has remained the same for years, in my view, it needs an update.

The NCMA contract complies with DfES Standard No 12...that is a very long time ago as we have had the DCSF and now the DfE

It is also stated that the contract is devised by NCMA to assist best practice. If we have any doubts about it we need to consult a solicitor.

Last but not least a contract should have an agreement by both parties to be respecful and professional ...
I fear that many parents often behave in a manner totally unacceptable and abusive so a Code of Practice would be welcome as cms have no one to witness such behaviour or able to stop it as we work on our own'' (End)

I doubt I will get a reply but worth waiting for one!

[angeldelight]

I think you are completely missing my point Simona

My remark was purely tongue in cheek .....light hearted ....cheeky comment .....the way I usually am when members complain to me that this is scary and soooo serious all the time ...... I tried to lighten the mood as I always do !!

I don't need you dictating to me about what each insurance company does ...I'm not stupid or thick and I really did not need you explaining it!

I've been with both insurance companies ....have you? So I have experience of both ...have you?

But what really matters to me is that the insurance company that I have .... delivers what I want and it does

Light hearted banter to lighten the mood never hurt anyone ....if you knew the members as I do then maybe you would understand that

I won't comment on this again

If you wish to discuss it then message me please

Angel xx

[Simona]

I won't Dm as there is nothing to debate

Apologies if you felt I was dictating to you...I was not and never meant to
There are new cms on this forum asking for advice about insurance in other posts so I explained the difference...I did start the reply by saying 'I feel' making clear it was my view

[Simona]

For those interested in receiving clarification on the serious matter of contract, validity and brand...the request has been posted on PACEY Local in the hope the m'ship dept will clarify where the NPF member has not been able to so far....until then we can only wait
Thanks for your all your contributions

[Chatterbox Childcare]

For those interested in receiving clarification on the serious matter of contract, validity and brand...the request has been posted on PACEY Local in the hope the m'ship dept will clarify where the NPF member has not been able to so far....until then we can only wait
Thanks for your all your contributions

Simona - I am NPF and I have clarified it - numerous times. you just won't have it

Contracts are valid until they are cancelled. FULL STOP - no questions - that is it. Can't make it any clearer can I?

Look on the last page under the review date and it is stated in the contract.

[Simona]

AARRGGHH...you just don't get it ...do you?
my question was not about that (both depts. did get it though) and has said I have sorted it now...please stop making new posts about contracts...my head is spinning now!

I am truly thinking of binning them now and just use my own!!

[rickysmiths]

I contacted PACEY again this morning...not the helpline, not the legal dept but the dept that offers support to cms.
I asked about the contract and its validity depending on which logo is on the one we use now and in a year's time...that dept will contact the legal dept and put out some information to clarify all this so it is in black and white

I also posted the question on PACEY Local and suggetsed clarification should be posted on there for all to see and refer to...

With regards to renewing a contract every 6 months or every year I was informed it is 'good practice' to do so but not necessary if nothing has changed such as fees, days of attendace or hours...I am fairly happy with that
What would be good is if a contract had a special 'review' section which we could sign again and consider that a review when no other details need reviewing....if you know what I mean?

Page 4 of the current NCMA Contracts has a review section. Ncma Contracts have had this on them for years!

[Simona]

Double AARRGGHH...that is not the point I was trying to clarify!!!!!!!!!!...please I think my English is not that bad after years of practice....even the m'ship dept said they would take the suggestions to the powers that be for future consideration...lets leave it you are happy and I am too!!

[rickysmiths]

Double AARRGGHH...that is not the point I was trying to clarify!!!!!!!!!!...please I think my English is not that bad after years of practice....even the m'ship dept said they would take the suggestions to the powers that be for future consideration...lets leave it you are happy and I am too!!

I am sorry Simona but you clearly stated in your post :

What would be good is if a contract had a special 'review' section which we could sign again and consider that a review when no other details need reviewing....if you know what I mean?

I was just saying that this is already done on page 4 and has always been done on the Ncma contracts. I don't see what you are getting at or the point of making the statement if you don't mean it. It just serves to confuse people about something that already happens.

The same thing over the Contracts. They have an NCMA logo on them that is all it could say Father Christmas for all it matters and it has no effect on ther Contract itself. It just frightens people to even come on a forum like this and even suggest such a thing frankly.

The only thing that is useful that you have said regarding contracts is that it is good practice to review them on a regular basis.

If you are really concerned that you have contracts with Ncma on them when the organization is now called pacey I suggest you purchase some of the stickers they have said they will be selling and apply them to your Contracts and then they will be fine because they will have pacey on them.

I'm sorry but what a fuss about nothing. People have better things to do with there time than answer silly questions like this. I should think they love you at pacey at the minute!!!

I'm sorry to be so blunt but this has annoyed me.

[Simona]

I will not reply anymore as you are not getting the point...I have sorted it out and WILL NOT USE ANY STICKERS...my choice and professional judgement for obvious reasons!
My contract only has 3 pages so not sure what you are referring to...
it may be a 'fuss' to you but you must respect other cms concerns and ...shall we leave it at that?...you do your thing I do mine.
Thank you

[angeldelight]

I will not reply anymore as you are not getting the point...I have sorted it out and WILL NOT USE ANY STICKERS...my choice and professional judgement for obvious reasons!
My contract only has 3 pages so not sure what you are referring to...
it may be a 'fuss' to you but you must respect other cms concerns and ...shall we leave it at that?...you do your thing I do mine.
Thank you

Simona I don't think anyone is getting at you ..

You say we must respect other cm concerns but don't you understand you are putting the concerns there in the first place ?

It seems that contracts are valid until they are cancelled

Maybe this subject should be closed for now ...until we have more concrete evidence

Otherwise we are going round and round in circles

Angel xx

[Simona]

Absolutely and totally agree with you...I never thought someone was getting at me just a question of respecting people's opinion and right to question!
subject closed and let cms decide what is best for them... that is why they are in charge of their business and do what suits them best?

in reply to the statement 'pacey must love you' by rickysmith ...I am not looking for love but representation and clarification...that is what I pay them for!!
Sorry to everyone bored by the subject ...lets move on to more challenging topics

[angeldelight]

Absolutely and totally agree with you...I never thought someone was getting at me just a question of respecting people's opinion and right to question!
subject closed and let cms decide what is best for them... that is why they are in charge of their business and do what suits them best?

in reply to the statement 'pacey must love you' by rickysmith ...I am not looking for love but representation and clarification...that is what I pay them for!!
Sorry to everyone bored by the subject ...lets move on to more challenging topics

It's a great topic no one is bored

We just don't want to worry anyone more than we need

You have strong views and they are respected

It's no good us all arguing with each other ...comments can come across wrong here ...so again we need to come across in a calm respectful manner to each other

Let us know if you do get any confirmation regarding this

Angel xx

[welshgirl]

Wow! I'm closing this thread and am never coming back to it!

[angeldelight]

Wow! I'm closing this thread and am never coming back to it!

Only us mods can close the thread or the original poster can request it :laughing:

Don't worry things are up in arms but members are fine now

We will wait for confirmation on any updates

Hope you had a good weekend Welshgirl

Angel xx

[shortstuff]

It's a great topic no one is bored

We just don't want to worry anyone more than we need

You have strong views and they are respected

It's no good us all arguing with each other ...comments can come across wrong here ...so again we need to come across in a calm respectful manner to each other

Let us know if you do get any confirmation regarding this

Angel xx

Well said angel x

[rickysmiths]

I will not reply anymore as you are not getting the point...I have sorted it out and WILL NOT USE ANY STICKERS...my choice and professional judgement for obvious reasons!
My contract only has 3 pages so not sure what you are referring to...
it may be a 'fuss' to you but you must respect other cms concerns and ...shall we leave it at that?...you do your thing I do mine.
Thank you



Simona with the greatest of respect I am even more confused. You have said several times that you use your own Contracts not NCMA ones so you wouldn't need or want to use pacey stickers on them?

The NCMA Contracts changed from a 3 page Contract to a 4 page Contract when they were revised by NCMA 2 years ago.

[angeldelight]

Simona with the greatest of respect I am even more confused. You have said several times that you use your own Contracts not NCMA ones so you wouldn't need or want to use pacey stickers on them?

The NCMA Contracts changed from a 3 page Contract to a 4 page Contract when they were revised by NCMA 2 years ago.

Think it's best to leave the subject now RS I understand where your coming from but this is getting us no where now

Angel xx

[Simona]

No I have said I use my own plus ncma for legal 'protection'