"Pet-free" daycare now getting a pet

My son say send this and put in writing, email is fine.


Dear Provider

As you are fully aware, we joined your dayhome following your advertisement of having a pet free environment. This was something you confirmed to us as accurate prior to joining your daycare and we discussed my child's allergies and the importance of a pet free home.

We totally respect that as a family home you have every right to decide to get a pet but that is not the environment we were promised for our child. As such, since it is you, not us, changing the agreement in place, it is you not us breaching the terms of care we had. We do not expect our son's medical concerns to affect your decision however, under the circumstances, we are not legally obligated to pay a month's notice to withdraw our child from your care. You have opted to bring in a family pet over the Christmas period and in doing so, have not provided us with sufficient time to give the notice period we normally would have given.

We are happy to continue in your care under the original agreement of you having a pet free home but in choosing to bring in an animal which is detrimental to the health of our child and in choosing to inform us just a short time before the change comes into effect, it is you who is breaching the contract not us. As such, from the time the animal arrives in your home, the contract is breached and therefore becomes null and void.

We cannot be expected to abide by the notice period within a contract that you have made invalid. Due to this, there will be no payment for notice period and we expect a refund for care already paid for, which we will not be able to receive once your new pet arrives.

I trust this will be the conclusion of this matter.

Suzie.....does the caregiver have any leg to stand on, because there is nothing in the contract about the pet free? So is she really breaching terms of the contract? Only her add stated pet free but life changes and now she's no longer pet free. Unless her contract says to give a mths notice to,any changes in this contract then I would agree. But if it doesn't and nothing is mentioned about pets in the contract then the parents can really send that letter??

I'm not arguing I'm truely curious. I had the same stituation. Sort of. Yrs back. I took on a family to start in a mths time. In that time I also took on another family and now had five daycare kids and my own kids. As this was before bill 10 so our kids didn't count. Anyways I hired an assistant to help me and I emailed all the parents to make them aware of this. Everyone was ok but this one family that hadn't started yet. She said when we signed the contract we signed on knowing you would only have four kids and no assistants. We don't want a big crowded daycare so we want our deposit back. I said the deposit is non refundable. They said we'll fight this as u changed the contract rules after we signed on and we no longer agree with ur way of running ur daycare. Long story short I have the deposit back and said good ridings. I always thought I was right. I can change and run my daycare anyway I want and it's up to them to leave and find something else if they don't like it. But now after reading this thread maybe I was wrong? She came on as pet free and it worked well but now life changes and the provider got a pet. So it's up to her to stay or leave for another pet free daycare. No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babydom

Suzie.....does the caregiver have any leg to stand on, because there is nothing in the contract about the pet free? So is she really breaching terms of the contract? Only her add stated pet free but life changes and now she's no longer pet free. Unless her contract says to give a mths notice to,any changes in this contract then I would agree. But if it doesn't and nothing is mentioned about pets in the contract then the parents can really send that letter??

I'm not arguing I'm truely curious. I had the same stituation. Sort of. Yrs back. I took on a family to start in a mths time. In that time I also took on another family and now had five daycare kids and my own kids. As this was before bill 10 so our kids didn't count. Anyways I hired an assistant to help me and I emailed all the parents to make them aware of this. Everyone was ok but this one family that hadn't started yet. She said when we signed the contract we signed on knowing you would only have four kids and no assistants. We don't want a big crowded daycare so we want our deposit back. I said the deposit is non refundable. They said we'll fight this as u changed the contract rules after we signed on and we no longer agree with ur way of running ur daycare. Long story short I have the deposit back and said good ridings. I always thought I was right. I can change and run my daycare anyway I want and it's up to them to leave and find something else if they don't like it. But now after reading this thread maybe I was wrong? She came on as pet free and it worked well but now life changes and the provider got a pet. So it's up to her to stay or leave for another pet free daycare. No?

---

I think there is "right" and there is right.

In your case you do in fact have the right to change your daycare, add another child, add an assistant. BUT to keep your clients happy (which impacts your work, your reputation, your income) major changes should be given notice and we need to recognize that some families will not be comfortable and will leave. Sometime giving back a deposit, or forgoing notice period, should be done just for the sake of the business. It is us making the decisions so we as the caregiver should be the one feeling the impact. But, you are in your right to make those changes.

Just because you can go to the courts and win doesn't necessarily mean we should or that we did the right thing.

As for the OP's case. Yes that caregiver is in the right to get a dog and yes she can enforce her contract...BUT she is making a big change to the terms of care without giving enough notice and it isn't right to insist the family pay for the full notice period when it means their child's health is at risk due to the dog. The consequence of getting a dog last minute (or withholding the fact they planned it) is that they SHOULD forgo the payment for the notice period.

What is in one's rights isn't always the right and definitely isn't always the wisest move.

Ok. I agree with that :)

Interesting! My friend just called. Her daycare provider has waived the fee for January. She also apologized for the extra stress, saying that her own children have been begging for a dog for years and they finally decided to get one as a Christmas gift for the whole family. It's almost like the provider is on this forum. If she is, thank you! :)

I think most providers are reasonable and human! Sometimes it is just hard to see the situation form the others perspective.

Hopefully she can find alternative care in time!

Glad it worked out amicably. Maybe the provider actually forgot that the child needed a pet-free environment?
Regardless, this is great news. Good luck to your friend with finding a new daycare. Which city is she in? There are probably providers here that are near her.

I am glad it worked out well and I hope she finds a pet free daycare for Jan soon- There are a few providers having a dry time with no calls so they will be glad to help

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by babydom

Suzie.....does the caregiver have any leg to stand on, because there is nothing in the contract about the pet free? So is she really breaching terms of the contract? Only her add stated pet free but life changes and now she's no longer pet free. Unless her contract says to give a mths notice to,any changes in this contract then I would agree. But if it doesn't and nothing is mentioned about pets in the contract then the parents can really send that letter??

I'm not arguing I'm truely curious. I had the same stituation. Sort of. Yrs back. I took on a family to start in a mths time. In that time I also took on another family and now had five daycare kids and my own kids. As this was before bill 10 so our kids didn't count. Anyways I hired an assistant to help me and I emailed all the parents to make them aware of this. Everyone was ok but this one family that hadn't started yet. She said when we signed the contract we signed on knowing you would only have four kids and no assistants. We don't want a big crowded daycare so we want our deposit back. I said the deposit is non refundable. They said we'll fight this as u changed the contract rules after we signed on and we no longer agree with ur way of running ur daycare. Long story short I have the deposit back and said good ridings. I always thought I was right. I can change and run my daycare anyway I want and it's up to them to leave and find something else if they don't like it. But now after reading this thread maybe I was wrong? She came on as pet free and it worked well but now life changes and the provider got a pet. So it's up to her to stay or leave for another pet free daycare. No?

---

Sorry for delaying but waited for son to come last night so he could explain it better to me.

In Small Claim Court which this would be, it much less formal. It not so black and white to be letter of law and no room for common sense. The Judge act more like a mediator and has level of discretion for common sense.

If person has record of pet-free advertisement and then communication showing that was key to their decision, the Judge will take into account that was big part of the reason for going to that daycare.

The provider is allowed to change anything about her service include getting pet in pet-free home but small claim Judge will accept that mean end of service for this client. Esp because it not simple preference but medical requirement. And allergies were communicate to provider before contract signed.

The Judge will accept that parent have no option not to return once pet in house. That 100% decision because clearly documented need before start care.

The provider has made change to service which mean that service no longer suitable for this family. Just like if she changed hours from 10am until 2pm she would be making service unsuitable for some client.

Because she change service so it not suitable, she is one breaking the term of agreement. It not matter that her contract not state pet-free. This parent documented before coming that this key requirement, had provider confirm it and had valid reason for need pet-free home.

If this was big tender document between companies, it would be different because contractual law mean the agreement is only what written on that signed piece paper and any verbal difference would no be considered. But in Small Claim Court, decision is based on common sense of Judge and not strictly law alone. This why Small Claim court exist. It not aimed at big lawyer battle. It aimed at common person with no legal background training and it based around what is reasonable in the circumstance. If one side being unreasonable, that can take into accounts.

My son explain that if parent held to set notice period, it only fair that provider must give same notice of significant changes. This permit parent to deny option to continue in care.

Where animal is coming into home in shorter time than notice period for parent, it not reasonable that parent have to pay for time due to provider lack communication in timely manner.

The minute that animal arrive, provider has changed the agreement in place. That mean parent not have accept new agreement and can walk away with "clean hand". My son explained that a term used when someone is entirely blame free from situation and has no liability.

If parent not had advertising and conversation confirm pet-free before joining or if parent had not advised provider it an allergy based requirement, it would be harder to persuade Judge that this was key in agreement even though not in contract.

(This all notes I have from son explain. I should maybe answered when he was here. I can call him and ask about your situation specifically at is lunchtime)

Quote:

---

I'm not arguing I'm truely curious. I had the same stituation. Sort of. Yrs back. I took on a family to start in a mths time. In that time I also took on another family and now had five daycare kids and my own kids. As this was before bill 10 so our kids didn't count. Anyways I hired an assistant to help me and I emailed all the parents to make them aware of this. Everyone was ok but this one family that hadn't started yet. She said when we signed the contract we signed on knowing you would only have four kids and no assistants. We don't want a big crowded daycare so we want our deposit back. I said the deposit is non refundable. They said we'll fight this as u changed the contract rules after we signed on and we no longer agree with ur way of running ur daycare. Long story short I have the deposit back and said good ridings. I always thought I was right. I can change and run my daycare anyway I want and it's up to them to leave and find something else if they don't like it. But now after reading this thread maybe I was wrong? She came on as pet free and it worked well but now life changes and the provider got a pet. So it's up to her to stay or leave for another pet free daycare. No?

---

I just call him.

He say client was right.

They sign on for one service and were getting something different. It would be viewed as misrepresentation of situation and make your contract void.

He say best example is - If someone buy used car privately and the ad say "new brake, new MVI" that even if person selling state sale is "as is" it would not be legal transaction unless that new brake and new MVI was real. Seller cannot make false claim to make sale and then write "as is" and be protect by laws about as is sales. They can say "good runner, never let me down" because that opinion but they not allowed make false statement.

For your situation, when family come to interview, they told that you would only have 4 child and you would be only carer. Even though you made statement with real fact, you later changed that through own choice and own control by take more children and adding assistant. Although you not lie in interview, you changed service that was discussed to be something different. It service discussed was not the same that was going be delivered. This would be misrepresentation (although not done to deceive). You made decision to deliver something different than what family signed up for. They were entitled to refund and they would have won court case. Like with car sale, service provider not allowed make inaccurate statement about service and deliver something else and if they did court would not uphold the contact because it signed for something different than client getting.