Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi,


I am struggling to get my head around how it works when your little one turns three with the government vouchers - the 15 hours of nursery time you are meant to get and how that works at all the various nurseries in Dulwich. I am feeling very confused and I am sure it really isn't that confusing. I assumed that if I wanted to put my little one when he is three in a nursery for three half days that if that totalled 15 hours it would be covered by the government and I wouldn't have to pay anything. However, one nursery I saw today said you do pay an amount on top of the free time because they are open all year. At another place I assumed that the three half day sessions of 5 hours each would be covered and I am sure they are open to all year......how does it all work??? I am interested in the Bright norizons nursery (which mentions the free sessions as being 8-11 or 3-6) and my favourite nursery.

Thank you in advance

Hello Katiesa


So, from what I know there are two things going on with the 15 hours.


1) You take a place at a local school that has a pre school provision, they offer you mornings or afternoon sessions to equal 15 hours per week.


2) If your child is at a private nursery then if they are there full time, they get 15 hours knocked off the bill. However, if they are there less than that, as in my childs case, they get a pro rata'd amount of free hours. It isnt actually a simple calculation for the nurseries at all, because my nursery showed me how they work it out and it seemed to be based on whether that child is full time or not, and every day less than full time means that they have to charge it out differently. Sorry to not be able to explain better, but Im sure your nursery can.


3) I think from what you say above, you can put your child down for a private nursery just to get the 15 hours same as option 1, but I think what I understand is that you couldnt just say, right they'll do all day on a monday, and half day on a tuesday, which is pretty much 15 hours, you have to go along with what they suggest so the sessions as described above.


I am also with a branch of Bright Horizons, although not locally, and have loved it.


Hope that helps.

Thankyou so much. I think i actually understand it now. I guess when I get to the point of signing up for a nursery i'll be able to say I only want three half days and ask if that will be covered.I'm not aware of any of the schools near me having preschools/nursery although that would be great

Hi Katiesa


I was very keen on the Bright Horizons nursery but found the policy of only full days doesn't really suit us. Different nurseries work differently with the most flexible having a minimum of 3 hours a day vs some that require full time attendance. Bright Horizons charges for full days whether your child attends all day or not. When you get the vouchers I believe that they allow a maximum of 6 hours per day out of your free allowance of 15 hours. That means that your child would need to attend 3 days a week and pay something on top of your free allowance as they'd only get 6 hours free per day and that only applies for 38 weeks of the year. They have a sheet which says how much you would pay per month when your child qualifies for 15 hours free a week.

As you have to commit to a nursery year round I imagine you would end up always paying for the school holidays unless your chosen nursery only runs in for 38 weeks per year (eg school nursery).

Wow, ok so I am confused agsain....I'm going to Bright Horizons later today so will ask but I do want half days not a full day and don't want to be putting him in for a day but having to pay for most of it when the government vouchers do not cover it sll.I am sure that My favourite place nursery do do half days and so I could get that covered by the vouchers. I'm not sure if they break for the hoilidays there but I don't mind having him home for holidays
The mind boggles at how this could be so inconsistent and confusing. We are struggling to understand the same and having to have a very akward conversation with the nursery my son attends (which we absolutely love!) as the subsidy is not calculated the way we expected (and the way the policy lays out) which means - unless it changes - we can't afford to send him.
One school that does have a pre school section is Ivydale in Nunhead. I 'think' although I have only been there once, that Goodrich also do. I would be surprised if there are not others too. If you can get hold of the Southwark schools application booklet they have a list of every school in the Borough, and they say whether each has a pre school provision.
There is a nursery at Goodrich, and other local schools that offer nursery are Heber, Goose Green, Ivydale... I'm sure there are others. It works well for us getting the free school nursery place (5 mornings a week in our case), and seems a lot simpler than trying to use the subsidy privately. I guess a lot of private nurseries would rather have full time children as the demand is there - seems a shame!

I wish I had known that they can't make you pay for more hours when I visited Bright Horizons this week as that is not what they told me at all. Katiesa it would be great to hear how you get on.


Thanks for that article too Fuschia. I wonder when the following bit will come into effect this year as that will change things for the good:


The Code also confirms that from 2012, parents will also have the right to spread the free entitlement over a whole year. The Government said this would help parents balance childcare with employment or training and enable them to budget.

ok so I have just been to Bright Horizons and thought I understood it until I read all these posts again. They said the minimum amount I could do is one day - where of that one day 6 hours is paid for leaving four hours to pay for. So to put him in for one day a week it would cost ?133.40 a month. I don't think you can pay any less as one day is the minimum. I didn't ask but I assume that means you couldn't just put them in for the morning free session of 8-11 or the afternoon one of 3-6pm.
So you got the same explanation as I did. I did ask if you could put them in for the morning or afternoon free session that they mention as being 8-11 or 3-6. I was told that you have to pay for the whole day still so if you just used 3 of your free hours one day you'd be paying for the rest of the day on top of that. Their approach did surprise me as it works out very expensive and seems to be only really suitable for parents who actually want their children there all day long. I was kind of hoping that I'd been given the wrong information as I've ruled it out on this basis and this basis alone as it was great apart from this!
I'm still confused. My daughter will be eligible for the 15 hours from April. She already attends a Southwark EYC nursery 3 days per week. They clearly state that the free hours are pro rata, as DishandtheSpoon said above, so we only get 9 of the hours deducted from our bill. The code of practice link that Fuschia posted seems to say that they have to be more flexible and allow people 5 hours x 3 days etc. Is this just that they should offer this or do they have to?
when the nurseries say they offer the 15 hours pro-rata, could they mean that they spread the 15 x38 weeks over 52 weeks (most private nurseries operate out of school term). When my daughter was at nursery, the weekly fee was not reduced by the equivalent of 15hrs, simply because the 15 hours over 38 weeks was spread out over 50 weeks - does that make sense? Otherwise we'd have been paying a different weekly fee for term-time vs out of term time which would have been a pain.

No, they mean 3/5 of the 15 hours. I think they also stretch this out over 52 weeks instead of 38 like you describe.


kristymac1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> when the nurseries say they offer the 15 hours

> pro-rata, could they mean that they spread the 15

> x38 weeks over 52 weeks (most private nurseries

> operate out of school term). When my daughter was

> at nursery, the weekly fee was not reduced by the

> equivalent of 15hrs, simply because the 15 hours

> over 38 weeks was spread out over 50 weeks - does

> that make sense? Otherwise we'd have been paying a

> different weekly fee for term-time vs out of term

> time which would have been a pain.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...