Newton Child Care Academy, LLC.

Dear Sir/Madam,I write on behalf of Newton Childcare Academy to respond to Complaint # *** by Mr*** *** and his wife Ms*** ***. That response is below. Please confirm
receipt. This complaint stems from the customer’s failure to understand the terms of her contractual relationship with Newton Childcare Academy (“NCA”) and statements about what the director of NCA told her. The complaint is both untrue and unreasonable. All parents of children at NCA must agree to NCA’s Contract for Services, which Ms*** *** and her husband *** *** executed before their child was permitted to attend NCA. In this case, Ms*** signed her child up for services starting on August 24, 2015, and set forth no ending date for the services, asking for attendance five days a week. Multiple provisions of the Contract for Services indicates that tuition will not be adjusted for any reason (including illness, vacation or any other absence). Specifically, Section B of the Contract states that “There will be no adjustment in tuition for absences.” Section H of the Contract states “The parent(s) agree to pay tuition whether or not the child actually attends on any particular day(s) during the enrollment period, including holidays, other days when the Academy is closed and vacation or sick time taken by the child during which the child does not attend the Academy. There will be no credits, trading of days, or refunds for days the child is not in attendance.” Therefore, the Contract is extremely clear that regardless of the reason that Ms***s child does not attend the Academy, she would still be charged tuition during that time. These terms are standard provisions for day cares. No one in the industry permits a parent to selectively pay and attend whenever they like. Day cares cannot simply replace one child with another when they go on vacation. Ms*** and her husband read this Contract and signed it on June 25, 2015, agreeing that they “confirm that [they] are bound by the provisions of this Contract.” Given the foregoing, Ms*** had no right to a refund for the time that her child was on vacation with her. Quite to the contrary, she had agreed that she would be responsible for tuition during the time that her child was on vacation. Moreover, Ms***’s statements that NCA’s director, Ms***, agreed not to charge her while their child was on vacation is simply and demonstrably untrue. First, given that the Contract clearly says they would be responsible for tuition, it simply does not make sense that Ms*** would have said the opposite. Second, if they had actually agreed that Ms*** would not be charged during their vacation, they would have indicated it in the Contract, either by putting an end date before the date of the vacation or by crossing out or amending the above referenced sections. They did none of that though. In any case, contrary to Ms***’s statements, Ms*** never told Ms*** that she would not be charged for the time that her child was on vacation. This is outside standard practices and contrary to the terms of the Contract. It simply does not make sense that Ms*** would have said this. Despite all of the foregoing, which clearly proves that Ms*** and her husband were responsible for paying tuition while their child was on vacation, NCA went above and beyond its duties to try to resolve the matter by offering her four weeks of tuition credit at the Academy, a 20% discount on the next year of tuition, and a birthday party for her child at the Jump and Slide play center next to the Academy (all of which she acknowledges in her complaint). NCA was under no obligation to provide all of the foregoing, which is valued any many thousands of dollars, but did so anyway. Her unreasonable failure to accept this offer cannot be held against NCA. At all times, NCA acted in accordance with its contractual relationship with Ms***. Ms***’s dissatisfaction with the terms of that relationship, which she entered into with full knowledge, is unreasonable and in bad faith. And despite her inappropriate complaint, NCA has made more than a reasonable effort to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, sometimes, despite everything you do for a customer, if that customer does not want to be reasonable, there is not much else that can be done.*** *** *** *** **
*** *** *** *** ** * *** *** ** ***
*** *** *** * *** *** *** * *** *** ***
***

Dear Sir/Madam,I write on behalf of Newton Childcare Academy to respond to Complaint # *** by Mr*** *** and his wife Ms*** ***. That response is below. Please confirm
receipt. This complaint stems from the customer’s failure to understand the terms of her contractual relationship with Newton Childcare Academy (“NCA”) and statements about what the director of NCA told her. The complaint is both untrue and unreasonable. All parents of children at NCA must agree to NCA’s Contract for Services, which Ms*** *** and her husband *** *** executed before their child was permitted to attend NCA. In this case, Ms*** signed her child up for services starting on August 24, 2015, and set forth no ending date for the services, asking for attendance five days a week. Multiple provisions of the Contract for Services indicates that tuition will not be adjusted for any reason (including illness, vacation or any other absence). Specifically, Section B of the Contract states that “There will be no adjustment in tuition for absences.” Section H of the Contract states “The parent(s) agree to pay tuition whether or not the child actually attends on any particular day(s) during the enrollment period, including holidays, other days when the Academy is closed and vacation or sick time taken by the child during which the child does not attend the Academy. There will be no credits, trading of days, or refunds for days the child is not in attendance.” Therefore, the Contract is extremely clear that regardless of the reason that Ms***s child does not attend the Academy, she would still be charged tuition during that time. These terms are standard provisions for day cares. No one in the industry permits a parent to selectively pay and attend whenever they like. Day cares cannot simply replace one child with another when they go on vacation. Ms*** and her husband read this Contract and signed it on June 25, 2015, agreeing that they “confirm that [they] are bound by the provisions of this Contract.” Given the foregoing, Ms*** had no right to a refund for the time that her child was on vacation with her. Quite to the contrary, she had agreed that she would be responsible for tuition during the time that her child was on vacation. Moreover, Ms***’s statements that NCA’s director, Ms***, agreed not to charge her while their child was on vacation is simply and demonstrably untrue. First, given that the Contract clearly says they would be responsible for tuition, it simply does not make sense that Ms*** would have said the opposite. Second, if they had actually agreed that Ms*** would not be charged during their vacation, they would have indicated it in the Contract, either by putting an end date before the date of the vacation or by crossing out or amending the above referenced sections. They did none of that though. In any case, contrary to Ms***’s statements, Ms*** never told Ms*** that she would not be charged for the time that her child was on vacation. This is outside standard practices and contrary to the terms of the Contract. It simply does not make sense that Ms*** would have said this. Despite all of the foregoing, which clearly proves that Ms*** and her husband were responsible for paying tuition while their child was on vacation, NCA went above and beyond its duties to try to resolve the matter by offering her four weeks of tuition credit at the Academy, a 20% discount on the next year of tuition, and a birthday party for her child at the Jump and Slide play center next to the Academy (all of which she acknowledges in her complaint). NCA was under no obligation to provide all of the foregoing, which is valued any many thousands of dollars, but did so anyway. Her unreasonable failure to accept this offer cannot be held against NCA. At all times, NCA acted in accordance with its contractual relationship with Ms***. Ms***’s dissatisfaction with the terms of that relationship, which she entered into with full knowledge, is unreasonable and in bad faith. And despite her inappropriate complaint, NCA has made more than a reasonable effort to resolve this matter. Unfortunately, sometimes, despite everything you do for a customer, if that customer does not want to be reasonable, there is not much else that can be done.*** *** *** *** **
*** *** *** *** ** * *** *** ** ***
*** *** *** * *** *** *** * *** *** ***
***