Make sure you leave a review for Baby’s Days…… or you won’t get a system update!?

Yesterday, Mark Kahl posted on the Facebook Baby’s Days support group asking people to leave a review as it, “encourages [them] to release fantastic new features onto the system.”

marks-postIf you’re a regular reader of this blog you will know that when Baby’s Days introduced the control centre they refused to update my (fully paid up) system with the update, they refused to tell me why I suddenly wasn’t eligible for updates and they refused to pass my letter of complaint to the director.  I’m not quite sure how they did this given their insistence that all systems are “identical”, but they did and you can read about it here.

Anyway lots of people are very concerned about the wording of the Facebook post made by Mark Kahl on the support group run by Kel Thomas via facebook.  I’ve had numerous messages in my inbox over the last 24 hours asking things like:

If someone doesn’t leave a positive review will they be denied the next update?

Is this review site some sort of method for weeding out those not 100% happy about the system and cutting them off?

Why hasn’t Mark Kahl advertised this review website on the official Baby’s Days like page? Is he concerned that he will get more negative than positive reviews?  After all the support group has all the unsatisfied customers weeded out by admin Kel Thomas, but you can’t stop people reading the official ‘Like page'; all those unhappy people will see the post and will leave a negative review.

I posted on Monday that my fair and accurate review wasn’t published on their review site, I know of a few others that have posted fair and reflective reviews too, but they also were censored.  It turns out they are approving each review individually!


You have to start questioning at this point, is this a review site or a fan club?  Can you imagine if Trip Advisor had to “approve” each review individually?  What a farce!

Also, how many people have something negative to say about Baby’s Days that warrants them needing to approve each “review”.  I’m under the impression I’m the only person in the history of the world EVER, to have had a problem with Baby’s Days (according to them).  They have posted the link to the review site in a closed Facebook group. Surely if it’s just little old me with anything bad to say “approving” each comment is overkill?

In my opinion, you’d only need to approve each comment individually if you were worried you might get “too many” reviews that were “bad”.  Given that this review website has only been advertised in a closed Facebook group how many “bad” reviews are they expecting to warrant this level of scrutiny?

These are the questions that current users of Baby’s Days really need to be asking themselves.  There are still lots of people that believe the theft of my data by Sys IQ Ltd is somehow my own “fault”, I must have deserved it in some way.  Surely no company would treat a customer the way I claim Baby’s Days has treated me, I must be lying, right?

Apart from the fact this blog is fully evidenced, you have to ask, if it’s just me that they have upset with their disgusting customer service why has this blog had over 30,000 views in such a short space of time?  Why are so many people banned from posting on their “like” page?  Why are so many users removed from the Support Group run by Kel Thomas that Mark Kahl, director of Baby’s Days, continues to endorse?

If it’s “just me” why not let my factual and fair comment lie there in with the (supposed) “hundreds” of others?  Wake up and smell the coffee people, it’s not just me that’s why each post has to be “approved”; to keep their little bubble from popping.

And FYI Mark Kahl (my most frequent blog reader) I spent nearly 4 years on my work that you have refused to return, I sure as hell intend to spend at least that getting it all back.

Pop Back tomorrow where I’ll be posting a critique of Baby’s Days false advertising methods and then Friday I’m hoping to be posting a collaborative piece with a guest blogger.  Ohhhh Exciting!

Who are Noble Minder and why does Baby’s Days own their domain?

I’ve had so many messages about yesterdays post in my inbox, so I thought I would blog about this matter again this evening in more detail.

Who are Noble Minder?

There is a link to an advert placed by the company here, but it basically says, “Noble Minder is the complete online support package for childminders”.  Like Baby’s Days, Noble Minder did Risk Assessments, Book Keeping, Observations and Assessment Recorods, Policy Writing and staff Training Logs etc.  It was supposed to be a “complete solution” for childminders, a lot like Baby’s Days is.

Sadly the company was dissolved in April 2012 (and was established in 2008, so had 4 years worth of customers) after numerous accounts were late being filed.  Baby’s Days came along around April 2010, and has now been around for slightly longer than Noble Minder was.

As the company was dissolved a lot of customers lost a lot of work and I have found a few threads on the internet where childminders are desperately trying to salvage their work.

What has Noble Minder got to do with Baby’s Days?

I’m not really sure, all I know is that the director of Baby’s Days, Mark Kahl owns the domain / web address for


Do any readers know if there is a connection?  Or do they know why Noble Minder went bust?  It looks to me the reason that Mark Kahl owns the domain is because he was trying to “skim” unsuspecting Noble Minder customers, but a few messages in my inbox have suggested there is more to it than this.  Get in touch if you have any info.

Pop back tomorrow where I will be blogging about Baby’s Days false claims and how they misrepresent their package being “the only one” that has certain features when in fact there are lots that do the same thing and most were doing it first!

Surely the ICO will protect my data?

Lots of childminders have said to me, “it’s your data just ask the Information Commissioners Office to get Baby’s Days to give it back, that’s the whole point of the ICO isn’t it? To protect your data!?”

It turns out that actually no, this isn’t quite true.  I blogged a few weeks ago about how the ICO had contacted Mark Kahl the Director of Sys IQ Ltd which manage the Baby’s Days software.  The ICO contacted him 3 times infact and finally at the last request the ICO received a reply to my subject Access request which is as follows:

“We can confirm that SyS IQ Ltd do not hold any personal data regarding yourself.”

That’s it.  That is all they had to say about 3.5 years with of work being withdrawn and with held, arguably stolen from me.  It’s not clear if they’ve deleted the data (which they had no right to do as I made the access request 15 mins after they terminated the account) or if they believe the data they have (maybe) stored (somewhere) isn’t MY data as such.

After all some of it is about children and these aren’t my children, so it’s a bit of a grey area if the details about these children are protected by a subject access request as usually only personal data is released, such as my accounts and system notes  etc.  It may be the case the the childrens parents have to notify the ICO themselves.

So if you use Baby’s Days and you do not back up you basically have no way yourself (it seems) to recover the data directly from the company.  I’m waiting for the ICO to clarify this.

Due to the seriousness of this and the implications it could have on other users of Baby’s Days I am going to be actively contacting as many childminders, local authority’s, networks, nurseries, agencies and Parents as possible.

They all need to be aware that this could happen to their data, that the ICO possibly can not help get the data back, the company is unaccountable for it’s actions and as such it is extremely important that the data is saved by the childmidner which then makes a complete farce of the companies security claims.

I have compiled a list of childminders currently using Baby’s Days, this information is freely available on the Babys Days like page and also on the support group page.  Once all of those childminders have been notified I will then start to contact the users parents directly if they have facebook groups and then I will contact local authorities, agencies and other networks.

Until my data is returned to me I feel I am obliged to make others directly aware of the risks that using this company carries.  I had well over 1000 pictures of children on this system, where are they? I had personal documents and financial accounts on the system, where are they?  Why doesn’t the company return the data? What do they plan to do with it?

These are the questions I have asked Mark Kahl, via email and phone and he can not provide me with an answer.

This is the “1000% secure” company you’re trusting your data, your children, your parents and your business with.

If I can prevent just one minder going through the ordeal I have been through over the last few months then it will be worth it.




Would Baby’s Days write an untrue review about a childminder?

So last night I blogged about how Baby’s Days were mentioned on another blog back in October 2013 and how a person called Jeff left lots of comments on the blog, including one which said something along the lines of, ‘how would you like it if I sent up a blog about your childminding service and said your house was dirty and your service was rubbish?’

So it seems that what Jeff was saying, is that if you state an opinion based on fact and evidence about Baby’s Days you may, as a childminder, find yourself the subject of a review blog based on your services as a childminder which will be totally unfounded and damaging.

One of the people that commented on the blog used her real name and email address, a few hours later she received this email in her this email is basically saying is that the sender has determined where this childminder lives and they are threatening her with a negative review of her childminding service.  Although the email isn’t sent from anyone called Jeff, it’s very odd that Jeff mentions the possibility of childminders receiving negative reviews and then this lady receives this in her inbox.

So if you use Baby’s Days, or comment negatively about Baby’s Days, you need to be prepared, if this Jeff is the same Jeff as the one Baby’s Days employs, that this is how Baby’s Days handles its complaints.  They don’t try to solve customers complaints (such as payment problems or lack of updates) or improve their customer service, they threaten you with court action and negative reviews of your child minding service.

If Jeff is the same Jeff that works for Baby’s Days then does this mean he sent this email to intimidate the childminder?  Is that something this supposed market leading company would do?

If you pop back tomorrow you’ll find the answer because I have some IP addresses to share with you.  They belong to Jeff, Baby’s Days and the fake email account that tried to intimidate this childminder into silence.  Needless to say the police have already been contacted and myself and the other childminder have both informed Ofsted that a malicious complaint may be made against us soon.

What did Baby’s Days do last time they were mentioned in a blog?

Hey readers, I hope you had a fab weekend.  Cracking on with the next blog post as I have quite a lot to get through this week and my best friend just had her first baby (a boy, 7lbs, 1 week early!), so I’m sure I’ll have to pop over there a few times this week too and get that newborn baby smell fix :)

So last week I blogged about the previous blog that Baby’s Days were mentioned in.  They demanded the author of the blog remove the information they felt to be incorrect, in addition they asked her to remove all mention of Baby’s Days from the blog, and make a public apology across various different social sites.  Sounds very familiar to my first legal letter from them.

Anyway, the blog author removed the information Baby’s Days didn’t agree with, but she refused to apologise and she also refused to remove Baby’s Days from her comparison blog post.  What followed then were about 100 comments made by various people, but the most interesting of these comments was one made by the user “Jeff”.  Baby’s Days has an employee by the name of Jeff.  Whether or not this is the same Jeff I am unsure, but here is what Jeff had to say about the blog post.

“Jeff says: October 23, 2013 at 5:03 pm
Let’s get some facts straight, the owner of this blog did a SSL security test on NOT the personal URL’s of it’s customers, the demo sites are NOT secure, customers site ARE secure. Baby’s Days is the most advanced system on the market and no other system comes anywhere near it, their data is housed at a Tier 4 data centre unlike every other company in this blog – they are 1000%

I suggest you get your facts right Mr or Mrs Blog owner because right now you are opening yourself up to legal ramifications that I am sure Baby’s Days will look at proceeding with.”

I’ll just skip right past the 1000% secure bit because as we all know from a previous blog post,nothing is ever 100% secure, let alone 1000% secure.  There was then an exchange of comments made between various users which resulted in Jeff posting the following:

“Jeff says: October 24, 2013 at 2:29 pm
…keep your opinions and your objectives to yourself and read the information correctly, the sooner you do this the better, it’s not difficult is it – really !!”

Wow.  If this Jeff is the same Jeff that works with Baby’s Days, I sincerely hope they’re aren’t paying him for his customer service skills?! It’s painfully clear that if this is the same Jeff that works for Baby’s Days, they don’t care one jot about customers opinions.

Sure they might make a little forum and ask you all for your development ideas; don’t be fooled, this is, in my opinion, to benefit their progression of the system.  When it actually comes to it, when push comes to shove, if my case is anything to go by, you will certainly be shoved and you will certainly have no chance of getting your data back.

One of the last comments by Jeff cumulated with the following veiled threat, a bit like the one I feel I received from Kel Thomas, regarding the potential for my parents to find out about my “evil traits”.  Jeff posted,

“October 24, 2013 at 2:55 pm
…I hope no one ever decides to post false and inaccurate information about your childminding business because I am sure you would not like it. Think about it, anyone could quite easily setup a blog about childminders and state that your property was dirty or dangerous etc, how would you feel about that, what could you do about that, surely it would be ok because it is just their opinion, right?”

Whoever this Jeff is he clearly doesn’t understand that making things up about people is illegal, it’s called defamation.  Stating an opinion based on reality is not defamation, it is recounting of events for review purpose.  I’ve said it a lot of times, if Baby’s Days had given me the parental control upgrade they promise to “all” customers when we signed up, then I would never have had the need or material to post my first blog post here.  This blog is their own doing and if their continuing negative treatment of paying customers is anything to go by (more on this in the week) they’ll be plenty more material to keep me going.

The minute they start understanding “the customer is always right”, is the minute this blog has no new material.  Sadly I don’t think the director of Baby’s Days could ever swallow his pride and take this customer service approach onboard.

Until he does you’ll be hearing lots more from me; tomorrows blog post contains screen shots from a childminder who was threatened with a review blog based on her services after she criticised Baby’s Days.  If you’re reading this blog and you currently use Baby’s Days please be careful posting anything remotely negative about them in the public domain and back up all of your work.