Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 25th Nov 17, 10:18 PM
    • 36,185Posts
    • 152,920Thanks
    silvercar
    'The UKís hidden one-child-per-family university policy' according to Martin Lewis
    • #1
    • 25th Nov 17, 10:18 PM
    'The UKís hidden one-child-per-family university policy' according to Martin Lewis 25th Nov 17 at 10:18 PM
    The UKís hidden one-child-per-family university policy

    Interesting article by Martin Lewis suggesting that parents will struggle to support 2 of their offspring in university at the same time.
    I'm a Board Guide on the Debate House Prices & the Economy, House Buying, Renting & Selling, Mortgages and Endowments, In My Home incl DIY, Overseas Holidays & Student boards.
    I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly.
    Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an abusive or illegal post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com. Any views are mine and not the official line of moneysavingexpert.com.
Page 1
    • Owain Moneysaver
    • By Owain Moneysaver 25th Nov 17, 10:43 PM
    • 7,588 Posts
    • 8,124 Thanks
    Owain Moneysaver
    • #2
    • 25th Nov 17, 10:43 PM
    • #2
    • 25th Nov 17, 10:43 PM
    One child can go to university and the other(s) can get a job and learn to do something useful.
    A kind word lasts a minute, a skelped erse is sair for a day.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 26th Nov 17, 9:55 AM
    • 36,185 Posts
    • 152,920 Thanks
    silvercar
    • #3
    • 26th Nov 17, 9:55 AM
    • #3
    • 26th Nov 17, 9:55 AM
    A bit of a non story.

    When you plan on having children close together, you realise that you may be doubling up on the amount of nappies you need; that they will probably overlap in nursery, so double fees there etc.
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 26th Nov 17, 5:10 PM
    • 19,705 Posts
    • 31,853 Thanks
    Spendless
    • #4
    • 26th Nov 17, 5:10 PM
    • #4
    • 26th Nov 17, 5:10 PM
    When I was having my children, it wasn't really in my mindset about spacing them in case both wanted to go to Uni. What was on my mind was my age (already in my 30s), having a small enough gap (there's 3 years) that they could enjoy doing things together, because this was something I felt I'd not had, being 7 years older than my only sibling. I knew working wasn't viable when I discovered the cost of childcare fees for the eldest was equivalent to my net pay. I have no idea what the set up for loans etc was back in the early 00s. Neither myself or my husband went to Uni (both 60s born) as it just wasn't as commonplace back then, so no thought about where we'd financially be in 18 years time.


    The issue I think is to do with not making it clearer than there's a parental contribution 'expected' but not obligated. With a 3 year gap between my 2, we're in a better place than many with this. We attended an open day yesterday for my eldest and told him we would pay for his first years accommodation. After that he needs to find work and at least pay a %. My sister though has twins and just can't afford to fund both at the same time.
    • IAmWales
    • By IAmWales 26th Nov 17, 7:03 PM
    • 1,823 Posts
    • 3,804 Thanks
    IAmWales
    • #5
    • 26th Nov 17, 7:03 PM
    • #5
    • 26th Nov 17, 7:03 PM
    "TWO CHILDREN COST MORE THAN ONE SHOCKER!"

    This is news?
    • Tabbytabitha
    • By Tabbytabitha 27th Nov 17, 6:52 AM
    • 434 Posts
    • 867 Thanks
    Tabbytabitha
    • #6
    • 27th Nov 17, 6:52 AM
    • #6
    • 27th Nov 17, 6:52 AM
    When I was having my children, it wasn't really in my mindset about spacing them in case both wanted to go to Uni. What was on my mind was my age (already in my 30s), having a small enough gap (there's 3 years) that they could enjoy doing things together, because this was something I felt I'd not had, being 7 years older than my only sibling. I knew working wasn't viable when I discovered the cost of childcare fees for the eldest was equivalent to my net pay. I have no idea what the set up for loans etc was back in the early 00s. Neither myself or my husband went to Uni (both 60s born) as it just wasn't as commonplace back then, so no thought about where we'd financially be in 18 years time.


    The issue I think is to do with not making it clearer than there's a parental contribution 'expected' but not obligated. With a 3 year gap between my 2, we're in a better place than many with this. We attended an open day yesterday for my eldest and told him we would pay for his first years accommodation. After that he needs to find work and at least pay a %. My sister though has twins and just can't afford to fund both at the same time.
    Originally posted by Spendless
    Presumably she's been funding them at the same time for the last 18 years?

    Parents need to remember all the money they'll be saving by not having a child living at home before stating so definitely that they can't afford to support them to a certain extent at university. Just because one set of costs is more overt than the other doesn't mean that those costs haven't existed.
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 27th Nov 17, 7:47 AM
    • 19,705 Posts
    • 31,853 Thanks
    Spendless
    • #7
    • 27th Nov 17, 7:47 AM
    • #7
    • 27th Nov 17, 7:47 AM
    Presumably she's been funding them at the same time for the last 18 years?

    Parents need to remember all the money they'll be saving by not having a child living at home before stating so definitely that they can't afford to support them to a certain extent at university. Just because one set of costs is more overt than the other doesn't mean that those costs haven't existed.
    Originally posted by Tabbytabitha
    Certainly,but they will receive the minimum due to the household income (plus a company car is added) and I doubt they actually cost that much at home compared to the difference x 2 between what they'd receive as a student loan and what the maximum loan is and is the 'expected' parental contribution. A quick look tells me this would be £9K a year or £750 per month. I am quite sure my own 2 children don't cost that much to keep per month. Her eldest wants to study medicine so the course is longer and I think options to work are more limited during the duration of study

    We've had to tell my 2 that though we can and will pay for 100% of accommodation in eldest's first year, this is due to his sister still being at the local Secondary school a few streets away and being relatively cheap for that year, he will need to find a job and save during this year because for yr2 we will be funding his sister at a further away sixth form due to the subject she wishes to study. We've had to veto his suggestion that he studies in London for this reason.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 27th Nov 17, 10:58 AM
    • 36,185 Posts
    • 152,920 Thanks
    silvercar
    • #8
    • 27th Nov 17, 10:58 AM
    • #8
    • 27th Nov 17, 10:58 AM
    A quick look tells me this would be £9K a year or £750 per month.
    Your figures don't match the article. For 2 children studying outside London with a parental income over £60k, the contribution is £4,100 each child= £8,200 total.

    Given that teenagers supposedly leave all the lights on, eat mountains of food, turn the heating up full blast, shower for hours, have the latest iPhones, use Mum & Dad as a taxi service and cash machine and need wardrobes of clothes, there must be some saving when they leave.
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 27th Nov 17, 3:40 PM
    • 19,705 Posts
    • 31,853 Thanks
    Spendless
    • #9
    • 27th Nov 17, 3:40 PM
    • #9
    • 27th Nov 17, 3:40 PM
    Your figures don't match the article. For 2 children studying outside London with a parental income over £60k, the contribution is £4,100 each child= £8,200 total.

    Given that teenagers supposedly leave all the lights on, eat mountains of food, turn the heating up full blast, shower for hours, have the latest iPhones, use Mum & Dad as a taxi service and cash machine and need wardrobes of clothes, there must be some saving when they leave.
    Originally posted by silvercar
    I went on this

    2017 starter.
    £62,187+ £3,928 £4,502

    From

    https://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2016/09/02/how-much-are-parents-supposed-to-give-their-children-when-they-go-to-university/#new

    I know my 2 are not costing anything like that amount to keep at home currently still being at school/FE college. There certainly may be some saving but not to the tune of £8-9K per year.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 27th Nov 17, 6:32 PM
    • 36,185 Posts
    • 152,920 Thanks
    silvercar
    I went on this

    2017 starter.
    £62,187+ £3,928 £4,502

    From

    https://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2016/09/02/how-much-are-parents-supposed-to-give-their-children-when-they-go-to-university/#new

    I know my 2 are not costing anything like that amount to keep at home currently still being at school/FE college. There certainly may be some saving but not to the tune of £8-9K per year.
    Originally posted by Spendless
    I suspect, that the lowest income giving the highest loans are sufficient to support those students 52 weeks of the year ie including holiday time and possible a contribution to the household budget when they are home. The amount that is needed by a reasonably frugal student could well be less than that.

    Anecdotally, the squeezed middle are the students who suffer. those at the top end have parental support, those at the lowest have the loan system plus university bursaries etc, those in the middle whose parents may not have much spare income are the ones struggling.
    • Starrystarrynight1
    • By Starrystarrynight1 30th Nov 17, 8:07 PM
    • 134 Posts
    • 267 Thanks
    Starrystarrynight1
    The government doesn't stand there waiting for parents to hand over a cheque for their 'contribution.' What parents can afford to give their kids at university is their own business.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I used to be Starrystarrynight on MSE, before a log in technical glitch!
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 30th Nov 17, 9:47 PM
    • 36,185 Posts
    • 152,920 Thanks
    silvercar
    The government doesn't stand there waiting for parents to hand over a cheque for their 'contribution.' What parents can afford to give their kids at university is their own business.
    Originally posted by Starrystarrynight1
    Sure, but the parents are the 'enablers', without their contribution a lot of students won't be able to manage financially at university.
    • Tabbytabitha
    • By Tabbytabitha 1st Dec 17, 5:16 PM
    • 434 Posts
    • 867 Thanks
    Tabbytabitha
    Certainly,but they will receive the minimum due to the household income (plus a company car is added) and I doubt they actually cost that much at home compared to the difference x 2 between what they'd receive as a student loan and what the maximum loan is and is the 'expected' parental contribution. A quick look tells me this would be £9K a year or £750 per month. I am quite sure my own 2 children don't cost that much to keep per month. Her eldest wants to study medicine so the course is longer and I think options to work are more limited during the duration of study

    We've had to tell my 2 that though we can and will pay for 100% of accommodation in eldest's first year, this is due to his sister still being at the local Secondary school a few streets away and being relatively cheap for that year, he will need to find a job and save during this year because for yr2 we will be funding his sister at a further away sixth form due to the subject she wishes to study. We've had to veto his suggestion that he studies in London for this reason.
    Originally posted by Spendless
    Your figures don't match the article. For 2 children studying outside London with a parental income over £60k, the contribution is £4,100 each child= £8,200 total.

    Given that teenagers supposedly leave all the lights on, eat mountains of food, turn the heating up full blast, shower for hours, have the latest iPhones, use Mum & Dad as a taxi service and cash machine and need wardrobes of clothes, there must be some saving when they leave.
    Originally posted by silvercar
    Exactly. We found ourselves about £80 a week better off when our teenager left home and we didn't spend anything like the amount of money on him that friends earning double our income did.
    • Spendless
    • By Spendless 2nd Dec 17, 7:42 AM
    • 19,705 Posts
    • 31,853 Thanks
    Spendless
    Exactly. We found ourselves about £80 a week better off when our teenager left home and we didn't spend anything like the amount of money on him that friends earning double our income did.
    Originally posted by Tabbytabitha
    What sort of things were you paying for that meant you made savings of £80 a week when your teen wasn't there. I've had a look at our figures (admittedly quickly) but see nothing like these amount of savings to come.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

1,089Posts Today

6,592Users online

Martin's Twitter