Adult dependant grant

gemma86

Hi has anyone ever applied for this? Or know anything about it? I read the info on the direct gov website but doesn't really explain, just says if they are financially dependant on you! My oh is reducing his hours to part time so he can look after the kids while I start uni, so therefore would that make him financially dependant on me?

mummytofour

Yes it would so you should apply. I dont know if there is some earnings limit tho... I guess it based on houshold income groan..

Well done MR Gemma, for becoming a stay-@home-dad/mr-mum! You can join my dh who is now mr-mum/student/carer lol

Theboys!

No I disagree, he will still be working part-time so will not be financially dependant on you.
He should get a rise in working / child tax credits though.

The only person I know who gets adult dependants on my course is somebody who's partner was on job seekers allowance when she started the course and as he cannot claim that due to her student income he is financially dependant on her as he has zero income of his own.

bestpud

Theboys! wrote: »

No I disagree, he will still be working part-time so will not be financially dependant on you.
He should get a rise in working / child tax credits though.

The only person I know who gets adult dependants on my course is somebody who's partner was on job seekers allowance when she started the course and as he cannot claim that due to her student income he is financially dependant on her as he has zero income of his own.

Sorry but that is incorrect! I thought that was the case too, but it isn't! The name is misleading imo.

My OH works FULLTIME and we got the dependents grant on my first year, whe I wasn't working myself.

They do not have to be dependent on you - just dependent on you bringing some money in to the household.

The threshold is pretty low but, yes, apply for it - the worst that will happen is they turn you down.

One caveat though: it does count as income for other benefits, including tax credits!

Theboys!

bestpud wrote: »

Sorry but that is incorrect! I thought that was the case too, but it isn't! The name is misleading imo.

My OH works FULLTIME and we got the dependents grant on my first year, whe I wasn't working myself.

They do not have to be dependent on you - just dependent on you bringing some money in to the household.

The threshold is pretty low but, yes, apply for it - the worst that will happen is they turn you down.

One caveat though: it does count as income for other benefits, including tax credits!

No it certainly wasn't in my case , I left a job to start university, but my LEA said as I had student loans etc I was not financially dependant on my husband who was working full time at that point.
However as you say it is means tested that could have been the problem in our case, as I wasn't entitled to any help with childcare etc last year either. This is despite our family living on an income barely above the max limit for working tax credits :rolleyes:

I Qualified for the very minimum support last year, but things are different now so will get slightly more.

As you say it doesn't hurt to apply for it then, if its a case of spending ten minutes on a form there is nothing to lose

bestpud

Theboys! wrote: »

No it certainly wasn't, in my case I left a job to start university, but my LEA said as I had student loans etc I was not financially dependant on my husband who was working full time at that point.
However as you say it is means tested that could have been the problem in our case, as I wasn't entitled to any help with childcare etc last year either. This is despite our family living on an income barely above the max limit for working tax credits :rolleyes:

I Qualified for the very minimum support last year, but things are different now so will get slightly more.

As you say it doesn't hurt to apply for it then, if its a case of spending ten minutes on a form there is nothing to lose

Your post disagreed with a previous poster, who gave correct information, so it certainly was incorrect! Also, you stated the adult had to be dependent on the student and that is incorrect too!!

You were obviously refused because your income was too high, simple as.

It is misleading, at best, to post information that is based purely on your circumstances.

What you have done is taken your experience and used that to state the OP will not be entitled to the dependents grant, without giving any thought to the rules and/or alternate reasons for you being turned down.

Have a read of your post before trying to tell me you were correct. While you are at it, have a read of the rules for student finance before posting further bad advice!! Or, if you are not sure whether you are talking tripe, or are basing your answer on personal circumstance, please make that clear in your post so people know to check it out!

Theboys!

bestpud wrote: »

Your post disagreed with a previous poster, who gave correct information, so it certainly was incorrect! Also, you stated the adult had to be dependent on the student and that is incorrect too!!

You were obviously refused because your income was too high, simple as.

It is misleading, at best, to post information that is based purely on your circumstances.

What you have done is taken your experience and used that to state the OP will not be entitled to the dependents grant, without giving any thought to the rules and/or alternate reasons for you being turned down.

Have a read of your post before trying to tell me you were correct. While you are at it, have a read of the rules for student finance before posting further bad advice!! Or, if you are not sure whether you are talking tripe, or are basing your answer on personal circumstance, please make that clear in your post so people know to check it out!

Gosh what a nasty unnecessary post.
At no point did I say I was a student finance advisor, I was unaware that we all had to be expert to post on a forum.
As you can see I put, I disagree, not anyone else will disagree.
I also posted after you saying that obviously it was the means testing that was the problem in our case, please note, nice tone followed by smilie etc.

I do not claim to be an expert, I can only put what happened In my situation.

bestpud

Theboys! wrote: »

Gosh what a nasty unnecessary post.
At no point did I say I was a student finance advisor, I was unaware that we all had to be expert to post on a forum.
As you can see I put, I disagree, not anyone else will disagree.
I also posted after you saying that obviously it was the means testing that was the problem in our case, please note, nice tone followed by smilie etc.

I do not claim to be an expert, I can only put what happened In my situation.

I stand by what I said.

It's not about being an expert or not (that is an irrelevent point) - it is about letting people know when we are merely summising.

If you think that was nasty, well so be it... :rolleyes:

I said it was incorrect and I stated why I think people get confused (the name is misleading to say the least), as well as saying I used to think the same myself.

You then decided to tell me you were not incorrect, when you clearly were. You posted 'No it certainly wasn't' so I replied with the same tone.

I'm not sure why it matters that you later went on to say why you were wrong? You stated a point, were told it was wrong, argued it was not, and then went on to say why it was...?

On that note, I'm outta here!

Good luck with your claim OP.

Theboys!

bestpud wrote: »

I stand by what I said.

It's not about being an expert or not (that is an irrelevent point) - it is about letting people know when we are merely summising.

If you think that was nasty, well so be it... :rolleyes:

I said it was incorrect and I stated why I think people get confused (the name is misleading to say the least), as well as saying I used to think the same myself.

You then decided to tell me you were not incorrect, when you clearly were. You posted 'No it certainly wasn't' so I replied with the same tone.

I'm not sure why it matters that you later went on to say why you were wrong? You stated a point, were told it was wrong, argued it was not, and then went on to say why it was...?

On that note, I'm outta here!

Good luck with your claim OP.

Yes the point being It wasn't the case for me. I did not realise it was means tested hence my saying that was probably the problem in my case then.

I think my original misplaced comma has not helped matters either , eg it should have read as if I was saying it was certainly not in my case.

Anyway I am not here to cause offence or row with anyone so will be off now as well

gemma86

Thanks for all your replys! Will apply then hope for the best! Mummytofour I think Mr gemma is really looking forward to it, he was working till late so we missing out with the kids, so this is great 4 both of us! Power to the stay at home dads! Especially yours he sounds a bit of a star with all his roles!!!

mummytofour

gemma86 wrote: »

Thanks for all your replys! Will apply then hope for the best! Mummytofour I think Mr gemma is really looking forward to it, he was working till late so we missing out with the kids, so this is great 4 both of us! Power to the stay at home dads! Especially yours he sounds a bit of a star with all his roles!!!

:beer: Yes he's not too bad a hubby:D Good luck with Uni.