My sons rent

thehornets

I would like to say thanks to eveyrone for varied opinions:T.. It's nice to know i'm not the only one out there.It would have helped me out him living here and not having to work nearly every weekend to make ends meet but now the problem has been sorted and he's moved in with his eldest brother for £250/month....Thanks again...:beer:

happyinflorida

I would say it depends on your individual circumstances. If you can afford to let him stay for just the cost of the food and extras he'll cost you, then letting him stay for a cheaper amount should be ok, as long as you insist he is saving loads each month from his income, so that he can & will move out asap. What's his plans? Get them from him first, then decide.
If's it's a matter of you needing extra income and you were thinking of taking a lodger to make extra money to help your situation, then charge him the same amount as you need that money.

kimfarren

Blimey!!! I think I may get my daughter to read this!!! Shes nearly 20 years old and working in London for about 8 months now. She earns £17,000 a year and pays me £90 A MONTH. I do all her washing, cooking, cleaning and buy all her toiletries etc. And she thinks shes hard doneby as £10 of her rent we make her pay to us as we've installed sky into her room and thats how much the extra subscription costs. ( and I've just bought her a car (her 1st) for £950)

Might have to rethink methinks!!!!

Staciep88

All my mates that still live at home pay £50 a week and that includes everything.

I agree with xcat_girlx letting him pay less and therefore saying a desposit seems like a good idea. Of course it depends on your own money situation on what you can afford really.

Oldernotwiser

Staciep88 wrote: »

All my mates that still live at home pay £50 a week and that includes everything.

But do they clear £350 per week?

Staciep88

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

But do they clear £350 per week?

I wouldnt have thought so as they would be charged more. I dont know the ins and outs but I'm pretty sure the £50 p/week includes everything. Which thinking about it, yes it is cheap.

But like I said, it depends on the persons personal money situation. For example if one set of parents were stable, they may only charge £50 p/week as they dont really need it, but then there could be another set of parents that need to charge £100 p/week.

It depends on what you can afford to do. I think I would say yes to the £300 p/week and then make sure that he saves say £100 each month so that he has got some sort of savings when he may need it.

Sev_3

To be honest, I doubt he would save himself if you left it to him ( I have a 24 yr old sister living with parents) They have no idea how to manage money or live indepandantly when parents subsidise them constantly.

If u were wanting him to save, I would charge him say £500 and without telling him, pay £100 into an ISA/savings account for him, and then when he is ready to move out you can show him what you've done for him. And you'd be geting £400 towards his keep, which I would consider fair.

Its not ripping him off - it accounts for the extra time/energy/bills i is costing you to clean and cook for him. Ripping him off would be charging him in rent what he was paying before! Dont let him take advantage of you.

Anyway, I wouldnt worry about the housing market at this point - he'll either never be able to afford to buy, or if we go into a recession house prices should hopefully plummet low enough for us first time buyers!! :-)

Oldernotwiser

Staciep88 wrote: »

But like I said, it depends on the persons personal money situation. For example if one set of parents were stable, they may only charge £50 p/week as they dont really need it, but then there could be another set of parents that need to charge £100 p/week.

.

But you see, I don't think it's got anything to do with the parents' financial situation. People should pay their share because it's the right thing to do, regardless of whether or not the money's needed. If parents don't need the money they can save it but it's really up to them.

Staciep88

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

But you see, I don't think it's got anything to do with the parents' financial situation. People should pay their share because it's the right thing to do, regardless of whether or not the money's needed. If parents don't need the money they can save it but it's really up to them.

Thats fair enough if thats your opinion. Thats just my personal opinion and what I would do if I were in that sitation.


I like the idea of 'secret saving' thought

LisaandNick

My parents "charged" me & bro and sis one third of our take home pay to live at home, right from the day I got my first pay packet of £1.36 for doing an evening paper round, Saturday jobs when I was at school etc right to when I moved back home after Uni, and later for a short while after splitting with bf, when I had a proper job. I didn't have any problem with that - my folks spent tons raising us and sending us to Uni etc and it helped cover their costs. It was more to do with teaching us about living costs and the value of money, than a pound for pound reflection of their actual costs or local rents.

So I say £300 sounds about right. It's then up to you whether you keep it to spend on your bills or save it to help your son pay a deposit on his next home.

Good luck!