We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
BTL For Ex and Child?
Comments
-
Actually, I can see where you are coming from chambta.
In this day and age, it is difficult if not impossible to pay for not only your own home but also to provide by way of free rent, a home for your ex. Yes there is a question of responsibility to a child but that should not extend to giving an ex partner (of either sex) who has custody of a child a free ride, they too have to be responsible.
Having children, being single and working is difficult yes but not impossible, is there any way your ex partner could get herself a job (even a part time one) whereby you help out by way of looking after your daughter while she works? This could then help her (and your daughter) to obtain a suitable rental property whilst keeping childcare costs low.
Partnerships/marriages are always awkward things to deal with, especially when there are children involved and finances are always stretched until things are sorted out.
The OP has said he will be/is already, paying towards his child but the child is not just one parents responsibility...it is a dual responsibilty and the one with custody has to adjust and do their bit too.We made it! All three boys have graduated, it's been hard work but it shows there is a possibility of a chance of normal (ish) life after a diagnosis (or two) of ASD. It's not been the easiest route but I am so glad I ignored everything and everyone and did my own therapies with them.
Eldests' EDS diagnosis 4.5.10, mine 13.1.11 eekk - now having fun and games as a wheelchair user.0 -
Actually, I can see where you are coming from chambta.
In this day and age, it is difficult if not impossible to pay for not only your own home but also to provide by way of free rent, a home for your ex. Yes there is a question of responsibility to a child but that should not extend to giving an ex partner (of either sex) who has custody of a child a free ride, they too have to be responsible.
Having children, being single and working is difficult yes but not impossible, is there any way your ex partner could get herself a job (even a part time one) whereby you help out by way of looking after your daughter while she works? This could then help her (and your daughter) to obtain a suitable rental property whilst keeping childcare costs low.
Partnerships/marriages are always awkward things to deal with, especially when there are children involved and finances are always stretched until things are sorted out.
The OP has said he will be/is already, paying towards his child but the child is not just one parents responsibility...it is a dual responsibilty and the one with custody has to adjust and do their bit too.
You talk alot of sense. Thanks for taking the time to actually read what's been said! I would be 100% behind any attempt she makes to get part time work and would do anything I could to help make it happen.0 -
Love to hear their opinion on the story this week of the asylum seekers getting £12k a month housing benefit.
You get my opinion for free. They aren't asylum seekers!...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »You get my opinion for free. They aren't asylum seekers!
But the level of rent is prohibitive to anyone ever getting a job (ok almost anyone, there's probably a footballer or two)0 -
Read again what I actually saidTaxpayers money WILL be used to pay for her rent. That's not my decision. You obviously want to redesign the country benefits system. I will be paying maintenence of course but that won't affect her entitlement to benefits. Are you suggesting she turns those down? My responsibility is to provide my share towards her upbringing and that's what I'll be doing.
For what it’s worth I don’t think that any private individual should be able to profit from LHA/HB payments, using it to fund their property portfolio, but the fact is that there is totally inadequate social housing provision. So, yep, I would say that the HB/LHA system does needs an overhaul but that’s not actually necessary to cover your own suggested scenario because those benefits are quite simply not payable to house the child of a LL.…. You seem to be suggesting that taxpayers money be used to pay you to provide a roof over your child's head. You could consider paying a greater sum of money to your ex-partner to improve your child's lot in other ways, or sharing his/her upbringing in a way that will allow time for your ex-wife to go back to work.
It’s more than a moral issue Olly - the HB/LHA regs do not permit payment of those benefits in these circumstances. It took until almost two thirds of the way through the posts for the OP to understand that several people had already posted to this effect.Regardless of morals the OP continues not to get with this is that his ex could very easily do him over .
And here it is in black and whiteLandlord is the parent of the tenant’s child[FONT="]3.269 If the landlord is the parent of a child for whom the tenant or their partner is responsible, treat the tenant as not liable for housing costs. This reflects the fact that the absent parent has responsibilities towards their child, including providing accommodation. Responsibility for a child means more than ‘cares for’. The child must be a member of the claimant’s family, and included in their applicable amount.[/FONT]0 -
Every Council has a benefit fraud hotline, and the benefits agency can cross check all sorts of other data. Presumably he is registered as the father of the child and they are receiving child benefit, for example?Firstly, your ex can/could revert back to her maiden name, secondly I know of fathers renting to their daughters (same surname), and those in relationships renting to their partners. So if I were in your position I would rent to your ex, only if personal questions are raised should you honestly explain the position, if not asked, then you have no need to raise the subject.
What you are suggesting is not just a case of “playing the HB game” : it looks mighty like an incitement to commit benefit fraud Wings.0 -
I think a lot of you are being very harsh here. For once we have someone who is not only wanting the best for his child both financially and emotionally, but is willing to help out his ex as well.
I don't think it would be a good idea to go down this route for all the reasons mentioned above. Private rent might be the way to go and like it or not she may have to get a job to make ends meet.
People don't seem to be reading the OP's posts properly. They are not married. She is not entitled to any part of his house. He is trying to ensure that his child has a decent roof over her/his head and that goes hand in hand with making sure his ex is okay too.
In my opinion he has asked the question for all the right reasons. It is not the job of the ex partner to pay for accommodation for both parties. I am guessing he is trying to avoid the circumstances where the child would be better off with him - because he knows it would be better all round if the child lives with his mother and he pays maintenance.
Geez folks.0 -
I think people have assumed that the OP has come on here intending to commit benefit fraud and that's far from the truth, I'm sure.
He came on asking a question, got answers and then it just seems he's had abuse ever since.I am a Mortgage Consultant and don't like to be told what I can and can't put in a signature so long as it's legal and truthful.0 -
which he could equally do by simply choosing to top up his ex's LHA so she could rent a better standard of property ( that is not to say I think he *should* do this either)I think a lot of you are being very harsh here. For once we have someone who is not only wanting the best for his child both financially and emotionally, but is willing to help out his ex as well.
and * you * don't seem to be reading other people's respond posts properly either...I don't think it would be a good idea to go down this route for all the reasons mentioned above. Private rent might be the way to go and like it or not she may have to get a job to make ends meet.
People don't seem to be reading the OP's posts properly. They are not married. She is not entitled to any part of his house.
The issue is that the child is his and you cannot back up a legitimate claim for HB/LHA payments if you are both parent and LL.
( and on a slight side issue, given that none of us know the true finances behind the OP's situation, you may also like to take a look at this before making generalisations on property/relationship law.)0 -
poppysarah wrote: »But the level of rent is prohibitive to anyone ever getting a job (ok almost anyone, there's probably a footballer or two)
I agree with all of that.But calling them "asylum seekers" is wrong, and leads to misconceptions about those seeking asylum....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards