If Ex is On Benefits..is this Right

blimey40

Lets say a PWC pays his 30%. Lets for argument, say the PWC does not work one day until the daughter/son is aged 19.

A typical wage for a PWC is say £400, so £120 p/w gets paid to the government, but the PWC simply does not want to work all this time and lets say gets £80 p/w benefits (rough estimate).

Is it right the NRP should be penalised £120 a week, when the PWC is getting only £80? What happens to the other £40?

Is it also right, that the PWC should remain out of work until her daughter/son is 19?

In the above I illustrating a case on CSA 1

LizzieS_2

Lets say a PWC pays his 30%. Lets for argument, say the PWC does not work one day until the daughter/son is aged 19.

A typical wage for a PWC is say £400, so £120 p/w gets paid to the government, but the PWC simply does not want to work all this time and lets say gets £80 p/w benefits (rough estimate).

Not sure whether she can claim IS if the maintenance amount is greater - Kellogs may know for definate.

Is it right the NRP should be penalised £120 a week, when the PWC is getting only £80? What happens to the other £40?

Getting £80pw in cash, but there's the other benefits too, eg housing which is likely to be far more than the remaining £40. If it is a choice of whether or not to stay on benefits, she would pick the one which actually pays more overall.

Is it also right, that the PWC should remain out of work until her daughter/son is 19?

In my opinion, no. There are changes being made in this area by making IS stop when the youngest is 12 and JSA is instead payable (due to move to age 7 in the next couple of years).

In the above I illustrating a case on CSA 1

marshmallows

7 is too old they should change it to when the kids start full time school

Loopy_Girl

You can't get IS if your maintenance assessment is higher than the IS entitlement. You would be told to claim the child support.

Of course this means that you are no longer automatically entitled to HB, CTB, free prescriptions etc etc as you are as soon as you claim IS.

blimey40

Lizzies

Hope Kelloggs come back to answer the first one.

NRP pays 30%, which is greater then the sum received on IS for the PWC. How can can you get this calculated accurately so the NRP is paying at the very least what the PWC is receiving on IS?

I's accept that maybe the PWC cannot work or find it hard until say son/daughter is say 15/16, but never 19.

Claiming child support would be less than say £120, say before 2000?

How much of what the NRP is on the Child Support? what if it goes over what she receives?

looby75

LizzieS wrote: »

Not sure whether she can claim IS if the maintenance amount is greater - Kellogs may know for definate.

Is it right the NRP should be penalised £120 a week, when the PWC is getting only £80? What happens to the other £40?

Getting £80pw in cash, but there's the other benefits too, eg housing which is likely to be far more than the remaining £40. If it is a choice of whether or not to stay on benefits, she would pick the one which actually pays more overall.

Is it also right, that the PWC should remain out of work until her daughter/son is 19?

In my opinion, no. There are changes being made in this area by making IS stop when the youngest is 12 and JSA is instead payable (due to move to age 7 in the next couple of years).

If the amount of maintenance is higher than £80.60p per week (£60.60 IS for a lone parent plus £20 disregard of maintenance) then PWC can not claim IS, they can however still claim child tax credits and housing/council tax benefit due to low income. When the rules changed so that all maintenance is paid directly to PWC I was very very close to the borderline of not being eligible for IS. As it is I only receive £16 in IS payments each week and thats because ex now has the children overnight at weekends and holiday so his payments dropped slightly.

I would love a job, last time I saw the lone parent advisor she did a better off calculation for me and I will be £102 A WEEK better off if I manage to get a 16 hour a week min wage job. I'd be bonkers to not try and get a job knowing that.

Unfortunately jobs aren't exactly flowing freely at the moment

blimey40

fair enough.

But how much extra say would be Child support be over Income Support.

if the NRP is being charged 30% of his wage, and the PWC gets less. How is this fair?

Loopy_Girl

blimey40 wrote: »

NRP pays 30%, which is greater then the sum received on IS for the PWC. How can can you get this calculated accurately so the NRP is paying at the very least what the PWC is receiving on IS?

The only way to do that would be to get a lower paid job! The assessment is done on the NRP's wage. What the PWC receives in benefit is totally irrelevant.

But if the assessment is over the amount of IS entitlement then they would not be able to claim it so essentially all the maintenance is going to the PWC.

Loopy_Girl

blimey40 wrote: »

fair enough.

But how much extra say would be Child support be over Income Support.

if the NRP is being charged 30% of his wage, and the PWC gets less. How is this fair?

They can't! If the amount the NRP is paying is greater than the amount of IS then they can't claim IS and get the whole amount from the NRP.

looby75

blimey40 wrote: »

fair enough.

But how much extra say would be Child support be over Income Support.

if the NRP is being charged 30% of his wage, and the PWC gets less. How is this fair?

that wouldn't happen. All of the maintenance that NRP pays is now passed directly to the PWC, and all of their other benefits are adjusted accordingly.

Soubrette

marshmallows wrote: »

7 is too old they should change it to when the kids start full time school

I assume you are talking about going back to work?

There is plenty of evidence that show that working parents are not the best option for children, in general they do better academically and in society when they come home to someone - I work part time (needs must financially) because of this, as evidence shows that even older children benefit from have someone at home. I'd rather have been at home full time up until the youngest was 12 or so.

It is also hard to find somewhere to work with the flexibility to cover sickness, school holidays and school hours.

What I personally would like to see is equal responsibility from both parents - perhaps both could consider working part time so that both could cover the flexibility that children need.

What I tend to see in real life is that some NRPs working full time and have no intention of changing that and yet resent the part time or non working PWC. The PWC has to cover all the children's emotional and physical needs and yet somehow some NRPs expect them to work full time as well.

Not doing a jot of work until the child is 19 is taking that mick though. This is personal opinion but I think it allows children to grow up a bit if they see their family working and not relying on benefits

Sou