" Dat`s another fine mees ya got me in "

wageslave

chucky wrote: »

that is crazy money... without being sexist could a a single father do the same and get as much in benefit? or is not gender specific?

As I am not part of the discussion, I am not sure whether I am allowed to post. Oh the reply button works so I must be......
No it's child specific Chucky. A single father has every bit as much entitlement as a single mother.
It's not only single parents. Two adults sharing the same house and both on incapacity benefit can really clean up. They can, if they play the system well enough, become each others carers. Fling in mobility allowances etc and we are talking serious money.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It basically works out to around £12.00 per hour for a single parent with 2 kids. Thats double the minimum wage isn't it?

wageslave wrote: »

As I am not part of the discussion, I am not sure whether I am allowed to post. Oh the reply button works so I must be......
No it's child specific Chucky. A single father has every bit as much entitlement as a single mother.
It's not only single parents. Two adults sharing the same house and both on incapacity benefit can really clean up. They can, if they play the system well enough, become each others carers. Fling in mobility allowances etc and we are talking serious money.

that is pretty impressive - that these people could get get to the age of 40/45 without having worked for 15/20 years (if they have more than one child that is).

wageslave

I believe money paid from the absent parent is deducted. It is not deducted however when the custodial parent is in receipt of WTC. In other words if you are a working single parent on a low wage your entitlement to WTC and CTC is not affected by anything you receive from the childs mother/father.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

that is pretty impressive - that these people could get get to the age of 40/45 without having worked for 15/20 years (if they have more than one child that is).

The "limit" has recently been changed. I believe you could claim these amounts up until the youngest child was 16 (or 18 if going onto further education).

It's being revised down to 12....as really at this point, mummy don't need to be home all the time looking after the kids. All hell broke loose though in discussion time on here when that happened, hence a lot of derogatory comments from myself.

It's being revised down again to 7, not sure on this one personally.

Graham_Devon

Harry_Powell wrote: »

I thought the whole point of the CSA was to get the absent parent to 'pick up the slack' from the taxpayer? (i.e. reduce the amount of benefits the single parent received?)

Just goes to show what an abject failure the CSA is/was!

Like I say, I may not be correct, so best to get another opinion first. But I saw a big argument on the benefits board about it, and it certainly looked like they kept it, but may have been differing circumstances.

ETA: Looks like I'm not correct!

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The "limit" has recently been changed. I believe you could claim these amounts up until the youngest child was 16 (or 18 if going onto further education).

It's being revised down to 12....as really at this point, mummy don't need to be home all the time looking after the kids. All hell broke loose though in discussion time on here when that happened, hence a lot of derogatory comments from myself.

It's being revised down again to 7, not sure on this one personally.

i can see it on the social level being lowered to 12.

agree on the age of 7 - that sounds like an economic decision... not convinced.

Harry_Powell

wageslave wrote: »

As I am not part of the discussion, I am not sure whether I am allowed to post. Oh the reply button works so I must be......
No it's child specific Chucky. A single father has every bit as much entitlement as a single mother.
It's not only single parents. Two adults sharing the same house and both on incapacity benefit can really clean up. They can, if they play the system well enough, become each others carers. Fling in mobility allowances etc and we are talking serious money.

Are you're saying that they're not both disabled and are not entitled to ICB or are you saying that they are disabled but that their disability is such that one person is able in ways the other is not and so they can take care of each other. For instance, if one person was blind and the other person could not walk, but between them they can manage.

If you're saying the latter, then surely it's cheaper for the state to pay for them to care for each other than to have to employ full-time care professionals?

p.s. welcome to the discussion. Dont you find that you get so much more out of internet discussion forums when you actually 'discuss' than merely throwing insults?

socrates

My twopence worth

I personally know of three "single" mothers - who decided to have another child at around the same time their eldest child is about to leave full time education

I wonder why?

Graham_Devon

What does need to happen, no matter the age of the child, is the parent needs an incentive to work.

At the moment, you go to work, you lose a lot of the benefits, ending up a tenner or so a week better off, and there a max cap of 16 hours.

So you are left with a decision of A) Do I want to go to work....maybe a break from the kids, or a "normal" life outside the child, and will going to work be worth it at all.

We also need to stop the disincentive of a couple getting together and living together. The male taking on a single female with a kid or two will be expected to pay for everything. The female loses everything.

This is fine in one respect, a big ask of the male (not his child/ren), and a big ask for the female (losing all financial independance) but it comes down to whether love or finances rules. But I do think we need to stop this whole culture of making it financially better off to stay seperate....doesn't do much for the children of the country really, and they would be much better off in a family....I don't personally think we should disincentivise couples from getting together, which is happening at the moment.

wageslave

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The "limit" has recently been changed. I believe you could claim these amounts up until the youngest child was 16 (or 18 if going onto further education).

I think it's 19 but only if they go to college, strangely university isn't classed as full time education