Child maintenance & income support pre April 2010

andyg_prs

I'd say in the range of 80k. But how would she qualify for help if she didn't qualify for IS?

dmg24

andyg_prs wrote: »

I'd say in the range of 80k. But how would she qualify for help if she didn't qualify for IS?

The eligible housing costs could have entitled her to IS.

Did she claim Carers Allowance?

andyg_prs

I don't know the details but I think either some of the DLA or possibly carer's allowance got substituted for the Motability car that she drives.

I don't know anything about eligible housing costs.

dmg24

andyg_prs wrote: »

I don't know the details but I think either some of the DLA or possibly carer's allowance got substituted for the Motability car that she drives.

I don't know anything about eligible housing costs.

CA would not be used towards the mobility car, the DLA mobility component would have been.

Eligible housing costs are part of the amount that the govt says a person needs to live off. So if her mortgage was £80,000, her housing costs would have been close to £400 per month. Add that to her personal allowance, and there would have been some entitlement to IS.

andyg_prs

You are probably right that there is some entitlement. However, in 2006 she took me to the CSA as she didn't believe I was paying enough. They took the same money from me that I was paying her but she got over £100 less as they said that she wasn't entitled to all of it. I ended up helping her out, yet again, by calling the CSA so that we both jointly agreed to go back to a private arrangment. The CSA arrangement lasted for a single month. I don't believe this information every reached whichever agency that organises the mortgage interest assistance. However, it seems logical that if they knew the full extent of what I paid her, she wouldn't be entitled to the full mortgage interest assistance...but I admit I don't know the rules.

She also concealed the £50k equity from the house sale that I gave her. She had that for 10 months whilst still claiming housing and other benefits - I believe that there is only a 6 month entitlement to disregard savings of that level....

dmg24

andyg_prs wrote: »

You are probably right that there is some entitlement. However, in 2006 she took me to the CSA as she didn't believe I was paying enough. They took the same money from me that I was paying her but she got over £100 less as they said that she wasn't entitled to all of it. I ended up helping her out, yet again, by calling the CSA so that we both jointly agreed to go back to a private arrangment. The CSA arrangement lasted for a single month. I don't believe this information every reached whichever agency that organises the mortgage interest assistance. However, it seems logical that if they knew the full extent of what I paid her, she wouldn't be entitled to the full mortgage interest assistance...but I admit I don't know the rules.

She also concealed the £50k equity from the house sale that I gave her. She had that for 10 months whilst still claiming housing and other benefits - I believe that there is only a 6 month entitlement to disregard savings of that level....

I don't know what the SMI rate would have been back then so can't really say.

The savings disregard can be extended if you can provide evidence that it is still earmarked for a house purchase and there is good reason for the delay.

I am a great believer in karma. There is little you can do about the past, but if she has been cheating the system something will come back and bite her in the end.

andyg_prs

I know that she got me to put £6k of the equity into her ISA and that a few £k (say £3000) of the rest of the money that went into her bank account, got spent before she bought the house. Not sure what the 2004/2005 limit for savings was? I imagine that if she left the money in her ISA (which she did) plus spent the other money that was given (say £3,000) that it would count as £9,000 of savings that she hadn't reserved for the house purchase and should have been declared as savings?

andyg_prs

Also, does anyone know the rationale for the April 2010 change? I know that some people are struggling, but some people could receive large amounts of child maintenance payments - I know of people paying over £1000 per month. If these payments aren't taken into consideration, isn't this encouraging people to stay on IS rather than get a job - where appropriate. PS - please note, I'm just interested in the rationale. I'm not suggesting that being a single parent is easy or anything like that.

clearingout

can only assume it's about hitting child poverty targets - and frankly, as a parent, wouldn't you rather see the money go to your children than the Secretary of State? It is true that you can get caught, as a single parent, in the benefits trap as you do get a lot of support. However, there is a need to recognise the situation for what it is - and it's not easy having full responsiblity for a child and not being able to rely on the other parent to help out.

My own situation is very frustrating. I want to train as a secondary teacher in a shortage area (languages). Tutition fees have gone through the roof. I have three children. I can get through a training year on loans, and Tax Credit and support from the Government for childcare. But once I get a job, earning no more than around £25k in the first instance, I will lose a huge amount of Tax Credit compared with what I have now, have three children in childcare from 8am - 6pm (one not in school so needing full-time care at a cost of around £35 a day, the other two in breakfast and afterschool clubs which also have to be paid for) and all the stress of a full-time, highly stressful job. I will also be forced to pay back any money I take out on a student loan as I would be earning above thresholds. Putting all these numbers through current on-line calculators, I would actually be about £100 a month worse off working in a full-time PROFESSIONAL job than I am sitting at home on benefits and my children would have their mother available to them. Dignity and self-respect aside, is it worth it whilst my children are young?

At the same time, I'm not getting any younger, I have missed out on years of pension because my ex and I had two properities and we had failed to make much pension provision because we saw the house as providing for us into our futures. That's all gone now. I'm starting from scratch, with three children in tow and 20 working years lost to youth that fails to recognise what's important until it's forced upon you! I am a professional person, just years out of work because of having had a family and supporting a husband in our so-called 'family' business. I have a huge amount of experience to offer the classroom environment and am motivated to make a difference. How can someone like that be better off on benefits?!!! System is very wrong, somewhere....just don't know how I would fix it!!! However, if someone would right off any tutition fees and give me childcare support for 5 years, I would gladly give back three times that in guarenteed classroom time!

DX2

andyg_prs wrote: »

Also, does anyone know the rationale for the April 2010 change? I know that some people are struggling, but some people could receive large amounts of child maintenance payments - I know of people paying over £1000 per month. If these payments aren't taken into consideration, isn't this encouraging people to stay on IS rather than get a job - where appropriate. PS - please note, I'm just interested in the rationale. I'm not suggesting that being a single parent is easy or anything like that.

Something to do with child poverty, and many NRP's were seething that the child support they paid actually didn't benefit the child in anyway. However the total disregard that was brought in is just madness, as you say some PWC get a nice tidy sum of child support every month and they still get IS and all the other passported benefits.