Can you help me see how this is fair

melly1980

fannyanna wrote: »

I just posted the following on the child support forum and then thought this might be the better forum as my question is benefit related really and not specifically child maintenance.

I hope my post is appreciated for what it is. I'm not having a dig at PWC's or anything it's just that I don't see how the situation below is fair however someone else may be able to see it from another point of view and explain the rationale.......

I'm an NRPP with a hubby paying maintenance for 2 children so 20% of his net pay goes every month. Not a problem, I'm fine with that.

Hubby and I have wanted our own family for a while but as we're already financially responsible for two children it's made things a bit tricky but we're now trying for a baby.

Out of curiousity I've just had a look at benefit entitlements if I were to stay at home with the baby. On the basis of my hubby's income we'd be entitled to £66.63 per week. That's child tax credits, housing benefit and child benefit rolled together.

However on the basis that my hubby pays child maintenance 20% of his income is not available to us. If you subtract from his income the amount of money that we never benefit from and work out the benefit entitlement with what is left we'd be entitled to £199.15.

Now I understand that the benefit system is not set up in a way that would allow us to claim the larger amount but to me that doesn't exactly seem fair.

If we have a baby he'll be financially responsible for 3 children yet when being assessed for benefits he'll only be assessed for 1 of them and the 20% income that he never benefits from will be taken into account on the assessment.

I can't see the logic but perhaps this is because I'm only looking at it from our point of view.

No it isnt fair and if you want another kick in the swingers his ex doesnt have to declare child maintanance payments on her tax credits awards.

The results? Yup you guessed it. She gets to declare less income than is in reality coming in thus benefitting from a falsly high tax credits award while you get the reverse situation.

Never mind though. Its all in the name of equality for women.

fannyanna

dseventy wrote: »

Just to be clear and fair to the OP, my comments were not aimed at you, but the "its the same as paying money to the homeless" remark.

D70

Thanks, I did understand that your comment was at the other remark. Just thought it was an appropriate point to clarify our position in that respect as I think some other posters were starting to post along similar lines

melly1980

dseventy wrote: »

This is not charity. As he fathered these children, he needs to pay for them. The analogy of giving to a homeless person is incorrect. There is no obligation for you to pay money to them, there is for your children.
D70

So why should he not get tax credits based on his actual circumstances and more to the point why should t'other woman get more tax credits by being able to omit chiild maintainance payments?

fannyanna

HRV wrote: »

OP- I know exactly what you're saying. We sound like a v similar situation- My OH has 2 DD with ex. We planned to the hilt for a baby- but we're now having (naturally conceived) twins!!!

So I have to go back to work-depite childcare of £1200 a month- no extra allowance other than child benefit and no account of the 20% he pays out. It's not fair, not that he shouldnt pay towards his children, but it does seem unjust- especially as they don't take the maintenance he pays into account for her benefit entitlement

And to those of you who feel we dont have the cost of his 2 DDs we do. We have to provide a bedroom for them (so need a bigger house), we clothe themwhen they're with us (due to inappropriate clothing/ shoes too small when regularly from their mum), a car to fit us all in (so now a 7 seater), we pay fro Rainbows and swimming lessons.

Haha - how ironic we do have a similar situation.

We can afford a baby but I have a fear that like you we'll have twins (as there's twins on both my side of the family and hubbies side). Where I live nursery care for 1 child starts at about £1,000 and childminding from £800 if you're lucky. We can afford care for one but not two (even though you'd get a reduced rate for the second). I would then be in a position where I'd be better of staying at home to look after the children and that's why I've looked into what we'd be entitled to and stumbled across what is in my opinion an injustice.

All the best with your pregnancy x

fannyanna

Thanks Melly. You've said the things I was too afraid to say for fear of a PWC hating witch hunt :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

HRV

I spent the 1st 2 days after finding out about the twins in tears-not because of 2 babies but because of our financial situation!

In a way I am 'lucky' I have a well paid but highly stressful job working 50+ hours- so me working does still pay- just. We can not live without that bit extra though and like you say would be entitled to something ike 11 pounds a week if I give up- not possible! Financially we would be best off if my OH gave up work, and I worked- but his DD would loose out and he would not enjoy it- so we will continue to both work full time.

OP- I hope you manage to get your family- you are entitled to your own baby too- it may be hard but Im sure it'll be worth it ( I keep telling myself:D)

AnxiousMum

fannyanna wrote: »

If they lived with us the benefits would increase from £60 ish per week to just under £200 so a fair jump. We would also have that 20% of my husbands income available so I think it would be a sizeable difference. I appreciate there would be added expenditure but I'm not sure it would be that much.

You would also have 20% of the PWC's income in child support - so quite possibly, considerable financial difference in your household!

I did reply to your post on the child support forum.....

fannyanna

AnxiousMum wrote: »

You would also have 20% of the PWC's income in child support - so quite possibly, considerable financial difference in your household!

I did reply to your post on the child support forum.....

Indeed.

Yes I just saw and responded (I got a bit confused with the solution you kindly suggested) - thank you

melly1980

AnxiousMum wrote: »

You would also have 20% of the PWC's income in child support - so quite possibly, considerable financial difference in your household!

I did reply to your post on the child support forum.....

Never going to happen though because unless his ex is a rapist, murderer and hosts dinner parties with the Hitlers she is going to get the kids. Again, more equality at work.

nannytone_2

if his eligability for tax credits was taken on income 'after' his maintenace was paid ( meaning you'd get more tax credits) then surely that would mean that the taxpayer would be helping to pay his maintenance too?

it might seem unfair, but surely it would be more unfair for him to receive extra tax credits to help pay for other children that are his responsibility?