The £40k family

jellyhead

yes, it's really hard to be at the other end of the spectrum and be for example a single mum with one or more children. many people who get irritated by the high profile families getting 50k a year also seem to extend that irritation to those who are only claiming a small amount. in some cases people are too 'ashamed' to claim what they are entitled to and really struggle.

i needed to be on income support for a while after my son was born, i hadn't planned it that way and didn't concieve my child with the intention of being on benefits. i felt really guilty about it but i couldn't see any childcare that would cater for my sons special needs. the only answer seemed to be to find a man to take on the financial burden of myself and another mans child

Fran

Poppy9 wrote:

"Benefits keep us happy but we'd like a bigger house says mother rof 11 who has never worked"

From the Daily Mail (mon 14th March)

Mrs Scoot 42 has just given birth to her 11th child (by 3rd partner) and claims they have no money worries even though she has never had a days employment in her life. Their benefits income comes to £40948 - equivalent to over £50k before tax. She has never worked because she had her first baby at 17 and there isn't any job that would pay her as much as she gets on benefits so whats the point?

The house which comes rent free has a £1000 tv in sitting room and tv in every bedroom. There are 2 hi fi's and a playstaton. Between them they have 5 mobile phones.

Benefits made up of £752 per month for 3 kids with learning difficulties. The mother says "there is nothing physically wrong with them they are just a bit slow.

Remainder £25087 income support and £71.75 child benefit per week. Rent is free and they pay no council tax. Due to arthritis Mrs Scott says she can't manage the 2 pre school age children herself so her husband cannot work.

She says they spend per week
£200 on food
£60 on clothes
£40 on books and toys
£20 on washing powder
£25 on tobacco
£40 on utilities
£30 mobile phones
£10 on taxis

Total £425

Income: per year

Income support £25087
Child benefit £3731
DLA £9024
Free rent £2392
Free council tax

£787 per week including free rent; £727 excluding free rent/council tax

Finally she says they dont' have to scrimp and save and we can afford to buy the kids everything they want for xmas and birthdays.

Do you think this is what the benefit system was meant for?

OK lets go back to the original post.

Looking at the Child Benefit rates, it appears that there are 6 kids entitled to it (£16.15 for the eldest and £11.05 per child on top of that = £71.40)

Income support would be £356.87 for the couple and 6 children per week.

Child Benefit is taken off Income Support £ for £ so it cannot be added on as extra income.

The amount per year on Income Support is then £18,557.24 - not as the claim above and not with Child Benefit added on. That's for 8 people, the couple and 6 kids. Anyone over 18 will mean a non dependant deduction is taken off Housing Benefit entitlement and Council Tax Benefit and the person will need to contribute to this. It depends how much income the non-dependant has how much is taken off.

The disability benefits are available for anyone with a disability to help with the extra costs as Jellyhead has pointed out. DLA is paid to anyone, regardless of whether they are in or out of work as it is non an income-based benefit, so it should not come into the equation.

This situation is only a snapshot anyway as the older children stop being entitled to Child Benefit as they reach 16 (and up to 19) and leave full time non-advanced education.

If the older children stay around at home the family will really struggle to support them if they don't bring any income into the house.

Curry_Queen

Did you remember to add in the IS disability enhancements? This could well bring the IS up to the level originally stated, and the CB would already have been deducted from the IS they get so that figure is added to their income. Without knowing exactly which rates of DLA the children receive it's difficult to work out exactly what they're entitled to and whether the figures in the report are accurate.


Edit: btw you appear to be working on old rates ... CB in 2004/5 is £16.50 and £11.05 making that £71.75 a week for 6 kids as stated in the report


Edit 2: I've just done a quick calculation and the figures reported in the paper are in fact correct. On top of the £356.87 a week IS they get £42.49 a week for each disabled child and also (if on HR DLA) another £17.08 a week per child enhanced disability premium.

Their CB would be deducted from this figure though, as you correctly stated, so it can't be added on when calculating the total figure, therefore they are only getting £34,000 a year in benefits ... plus of course their rent and CT paid ... free prescriptions, school meals etc etc etc :rolleyes:

Unfortunately, it's families such as these that give the rest of us a bad name

Fran

I deliberately didn't put in any amounts (eg. IS premiums for disability) because anyone can be entitled to Disability Living Allowance regardless of income, and the thing that seems to annoy people most is that they are not working. The amount they get which is because of a low income (ie IS in this case) is what I was working on.


Incidentally if anyone thinks they might have loads of savings with their income, on Income Support you are only allowed £3,000 savings before it affects your IS. You can have up to £8,000 savings - £1 is deducted for every £250 between £3,000 and £8,000.

This income is for 8 people, 2 adults and 6 children so it's bound to be quite large on the face of it.

Curry_Queen wrote:

Edit: btw you appear to be working on old rates ... CB in 2004/5 is £16.50 and £11.05 making that £71.75 a week for 6 kids as stated in the report

Which just goes to show you can't trust what you read anywhere! I just wrote it down wrong.:rolleyes:

Curry_Queen

Fran wrote:

I deliberately didn't put in any amounts (eg. IS premiums for disability) because anyone can be entitled to Disability Living Allowance regardless of income, and the thing that seems to annoy people most is that they are not working. The amount they get which is because of a low income (ie IS in this case) is what I was working on.

I'm not disagreeing with you and yes, DLA is paid to anyone with a disability, regardless of whether they work or not, and isn't a means tested benefit. The reason I pointed out the extra premiums they receive on their IS is because these are only payable to someone in receipt of IS, on top of what they're usually entitled to, and the way I read your post is that you were disputing the amounts stated in the report. Apologies for any misunderstanding

Fran

Curry_Queen wrote:

I'm not disagreeing with you and yes, DLA is paid to anyone with a disability, regardless of whether they work or not, and isn't a means tested benefit. The reason I pointed out the extra premiums they receive on their IS is because these are only payable to someone in receipt of IS, on top of what they're usually entitled to, and the way I read your post is that you were disputing the amounts stated in the report. Apologies for any misunderstanding

Yes I was disputing it because there should be a clear line between income based benefit (IS) and benefits which are received because of disability (which I appreciate affects IS because of the premiums). The way the report is written sounds like they are much more affluent by not working than they actually are. (Statistics eh?!)

Bogof_Babe

Going back to the basic premise of this, i.e. the family assuming all that they get from the state to be their "right" (and incidentally Fran in this case I don't get the impression that they feel at all "low self esteem"), I wonder whether the lines have become somewhat blurred between receipt of normal family allowances (e.g. universally paid child allowance, tax credits, "pick it up it's yours" pensioner credits, minimum income guarantee etc.), and their unemployment payments and discounts/freebies that are not available to the nominally self-maintaining individual or family.

I don't want this to be controversial, and luckily am not in receipt myself of any government funding whatsoever - even my dentistry is paid for via Denplan, and I rarely visit the doctor. However to an outsider it does all seem to come from the same "pot", and seemingly only the forms to fill in to get it, differentiate many of these pay-outs from eachother. Therefore this family quite possibly do not see any difference between their situation, and that of (e.g.) next door, who may also have various state payments coming in, despite the fact that they are actually working.

I know what I mean - sorry I haven't put it very well.

jellyhead

you mean they think they're as entitled to what they get as the family next door with a working parent who get a bit of tax credit and child benefit on top of their wages? say for example my hubby earning 24k and getting £10 a week in tax credits and £16.50 a week in child benefit.

Curry_Queen

Fran wrote:

Yes I was disputing it because there should be a clear line between income based benefit (IS) and benefits which are received because of disability (which I appreciate affects IS because of the premiums). The way the report is written sounds like they are much more affluent by not working than they actually are. (Statistics eh?!)

Ah, I see where you're coming from now and based on that then yes, I do agree that IS is only a meagre income if you compare it to wages that can be earned, even if you only receive NMW. The ironic part of it is that were they to go out to work then they would probably qualify for tax credits that would take them well above this level of income anyway! :rolleyes:

Spendless

Yes i think that's what Bogof Babe means. I have posted before about a single mum friend who has the same net income as myself.

This is because her income is made up of her part-time wages, WTC,CTC, Child Benefit and maintainance.

We live in similar size houses, similar size mortgages, same band council tax, but she has a better disposible income than myself because she gets things like free perscriptions,70% off childcare and gets a 25% reduction in council tax for being only adult there (which is available to all single people before anyone points it out!), she also has one less adult to feed and clothe.

Myself with a working husband also gets Child Benefit for 2 kids plus the family element of CTC (roughly £10 a week)

Is this what you mean Bogof Babe-All the money comes out of the same (taxpayers pot) but some is seen as respectible,some isn't.

To me though the only reason that she gets so much is because of a large family which as others have said is unusual these days. I doubt very much that you could get the same outrage by posting about a 2 kid family on IS.