We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
CT benefit and "deprivation of capital"
Comments
-
It's outrageous that you can spend redundancy on paying off a huge credit card balance of thousands spent on fags and living it up and get benefits + housing benefit while the person who has spent an identical sum reducing his/her mortgage gets neither. There again, that's what socialism in Britain is all about; favouring the fekless at the expense of the prudent.it's okay to pay off a debt when it is legally due but not okay to use a lump sum to pay off a loan in advance of the schedule, such as paying off the mortgage before the term.0 -
For example, it's okay to pay off a debt when it is legally due but not okay to use a lump sum to pay off a loan in advance of the schedule, such as paying off the mortgage before the term.
As stupid as it might sound, but I am aware of a family member that received some compensation (£67600) for injuries sustained and had to pay the mortgage repayments every month out of this settlement along with the normal expenses of life until the level of capital reduced to below £6000 before she could get her benefits back.
The sting was that the settlement would have easily paid off the mortgage (£58,000) with cash to spare! She was advised that if she did that then she would be treated as still having the capital!
As it is she still has a mortgage which the State is now helping to pay, she has little capital left now - under £1000 and is trying to exist of Welfare payments to live!!!
Beggars belief.0 -
Just wondering why Kernel Sanders has bothered to resurrect a thread that's over 18 months old...... :cool:0
-
She could have cleared the mortgage and lived off the remaining £9,600. As there are no more mortgage repayments to make that amount of money at £71 a week could have lasted well over 2 years....at which point her deemed capital would have been below £16,000 (not £6,000) and she could have started to get some benefits. She would have saved loads in interest. Eventually her deemed capital would be below £6,000 and she would get full benefits.As stupid as it might sound, but I am aware of a family member that received some compensation (£67600) for injuries sustained and had to pay the mortgage repayments every month out of this settlement along with the normal expenses of life until the level of capital reduced to below £6000 before she could get her benefits back.
The sting was that the settlement would have easily paid off the mortgage (£58,000) with cash to spare! She was advised that if she did that then she would be treated as still having the capital!
As it is she still has a mortgage which the State is now helping to pay, she has little capital left now - under £1000 and is trying to exist of Welfare payments to live!!!
Beggars belief.:footie:
Regular savers earn 6% interest (HSBC, First Direct, M&S)
Loans cost 2.9% per year (Nationwide) = FREE money.
0 -
Andy is a billy no mates he has no life outside of these forums,
he done Martin Lewis a big favour when he sold this site to Money Super Market, he doubled the value MSM thought look at all those members, little did they know half were Andy's his Alter Egos :rotfl:0 -
-
can someone please tell me, who is Andy? and what are his AE's? I keep seeing references in threads and it's very confusingLove many, trust few, learn to paddle your own canoe.
“Don’t have children if you can’t afford them” is the “Let them eat cake” of the 21st century. It doesn’t matter how children got here, they need and deserve to be fed.0 -
-
Kernel_Sanders wrote: »I don't believe it's against the rules.
Shouting at other members is, though.
Dragging up such an old thread is pointless, if the OP's situation has not been solved by now your little rant was certainly not going to magically cure things.
I don't see any shouting?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards