Tuition fees case: Callum Hurley and Katy Moore lose

Derivative

kruzgal wrote: »

We have checked and there are no grants or bursaries available for people that earn just over the £42,000 limit. It just frustrates me when it is said that anyone can go - if we were not earning and were on benefits then our son could get access to grants/bursaries that would total more than enough to survive at Uni. Because of our earnings this is not the case.

Well, your son can go - if you choose to support him.

The system is designed so that those who can't afford to pay are loaned money and given grants, and those who can afford to pay are expected to.

I do not agree with means tested benefits and I believe that everyone should be able to claim the same support, but to compare your situation to someone on benefits is frankly ridiculous. You are probably taking home £30k net. Three years of hard saving would pay for his entire degree course + accommodation.

Is it fair that you should have to pay? Personally I would say no - but that's how the current system works.

The_One_Who

silvercar wrote: »

The student loan assessment makes no allowance for the expenses of the family, how many children there are to support,

Unless it has changed in recent years other dependents were taken into account when calculating the income. I don't think it was ever a huge amount, but it was taken into consideration.

I don't understand why someone would refuse to provide income details, and then moan about the lack of finance available. Really, it's only the student who will be losing out on the possible extra money.

kruzgal

silvercar wrote: »

The student loan assessment makes no allowance for the expenses of the family, how many children there are to support, housing costs or commuter costs. If a family has income over the magic 42k then SLC deem they can support their student child. If they have high commuting costs or say 4 children in the family to support ( and housing costs to match having a home for 6), they may have very little spare cash to give to the student.

Thank you - this is exactly what I am saying. We accept the need to contribute and of course will do all we can to help our son. I just get frustrated with the assumption/statements from Martin to the media that anyone who wants to can get loans and afford to go. Because of the means tested nature of the system this just isn't the case. I have read posts on other forums from students whose parents earn above the £42k but because of high outgoings can not afford to help them and as a consequence they are not going to Uni. It doesn't seem fair.

Lokolo

kruzgal wrote: »

Thank you - this is exactly what I am saying. We accept the need to contribute and of course will do all we can to help our son. I just get frustrated with the assumption/statements from Martin to the media that anyone who wants to can get loans and afford to go. Because of the means tested nature of the system this just isn't the case. I have read posts on other forums from students whose parents earn above the £42k but because of high outgoings can not afford to help them and as a consequence they are not going to Uni. It doesn't seem fair.

But he can afford to go to uni. He can take a year out and get a job, save the pennies. He can get a summer job, he can get a part time job.

Your outgoings will be reduced and you could give him the equivalent (for example, you won't have to buy his food, so instead, you could give him the money you would usually spend).

University isn't actually that expensive and there are plenty of options other than relying on student loans and parent gifts.

devildog

The_One_Who wrote: »

Unless it has changed in recent years other dependents were taken into account when calculating the income. I don't think it was ever a huge amount, but it was taken into consideration.

I don't understand why someone would refuse to provide income details, and then moan about the lack of finance available. Really, it's only the student who will be losing out on the possible extra money.

It hasn't changed, well at least not up to last year, I believe the figure was £1130 for every 'extra' child/student

Derivative

kruzgal wrote: »

Thank you - this is exactly what I am saying. We accept the need to contribute and of course will do all we can to help our son. I just get frustrated with the assumption/statements from Martin to the media that anyone who wants to can get loans and afford to go. Because of the means tested nature of the system this just isn't the case. I have read posts on other forums from students whose parents earn above the £42k but because of high outgoings can not afford to help them and as a consequence they are not going to Uni. It doesn't seem fair.

I don't think that it is fair that those earning well are asked to contribute while those not earning get to pay nothing.

However, the fact is that any family can afford to send their children to university.

because of high outgoings can not afford to help them

What 'high outgoings' are unavoidable? Are you paying £15k a year in mortgage repayments or something?

Not being able to afford to support, and choosing not to support, are two completely seperate issues.

Again, I wish to repeat that I think means testing is unfair and that all families should recieve the same support. But I think it is disingenious to claim that on £42k gross you cannot afford to support your children through University. You can, you just want to have your cake and eat it.

Mrs_Arcanum

Doesn't Child Benefit stop once they complete normal full time education? Also this magic £42k figure for one earner is also where ALL child Benefit will stop.

At this rate I just hope when the time comes DD can get into Oxford & commute.

Derivative

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

At this rate I just hope when the time comes DD can get into Oxford & commute.

Something to be careful of on that - Oxford require undergraduates to live within six miles of the city centre. Witney might be a bit too far away for that.

edit: Scrap that, had a look and it's 25 miles if living in parental residence and the college agrees to it.

MusicalLawyer

What is wrong with someone getting a job whilst studying if their parents earn above the threshold?

The Maintenance Loan would cover, at least, most of the accommodation fee's if living in halls. If living elsewhere that'd cover it easily. I work part time whilst studying and I earn £6,500 a year - I only work 18 hours per week, so it doesn't affect my studies.


I find it ridiculous that someone would not go to University, just because they apparently cannot afford to go! There are many charities out there which offer bursaries etc so students whose families earn above the threshold but cannot afford to support their child through University, for whatever reason, can still go to University. It proves that they haven't done enough research, and if that is the case should they even attempt to study a degree, if they can't even do the relevant research in to funding for said degree.

Dunroamin

Mrs_Arcanum wrote: »

Doesn't Child Benefit stop once they complete normal full time education? Also this magic £42k figure for one earner is also where ALL child Benefit will stop.

At this rate I just hope when the time comes DD can get into Oxford & commute.

Child benefit does stop at that point but most parents will have been paying out far more than the £20 pw that they get from this. Savings on buying food, clothes, extra utilities," pocket money" could all be used to fund a modest allowance to supplement the basic maintenance loan - you wouldn't be talking about a vast amount of money.