Losing 1400 when partner moves in

raven83

And who says romance is dead eh? You cynical lot!:D

zagfles

miamoo wrote: »

I have a friend who was in a very similar situation, her OH moved in with her an her 2 children but they were better off, as he paid £800 a month on his private rent plus all the bills.
Her rent/bills/shopping/ctax was only £800 a month, so even though she lost her benefits, they weren't any worse off.

He wont actually save himself money, but he will have less outgoings of his own and therefore he will have more money to put in the pot.

But of course this will vary greatly - £800 a month is a lot to pay in rent & household bills for a single person.

My friend who's in a similar position to the OPs partner pays about £350 a month in rent for his house share which includes all household bills. His partner would lose about £1200 a month in benefits if he moved in with her. That's about £850 net loss per month, £10,000 per year. With his other financial commitments he can't afford it, simple as. And unfortunately they're not Mills & Boon fans so they are unable to live on love alone. They just add to the depressing UK statistics about children brought up in workless households.

The French don't seem to have the same problem, as they have tax allowances which a step-parent can use if they suddenly become responsible for their new partner's kids. So the income loss isn't as great. We just have sanctimonious forum posters telling people how to live.

Guess which works?

Idiophreak

apoorlykitten wrote: »

i work for a family business and so does my mum and both my sisters. were 18 months into it and have only just started taking a wage in the last 8 months. i was working previously and helping here 2 days with out pay. if i could work more hours and get payed for it i would. on the days im currently not working i am looking after my sisters children so they can work. we help each other out.
im considering leaving if i could get more hours at another job. but i also enjoy spending time with my kids after school and weekends and i can currently help both my sisters with childcare. i dont charge them. if i worked more hours somewher else both my sisters would need to pay for childcare.

Right...so you *were* using your benefits to subsidise your family business, now you're using them to save your sisters money.

And there was I thinking you actually *needed* them.

Stop doing other people favours and get a job that actually pays money.

You are receiving benefits because you don't have enough money to live on with just your wages. When your partner moves in, you will have plenty of money to live on...so why do you expect to keep receiving the same level of benefits?

I think you've just completely missed the point of benefits altogether. They're not an endless pot of free money that you have some entitlement to. They're a system designed to help the NEEDY.

miss_hh

I fully understand what your trying to get across.
At the end of the day, your children are not your current partners so whilst he (im assuming) is happy to be out of pocket - I doubt he wants to fully lose his financial independence.

It is up to the childrens father to provide 100%. Some men (women also) can be quite tight with money and maybe the op doesnt want to have to 'ask' for money.

You need to sit your parnter down and explain to him that once he moves in that your finances will have to become 'joint' 'our'.

You need to be upfront with him and he needs to really consider if he wants to commit to this relationship as commitment comes in many forms and finance is one of those.

I am in the same situation. My BF lives in a neg equity apartment. He cant sell it. If he rents, it will only cover half the mortgage and he also has his management fees of 100 a month on top of this. If he moved in with me, he would still be paying out around 400 a month for his apartment whilst also contributing towards my household (I have 3 children also whom are not his) as like yourself I would also lose out on upto £10000 a year. We can not afford to live with each other, but we are more than willing to lose out on my 'income' but cannot do this until he gets rid of his apartment.

shedboy94

Idiophreak wrote: »

Right...so you *were* using your benefits to subsidise your family business, now you're using them to save your sisters money.

And there was I thinking you actually *needed* them.

Stop doing other people favours and get a job that actually pays money.

You are receiving benefits because you don't have enough money to live on with just your wages. When your partner moves in, you will have plenty of money to live on...so why do you expect to keep receiving the same level of benefits?

I think you've just completely missed the point of benefits altogether. They're not an endless pot of free money that you have some entitlement to. They're a system designed to help the NEEDY.

If only this were true.......:(

Idiophreak

zagfles wrote: »

My friend who's in a similar position to the OPs partner pays about £350 a month in rent for his house share which includes all household bills. His partner would lose about £1200 a month in benefits if he moved in with her. That's about £850 net loss per month, £10,000 per year. With his other financial commitments he can't afford it, simple as.

I think that's the issue, though. If he didn't have these "other financial commitments", he'd either be able to afford to move in just on his wage, or if his wage was low enough, the couple would be entitled to more benefits to make up the difference.

If he's got other debts, children etc that are a drain on his finances, I'm afraid that's not the government's fault. Benefits shouldn't be used to subsidise people's lifestyle choices.

Sparklebabey

zagfles wrote: »

My friend who's in a similar position to the OPs partner pays about £350 a month in rent for his house share which includes all household bills. His partner would lose about £1200 a month in benefits if he moved in with her. That's about £850 net loss per month, £10,000 per year. With his other financial commitments he can't afford it, simple as. And unfortunately they're not Mills & Boon fans so they are unable to live on love alone. They just add to the depressing UK statistics about children brought up in workless households.

Of course he could always think of ways to get himself out of the situation...instead of being happy for the state to bring his children up.

What would he do if there was no tax credits? Let his kids and missus live in poverty?

Single parent benefits are for just that - single parents. Not benefits that you get when your partner is safely esconsed in his own batchelor pad and pops round for his tea and leg over at the weekend.

Your friend is letting his children live in a single parent house and should frankly be ashamed.

What happened years ago when our parents didnt have tax credits? Oh yeah, they stuck together and worked every hour on a 'tag team' kinda basis.

I couldn't be friends with someone who put money over a childs happiness and development but maybe I am the freak..

The fact that you refer to them as 'partners' is pretty telling as well...not just a casual relationship.

raven83

Whilst i do understand what the OP is trying to say, at the end of the day when two peopke choose to live together they choose (IMO) to share finances, and that includes raising someone elses kids. I would personally feel some what upset if say i was in a situation like this and the boyfriend said he wasnt willing to support my kids, as far as i am concerned single mums come as a package, when a man take on a lady that has children he is taking on the WHOLE thing not just the relationship with the lady. Its about being with someone for love and if that means they have children then so be it. Relationships these days are based alot on money, its just so clinical and a sad representation of the times we live in.

Sorry for the rant

nomoreboomandbust

apoorlykitten wrote: »

i lose 1400 a month not 14k ! anyway i came here for advise not to be slammed or made to look bad. i thought this would be place i was offered support and or help. not to be spoken to like i have been.

i have 3 teeneage children plus 2 cats. they all need lunches everyday. my eldest needs money to go to college on the bus, i do not get help for that. i also have to clothe and give them pocket money. it all adds up believe me. i do not live beyond my means and i save every penny when i can.

im simply stating that the benfit system is severly flawed. its sad to think i will be better off not living with my partner. we both work for family run businesses and we both work bloody hard!
also i won tbe gainin g27k, my partner earns that money he won tbe giving it straight to me will he.

oh well i hoped for help and all i got was .........well.........

If you don't want people to be judgemental you should think before writing such cringeworthy statements, to say you get no help ! what more do you want ? a special bus fund as well on top of all the other stuff you are creaming off the system :mad:

midnight_express

apoorlykitten wrote: »

i DO NOT use my children as a meal ticket you narrow minded pig headed idiot

But without them you wouldn't be getting WTCs, CB , CTCs and you would be getting a lot less housing benefit. You are in for a nasty shock when the benefit system changes and / or the money makers grow up. You'll find the child free rarely get anything from the state.

I agree with you totally that the system is crazy. Your case is a perfect example of why all child related benefits should be abolished. It's the only way to get rid of the benefit breeders.