is this right

Marisco

margaretclare wrote: »

As others have said, You don't get benefits for a child who is no longer a child, nor for a dependent who is no longer a dependent.

Your son is lucky enough to be employed. He's old enough, and earns quite enough, to be contributing to the household expenses and that's what you were told originally by the DWP. You don't need benefits for his support. He supports himself and as long as he lives at home, he pays into the household budget.

Time was, before benefits became so widespread, this simple fact was well-known to all. Child leaves school on Friday, starts work on Monday, the first pay-day he/she would be expected to hand over money for what was called 'your keep'.

DH tells of when he was an engineering apprentice long ago. He was paid a tiny amount weekly and the first week he solemnly handed over his brown paper pay-packet complete to his Mum. It was such a pathetic amount, she didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

I know I'm living in the wrong century, but I can't see why all this isn't obvious. A son has moved out of education, is no longer dependent, no longer needs financial support, the money should start to move the other way.

This reminds me of when I first started my apprenticeship, I was paid £2 a week, and I had to give my mam 10 shillings (50p) out of it. That was a lot then!! They didn't need it, but she took it to give me a sense of responsibility and that you don't get owt for nowt!! I didn't see it like that at the time, mind!! It just meant I had less for buying make up and rubbish!!

I think the op's son is getting off lightly if he pays £100 pw, that still leaves him £200 pw for himself! Try running a flat/house, buy food, clothes etc on £100 pw and he'll see he's getting a bargain!! It's no wonder folk are getting aereated when the op suggests he gets a part time job just so they can keep their council tax and HB!! It's folk like that that ruin it for the genuine claimants, who don't have the option of working!!

BigAunty

Will non-dependent deductions still be made to the OPs council tax and housing benefit when their wife receives DLA?

I'm confused because on another thread where someone railed against their working son paying towards the HB/CT shortfall despite the fact he was earning loads, I thought they said these deductions ceased when they had their disability or sickness benefits re-instated? Am I remembering wrongly? I thought on that thread that other posters were amazed that non-dependent income was ignored in such a set-up when the son or daughter earns loads but doesn't have to contribute at all to household expenses. Doubt I can find the thread now.

margaretclare

Marisco wrote: »

This reminds me of when I first started my apprenticeship, I was paid £2 a week, and I had to give my mam 10 shillings (50p) out of it. That was a lot then!! They didn't need it, but she took it to give me a sense of responsibility and that you don't get owt for nowt!! I didn't see it like that at the time, mind!! It just meant I had less for buying make up and rubbish!!

I think the op's son is getting off lightly if he pays £100 pw, that still leaves him £200 pw for himself! Try running a flat/house, buy food, clothes etc on £100 pw and he'll see he's getting a bargain!! It's no wonder folk are getting aereated when the op suggests he gets a part time job just so they can keep their council tax and HB!! It's folk like that that ruin it for the genuine claimants, who don't have the option of working!!

Thanks for this, Marisco. It makes me feel I'm not quite such a dinosaur after all! When I read things like 'leave a full-time well-paid job and remain a dependent just so that parents can keep their benefits' I sometimes wonder what world I've stumbled into. We never voted for it, that's for sure.

anguk

BigAunty wrote: »

Will non-dependent deductions still be made to the OPs council tax and housing benefit when their wife receives DLA?

I'm confused because on another thread where someone railed against their working son paying towards the HB/CT shortfall despite the fact he was earning loads, I thought they said these deductions ceased when they had their disability or sickness benefits re-instated? Am I remembering wrongly? I thought on that thread that other posters were amazed that non-dependent income was ignored in such a set-up when the son or daughter earns loads but doesn't have to contribute at all to household expenses. Doubt I can find the thread now.

I found this:

Non-dependant deductions from HB

Deductions are made from your HB for non-dependants aged over 18 who normally live with you. There are six levels of deduction. If the non-dependant is working less than 16 hours a week, the lowest deduction will apply. If the non-dependant is doing paid work for 16 hours or more a week, the level of deduction will depend on the non-dependant’s gross income. A deduction will not be made from your HB if:

• the non-dependant is in receipt of Pension Credit
• you or your partner are aged 65 or more and the non-dependant is a full time student,
• you, or your partner, are registered blind or treated as blind (see page 69 or 71 for an explanation of being treated as blind) or
• you, or your partner, are receiving the care component of Disability Living Allowance or Attendance Allowance in respect of yourself or your partner or
• the non-dependant is aged 16 or 17 or the non-dependant’s normal home is somewhere else or
• the non-dependant is in receipt of a training allowance or a YTS scheme or
• the non-dependant is a full-time student (but deductions may be made during the summer vacation if the student does any paid work in this period) or
• the non-dependant is a prisoner or
• the non-dependant has been a patient in hospital for 52 weeks or more. If the non-dependant leaves hospital but is readmitted to hospital within 28 days their total number of days in hospital are added together
• The non-dependant is in receipt of ESA(IR) which does not include a component.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/publications/specialist-guides/technical-guidance/rr2-a-guide-to-housing-benefit/what-you-can-claim-for/non-dependants/

So if the OP's wife is receiving the care component of DLA there should be no deduction in their housing benefit because the son is working, no matter how much he earns, there may be a small deduction because he is no longer a dependant.

anguk

margaretclare wrote: »

Time was, before benefits became so widespread, this simple fact was well-known to all. Child leaves school on Friday, starts work on Monday, the first pay-day he/she would be expected to hand over money for what was called 'your keep'.

DH tells of when he was an engineering apprentice long ago. He was paid a tiny amount weekly and the first week he solemnly handed over his brown paper pay-packet complete to his Mum. It was such a pathetic amount, she didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

My first job was a Youth Opportunity Programme (government YOP scheme), I was paid £25 and I had to hand over £10 keep to my parents and pay £5 for a bus pass to get to work, leaving me with just £10 a week for myself. This was back in the 1980's so not too long ago.

nannytone_2

BigAunty wrote: »

Will non-dependent deductions still be made to the OPs council tax and housing benefit when their wife receives DLA?

I'm confused because on another thread where someone railed against their working son paying towards the HB/CT shortfall despite the fact he was earning loads, I thought they said these deductions ceased when they had their disability or sickness benefits re-instated? Am I remembering wrongly? I thought on that thread that other posters were amazed that non-dependent income was ignored in such a set-up when the son or daughter earns loads but doesn't have to contribute at all to household expenses. Doubt I can find the thread now.

i said the same in post 25, but no one picked up on it.

when my daughter and her hiusband and child moved in ( son in law working full time) u unformed hb/xtb and was told that due to my DLA, NO non dependant deductions would be made

Hmm71

Marisco wrote: »

This reminds me of when I first started my apprenticeship, I was paid £2 a week, and I had to give my mam 10 shillings (50p) out of it. That was a lot then!! They didn't need it, but she took it to give me a sense of responsibility and that you don't get owt for nowt!! I didn't see it like that at the time, mind!! It just meant I had less for buying make up and rubbish!!

I think the op's son is getting off lightly if he pays £100 pw, that still leaves him £200 pw for himself! Try running a flat/house, buy food, clothes etc on £100 pw and he'll see he's getting a bargain!! It's no wonder folk are getting aereated when the op suggests he gets a part time job just so they can keep their council tax and HB!! It's folk like that that ruin it for the genuine claimants, who don't have the option of working!!

I get the point you're making marisco but the OP's son is earning £300 a week gross, not nett.
Anyway, my husband had to do the same as you when he left school. He was earning £6 a week in 1961, working in the City. He can't remember how much he had to give his mum for his keep but he said he definitely didn't have any choice in the matter.

McKneff

margaretclare wrote: »

Thanks for this, Marisco. It makes me feel I'm not quite such a dinosaur after all! When I read things like 'leave a full-time well-paid job and remain a dependent just so that parents can keep their benefits' I sometimes wonder what world I've stumbled into. We never voted for it, that's for sure.

Another one here MC, I used to hand over my little brown envelpe to my mum too, I got (i think) about 4£ 10s for working in the coop at 16, my mum took £2.10s and I was left with the rest to pay my own busfares to work, lunch, clothes, everything.

BigAunty

nannytone wrote: »

i said the same in post 25, but no one picked up on it.

when my daughter and her hiusband and child moved in ( son in law working full time) u unformed hb/xtb and was told that due to my DLA, NO non dependant deductions would be made

Let's hope the OP comes back to find this out and challenges it with the council (despite my probably being considered one of the rude ones because I told him not to waste his MPs time on the matter and to get over the loss of child related benefits for his employed adult son).

Personally, I don't believe that DLA claimants should be exempt from non-dependent deductions - if there is plenty of money coming into the house why can't adult children in employment be required to pay some keep? I'm sure many voluntarily contribute but I can't understand why this is ring-fenced.

mrs_motivated

Personally, I don't believe that DLA claimants should be exempt from non-dependent deductions - if there is plenty of money coming into the house why can't adult children in employment be required to pay some keep? I'm sure many voluntarily contribute but I can't understand why this is ring-fenced.[/QUOTE]


I totally agree, however, when DLA is replaced with PIP will still be the case?

Folk, currently on DLA (even thos with indefinite/lifetime awards) will be invited to claim PIP and will be assessed under the new PIP criteria. Those who don't claim or fail the new test with a DWP health professional will not get any benefit. Current estimates are suggesting that 20per cent will no longer meet the criteria and 50 per cent will face a lower award of PIP than they currently receive under DLA.

With this in mind maybe the OP should warn his son, he may soon need to pay £200 per week to cover the loss of benefits.