Hand out generation (Grrr!)

johnsons_baby

Yes I agree and I know people wanting to buy on that estate too, both my elder cousins are actively looking for 3 beds there, one has been beaten to the post twice on properties.
I know it wouldn't be ideal but they only have a 'need' for a 2 bed home, I say that in the respect that that is what a council or HA would offer, as they have 2 kids of the same sex, so it would be a 2 bedroom need.
Now, I have seen 2 beds for £525-£595 and £625-£650 for a 3 bed in the older area concerned.
Even if they rented their own house on the new estate for £750, made up the shortfall of £150 & paid out for example £600 in rent they'd still be better off than they are now. It may not be their preferred option but worth considering, I certainly would

MamaMoo_2

I also noticed that based on income, they're also going to be entitled to ~£90 CTC £30 CB and some council tax benefit, realistically pushing their monthly income up to £1.9k per month.

sarahg1969

We only have part of the story. They'd be entitled to some benefits. And what are their families doing to help them? They can't ALL be in the same boat.

johnsons_baby

Can I just post this link, it's the website version of the local paper running the story:
http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/Gloucester-mum-doesn-t-eat-just-children-food/story-17466086-detail/story.html

I don't know if the comments at the bottom are true, one states that they have leased car, sky, iphones and went to the Olympics this summer.

IF this is true and I say IF because who knows, really, then it would go someway to explaining that they are living beyond their means right now.

ukjoel

Its a pretty standard daily mail article.

They are trying to show that a couple with two jobs are starving while the family next door on benefits are quids in.

In this case they are probably right HOWEVER this is due to 2 key elements.

One was a full repayment mortgage (which was a choice they made and they could possibly reduce this to interest only and freee up £700 a month for a year or two)

The second was childcare costs which would be substantial and in fairness if mum was fulltime would wipe out her income.

Scroll forward 2 years with both kids in school, mum working longer hours, and much much lower childcare costs then they will be doing far better.

They didnt mention any of the benefits they get such as child benefit, 15 hours free childcare for over 3's, working tax credits, etc etc.

I think there are a lot of people being squeezed hard but this couple wasnt the best example to be using.

5 years ago the headline would have read - Mum of two has lost 3 stone - check out her diet tips on page 24.