How much board should I be paying?

mumps

duchy wrote: »

I have a son at uni who lives at home. If he was complaining that his only income was his part-time wages ...whilst he was salting away an extra £6K in student loans each year-I'd call him selfish too.

Whilst I see nothing wrong in students using a student loan/grant prudently -I do have a problem with deception (even if it is also self deception). The OP was very clear that her only income was £600 a month ...until directly asked. I do think that in her head that is not "spending money" but the reality is her income is actually £6K a year higher than she is claiming and she should be budgeting (and contributing) in accordance with her full income....not a part of it.

Her student loan is just that, a loan. When we talk about our income we usually talk about wages or pension not borrowing. I wouldn't want my kids borrowing money so they could give me money. It would be interesting to see what her living at home is actually costing her mother.

mountainofdebt

So am I right in thinking that the OP's parents are divorced and it is the father who is pushing the saving of the maintenance grant so that she can move out as soon as she graduates?

Now if I was the OP I would be wondering why this was such an issue for him.........

mumps

Soleil_lune wrote: »

Well bully for your parents for being able to let you live as an adult for FREE, or occasionally take a tiny token amount from you, I am so glad they were well-off enough to support you with virtually NO financial contribution from you. However, not everyone is in that oh-so-fortunate position, and I take umbrage at the suggestion that people who ARE asking their WORKING ADULT children for money, are being mean and tight and rotten to them.

And whoop de doo, you were a homeowner at 24, (but you weren't really were you? you just took on a mortgage, which tied you down at a young age!) You say 'I was a homeowner at 24,' like it's some kind of special achievement: it isn't. Doesn't make you any better than anyone else, because you got a mortgage at 24!

And no most people don't/won't take money from their offspring while they are a uni student/studying/in full time education, but when a young adult child is WORKING, then they should be paying towards their keep. At least a fifth of their income. Why on earth shouldn't they pay something?

Stuff reality: it's about respect and decency and understanding that the cost of living is expensive, for almost everyone. Even if my parents had not wanted/needed anything from me: I would not have DREAMED of not contributing to the family budget when I worked full time. I gave them a quarter of my wages. I can't imagine why ANY working adult child would want to/expect to live rent and board-free.

The OP is in fulltime education, good for her that she works as well but does that mean her parents shouldn't help by letting her pay a reasonable amount and I think what she is paying is reasonable given that they don't provide food or toiletries and she isn't even there alot. I mean how much is she actually costing them or is it reasonable for them to actually subsidise their living costs by taking more off her?

Oh and you do come across as bitter, you contributed when you were working fulltime, she is a student, there is a difference.

mountainofdebt

mumps wrote: »

Her student loan is just that, a loan. When we talk about our income we usually talk about wages or pension not borrowing. I wouldn't want my kids borrowing money so they could give me money. It would be interesting to see what her living at home is actually costing her mother.

But from the sounds of it the OP is borrowing money anyway to squirrel away - which makes no sense at all

poet123

Soleil_lune wrote: »

No need to apologise.

NOTHING about my post is 'bitter.' If you choose to see it that way; that's your call. You're in support of the same views as person one, so you are BOUND to say something negative about my post

I am not in support of PO views necessarily. There are areas of broad agreement but by no means are we in full agreement. That aside, your post is bitter and comes across as vitriolic. With a tinge of the green eyed monster thrown in for good measure.

It is an achievement to be on the property ladder at 24 these days. PO should be applauded for that not derided. She will have security of tenure in her old age and something to pass to her own children should she choose to have any. Much better than being at the mercy of a LL or change of Govt policy if in social housing.

She was fortunate her parents allowed her to live at home for a peppercorn rent whilst she saved for a deposit. She saved and did that though and didn't blow the chance on high living. I imagine her parents were proud of her for being disciplined enough to do that.

There is more than one way to approach an issue.

mumps

thorsoak wrote: »

My kids are now at the stage where their kids are deciding on whether or not to go to uni .....and in actual fact, all 4 only stayed in the family home for a max of 18 months-2 years after gaining their degrees!

DS1, DD and DS2 were in receipt of grants (and as parents we had to top up the grants of DD and DS2 - DS 1 received full grant because of 3 sibligs still in f/t education); DS3 received part grant/part loan.

In actual fact, they all returned home for about 12-18 months after qualifying before moving in with others.

None of them contributed financially to the household expenses until they'd finished uni.

OK, the way you were talking about what you were doing and poll tax it sounded like they never left. Certainly your first two didn't have tuition fees then, probably number 3 as well. Kids now are in a very different position, leaving with 20 or 30 k of debt, in a couple of years many will be leaving with over 40 k of debt. Would you want them to add to that so that they could pay more board? I wouldn't, I have done everything I can to ensure mine have little or no debt when they leave uni. I know that isn't always possible but then kids from the poorest home will get grants and maybe bursaries as well so that makes up a bit for what parents can't or won't do. The students I know who stay at home do it to save money and their parents help as much as they can. I think the OP is to be congratulated on working hard, doing a degree and earning £600 a month is more than alot can manage.

mumps

mountainofdebt wrote: »

But from the sounds of it the OP is borrowing money anyway to squirrel away - which makes no sense at all

Slightly different in my opinion, my daughter took maximum loans but with work and support from us she graduated with a deposit for her first home. She is now looking to buy and that loan will mean she can get on the property ladder sooner. She is savy with money, even though we don't charge her board. She is looking at two bedroomed places and already has a friend lined up who is going to rent the second room. Her mortgage will end up costing her less than renting a room and she will have her own home. Not quite the same as borrowing money to pay more board. I am not saying she shouldn't pay anything if her parents need it but given that she is paying board and buying her own food, toiletries etc I think she should be encouraged to plan for her future not criticised for it.

Person_one

poet123 wrote: »

I am not in support of PO views necessarily. There are areas of broad agreement but by no means are we in full agreement. That aside, your post is bitter and comes across as vitriolic. With a tinge of the green eyed monster thrown in for good measure.

It is an achievement to be on the property ladder at 24 these days. PO should be applauded for that not derided. She will have security of tenure in her old age and something to pass to her own children should she choose to have any. Much better than being at the mercy of a LL or change of Govt policy if in social housing.

She was fortunate her parents allowed her to live at home for a peppercorn rent whilst she saved for a deposit. She saved and did that though and didn't blow the chance on high living. I imagine her parents were proud of her for being disciplined enough to do that.

There is more than one way to approach an issue.

It was half achievement and half thanks to my parents' generosity. I'm not showing off, lots of my peers have bought their homes, but we've all had help from our parents to do that, one way or another, which has been invaluable. There's nothing wrong with offering or accepting help from people you love and who love you.

I am extremely glad and grateful that I've been able to get this place that I can call my own (and yes it is my own, not the building society's, you still own your home when you have a mortgage, you just have a rather large loan secured against it!)

If parents truly can't afford to let their children live at home for nothing/next to nothing then that's a completely different scenario. That's not usually the situation we see on here though, and its not the situation we've been discussing for pages and pages!!

Dunroamin

mumps wrote: »

OK, the way you were talking about what you were doing and poll tax it sounded like they never left. Certainly your first two didn't have tuition fees then, probably number 3 as well. Kids now are in a very different position, leaving with 20 or 30 k of debt, in a couple of years many will be leaving with over 40 k of debt. Would you want them to add to that so that they could pay more board? I wouldn't, I have done everything I can to ensure mine have little or no debt when they leave uni. I know that isn't always possible but then kids from the poorest home will get grants and maybe bursaries as well so that makes up a bit for what parents can't or won't do. The students I know who stay at home do it to save money and their parents help as much as they can. I think the OP is to be congratulated on working hard, doing a degree and earning £600 a month is more than alot can manage.

Of course, you need to remember that student loan repayments are no different if you owe £5K than if you owe £50k and that most students will never repay all their student loan anyway.

I agree with others who say that the OP is greedy if she's pretending the loan and grant aren't part of her income and is squirrelling them away rather thn being independent and paying her own way.

mumps

Dunroamin wrote: »

Of course, you need to remember that student loan repayments are no different if you owe £5K than if you owe £50k and that most students will never repay all their student loan anyway.

I agree with others who say that the OP is greedy if she's pretending the loan and grant aren't part of her income and is squirrelling them away rather thn being independent and paying her own way.

If they owe £50k then I agree most will never pay it off, but they will be paying it for years. What a sad situation and even sadder that people who benefitted from a more civilised arrangement have no sympathy for these young people.

Maybe we should look at it another way, the reason she is able to save that money is because she works and earns £600 per month so turn it round and say she is saving money she earns and is living off her loan/grant. Does that sound less greedy?