'Bedroom tax' not applicable for parent with shared care ruling.

tomtom256

Podge52 wrote: »

I do not pay a bedroom tax, I just receive a reduced subsidy.

Is that better for you.

It's no different to those who cannot get social housing and get LHA for private rented accomodation.

They only get paid for what they need, not want, it evens the playing field out.

missbiggles1

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Perhaps I can put the case for single dads?

I think they often have a raw deal when it comes to shared access.

The mother is usually the one to claim child tax credits/child benefit and also has the benefit of child maintenance. I know this can be challenged with shared care but I have seen many cases where the father is left in a very poor financial situation. Trying to do the best for his children, wanting to maintain contact and yet unable to afford his own accommodation. Sometimes the mother lives in the marital home and if this is by court order then any equity in a property may not be able to be realised until the children leave full time education.

Admittedly many single fathers do not have the luxury of living in social housing if they leave the marital home which is why I would like to see this extended to local housing allowance.

Of course it could be argued that fathers with shared care do not have to pay child maintenance but having the children stay half the week means that they have to feed and clothe them. Often the mothers refuse to share the CTC and CB.

The number of single fathers who wish to provide a home for their children must be great in number. Children need to know that their father is still their father and part of his life. Far too many, because of the financial situation are unable to achieve this.

Just my opinion, but I have always thought that there is a huge discrepancy in the way we treat single dads to single mums. Time the balance was readdressed.

Perhaps it should only apply to single fathers who fully support their children financially?

BigAunty

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Perhaps it should only apply to single fathers who fully support their children financially?

Non-resident parents are only required to pay around 10-20% of their earnings towards the upkeep of their children (obviously many pay more while some pay not a penny at all). Those on benefits pay a token sum.

I looked up the child maintenance calculator to see how much a NRP earning £300 a week would pay towards 4 children and it came to £57 a week. £57 a week is surely a big dent in a persons pay packet but it works out at £2 a child per day so probably gets them a couple of pairs of socks or perhaps school lunch.

So this would fulfill your criteria but doesn't go a long way to supporting the actual costs of raising the children.

Also, the Parent with Care of the children doesn't suffer any decrease in their benefits if they receive CMS so at a personal level, the lone parent family are better off but the tax payer doesn't get any benefit.

Proposing that NRPs who pay a token sum of a minority of their wages to their children receive extra HB is still going to cost millions, if not a billion or two more.