Housekeeping money to your parents/from your children

VfM4meplse

Money_maker wrote: »

BTW, some youngsters these days are on zero hours contracts or low hours so housekeeping is unlikely to be as high as years ago.

Presumably the cost of living hasn't deflated, all things considered? I think that if you are going to go down the route of asking for payment, then it needs to be consistent with costs rather than earnings.

sooty&sweep

Personally I think that once a child is earning a regular income they should contribute to the family finances. How much depends upon the family's financial situation.
It does annoy me when you come across young people with a huge disposable income because they don't contribute whilst their parents have very little disposable income because they're still financing their children.
Jen

ciderwithrosie_2

sooty&sweep wrote: »

It does annoy me when you come across young people with a huge disposable income because they don't contribute whilst their parents have very little disposable income because they're still financing their children.

Totally agree. I charge my sons keep, because they're adults and as I've pointed out to them, we've long passed the parent-child relationship and now more equal partners in our home so they have to contribute. They're still getting a much better deal than living out of home but why should they get to keep all their wages to spend how they wish when 2/3rds of their parents earnings go on bills, food and maintaining the house. We all work equally as hard.

Newme2014

As soon as I started working my parents asked for housekeeping, 1/3 of my wages, I was then supposed to save a 1/3 and could spend a 1/3, wasn't very good at saving though so that didn't happen. Think I probably paid about £200pm in 2000, I moved out at 19 (150 miles away) and back at 21 (escaping an ex), I was out of work and had got myself into debt, though I hadn't told the parents about that so when I got another job and they said rent was now £400pm I had to come clean, they lowered it to £200 while I got back on my feet but they still had to charge as they had both been medically retired and needed help with the mortgage, looking back though I'm glad I moved back and they asked for the money as it meant they got the mortgage paid off and were free of it and the variable interest rate, when the recession hit. If you can afford to not take housekeeping then great but I don't think it does any harm and hopefully helps them learn to budget (my debt wasn't down to poor budgeting as such, just poor taste in men)

theoretica

I do think it is a bit mean to spring charging for keep onto a kid when they get their first job/pay cheque/turn 16. Seems much kinder to warn them well in advance when to expect it.

Callie22

I had to give my mum half of whatever I earned, from when I started babysitting at about 14. My mum really struggled for money when I was growing up so what I gave her really did help.

cazs

I'm surprised how many parents charge their own children to live in their own home. If my parents had done that to me there's no way I'd be able to save up a good deposit for my flat. I know a few people give it back later but otherwise....

LilElvis

Money_maker wrote: »

The idea is that the young person doesn't know that it's being saved on their behalf. As far as they're concerned, they're paying their way and giving their parents housekeeping. End of. It's a nice surprise when they want to move out and are given a lump sum. I try to save 50% of DS1's housekeeping.

Additionally, DS1 is going through the stage where all money is converted to alcohol and p***ed up against the wall so despite living at home, he has no savings. I'm quite happy to tell him that I dont trust him to save, after all he's spent all the money saved for him as a child. But he doesn't know about the money saved and wont know until he passes this stage he's in.

BTW, some youngsters these days are on zero hours contracts or low hours so housekeeping is unlikely to be as high as years ago.

I understand what your "idea" is, but I don't think that "surprising" them with giving their money back has actually taught them anything, other than the fact that you are treating them as children rather than working, functional adults.

I could just about countenance giving back the household contribution if the child was also saving towards their future, but certainly not if they are p*ssing it all against the wall. What do you think they will do with their windfall? If you have children with diametrically opposed attitudes towards spending/saving/budgeting what do you do? Should a spendthrift receive the same "reward" as their prudent sibling?

What you are doing teaches your children nothing, except that you will enable them regardless of their choices.

oystercatcher

With my eldest we worked out the cost of a room in a house share locally and I told him to save that or more each month.
He then had a deposit ready and bought a house when he was 21.

I wouldn't take money from my children unless we were really struggling .

balletshoes

cazs wrote: »

I'm surprised how many parents charge their own children to live in their own home. If my parents had done that to me there's no way I'd be able to save up a good deposit for my flat. I know a few people give it back later but otherwise....

their grown-up, working and earning, offspring, not children anymore.
I agree with the principle of every working and earning adult in a household contributing financially to the running of the house, whether thats the family home, or a flatshare, or a couple in their own home. And I also agree with someone earlier in the thread, who said that youngsters in a family should be aware long before they leave full time education and start working, that they'll be expected to contribute.
After that, its all down to the number really, and that, I think, is what should be discussed and agreed on as far as reasonably possible.