Is partner liable for my student loan?

Baxterkirby

Today I have received a letter from the student loans company advising that HMRC have been in touch to advise I'm no longer working. I am now fortunate to be a stay at home mum and we live off my partners wage.
Part of the form I received requests evidence support that I am supported by a third party.
My partner does not pay me money we both take money out of his account, will they accept my bank account showing no money contributions from him? Is my partner liable for the student loan now I'm not working?

Any help would be appreciated as I cannot find much information on the question.
Thank you

Gaz83

He will not be liable for your loans, but it's pretty clear that he does support you.

dealer_wins

Was your qualification worth the study and our money?

BrassicWoman

dealer_wins wrote: »

Was your qualification worth the study and our money?

That depends if you think the goal of education is purely financial, surely - I don't!

andyfromotley

dealer_wins wrote: »

Was your qualification worth the study and our money?

Oh dealer i normally enojoy your posts but this one really kinda sucks. Are we really reducing education to its fiscal worth to those who happened to fund it? (as if they were an analgous group with the same opinions anyway!!)

What next questioning if peoples children have turned out well enough to justify the money WE spent on delivering and raising them?

Yuk.

ViolaLass

dealer_wins wrote: »

Was your qualification worth the study and our money?

I look forward to seeing your proposed system for measuring such a gain, including the effect of a more educated stay-at-home mother on her children.

TrustyOven

Are you suggesting that it's ok for taxpayers to fund someone's "just for fun" (1) education because it will positively affect only one person's (2) education?

Edited to Add: I have no quarrel with the SLC rules, and I understand the OP is probably following the rules. I am just backing up 'Dealer Wins' in their post because it's +5, Insightful.


(1) - While it's true that we don't know OPs area of study, it seems that education using tax payers money (SLC) that is then not put back into the economy (SLC repayments or job in that field) or further educating the society at large (being a dedicated teacher or public speaker, activist), is wasteful. If one wants education for fun (evening courses, or wants to improve oneself, or continued learning etc) then either save up for it, or get a loan and pay it off.

(2) - Again, depending on the area of study, I find it hard to imagine that university level education can easily be transferred to the children (as per the more educated stay-at-home mother comment). Perhaps it helps, but I would imagine only at a very tiny level.

ReadingTim

ViolaLass wrote: »

I look forward to seeing your proposed system for measuring such a gain, including the effect of a more educated stay-at-home mother on her children.

And I look forward to your suggestion as to which public service or state benefit should go without on account of the OP stopping work and therefore repayment of her student loan.

CLAPTON

TrustyOven wrote: »

(2) - Again, depending on the area of study, I find it hard to imagine that university level education can easily be transferred to the children (as per the more educated stay-at-home mother comment). Perhaps it helps, but I would imagine only at a very tiny level.

for many degrees today, the skills would probably be directly relevant to a 2 year old

ViolaLass

ReadingTim wrote: »

And I look forward to your suggestion as to which public service or state benefit should go without on account of the OP stopping work and therefore repayment of her student loan.

The government make those decisions for us.

I wouldn't want us to change to the US system where people can be crippled by debts whether or not they are in work. Our system is much better (and I speak as someone who is paying their SL back).

ReadingTim

ViolaLass wrote: »

The government make those decisions for us.

I wouldn't want us to change to the US system where people can be crippled by debts whether or not they are in work. Our system is much better (and I speak as someone who is paying their SL back).

The government are our representatives, and decisions about the allocation of resources (and their raising of those resources through taxes) are the basis on which elections are fought. So it is our decision.

I don't want to end up in a US style system either, but our resources are limited, and must be prioritized on those whose need is greatest, or where they'll provide the most benefit for society as a whole. The OP fits neither category.