Dig money?

svain

KxMx wrote: »

I don't agree with the nominal amount of £100 per month .

There have been genuine costs to the household due to him starting work.

His rent should cover those plus a share of the other bills and I don't think £25 weekly is sufficient. He also does nothing around the house and seems extravagant with utilities. All needs to be taken into account.

Yes, missed the bit about losing benefit/Council Tax benefit. I think covering those is fair on this occasion and add £25 per week in addition to the shortfall to cover basic meals/roof over head etc ... (if he wants extra food or specific food then he pays for himself)

I cant agree that sharing utility cost. The difference in heating/electricity cost will be minimal as he is working full time. The mum seems to be home all day so she will be using majority of the utilities. To sting him 30% is excessive.

Should he want things like Sky TV or specific high speed broadband then he could take them out in his own name anyway.

I dont see how him doing nothing round the house is relevant. His parents have allowed this (perfectly ok imo) and should have no bearing on how he is charged. He's not a member of staff who should pay less on a reward basis.

All this working out itemised costings for bills and running the house is unnecessary imo. He is their son, just starting out in life .... not a lodger or a business agreement. Its cold and un-maternal/patermal imo.

He has just started work so let him have some fun for couple years ..... Life will be financially serious enough for him soon enough.


This lunch money weirdness needs to stop though.

annandale

And if someone sat around my house monopolising my pc and Internet it would make no difference to the amount I paid every month.

I agree with the poster who said that they don't seem to have much positive to say about him so maybe he should move on and they could get a lodger to rent his room

Loz01

Surely he should be paying at least £250 a month if he earns over £900! Thats a heck of a lot of disposable income, even with a mobile phone bill

svain

annandale wrote: »

And if someone sat around my house monopolising my pc and Internet it would make no difference to the amount I paid every month.

Classic example of someone trying to justify stinging their son/daughter for as much as possible

annandale

Hes working for that disposable income.

Let's not forget.

onomatopoeia99

theoretica wrote: »

Or as a maximum, if he moved out and paid market rates somewhere else his parents could then rent his room to a lodger - what would they get?

They would get a stranger in their home.

silvercar

Jackieboy wrote: »

I don't know when taking keep from working children started to be considered "making a profit from them" rather than another working adult paying their share. It seems a very odd idea to me.

Anything they take over and above the extra costs of him living at home (loss in benefit, extra costs of utilities, food etc is profit. I find it strange that you can't see that.

theoretica wrote: »

Or as a maximum, if he moved out and paid market rates somewhere else his parents could then rent his room to a lodger - what would they get? And then in addition the food bill. Might be simplest if exactly that happened!

Would the parents do that or would they leave the room empty?

foolofbeans

I think the minimum payment should be the cost of the loss of benefits. HB will tell the parents how much the son is expected to contribute and likewise with CT. Then there should be a contribution towards the cost of food and utilities but this should be realistic and not extortionate.
£100 is way too low as dependent deductions for a household receiving full HB in England would be almost £50 per week.
I charged my children £30 a week when they first started work and this was the same amount whether they worked or claimed benefits (an incentive to work).
We only lost child benefit but didn't expect them to cover that loss but then we had disposable income and could afford our costs. Having a younger person in the house does cost quite a bit as they are a lot more lax with things like constant water use and turning the heating on while walking around in shorts and t-shirt!
We were happy with £30 a week but charging so little had a negative effect in that the children were far too comfortable at home and begrudged ever increasing the payment so 5 years later they are still at home and still paying peanuts.

annandale

Water isn't metered in Scotland.

prosaver

He should split the bills, after all hes going to get the house when they stuff it.
Man up and pay your way.
And stop letting mummy tuck u up in bed.