Can't afford to stay in a relationship

The_Old_Bag

Perryface wrote: »

The Old Bag, why are you even asking the question, it has no relevance to the OP's post. She has 4 children.... End of.

Are you proposing people who are disabled or claiming tax credits or both cannot procreate?

You assume the OP chose to have another child even though she was struggling financially.... From what I read in the original post, there was a mistake made when dla was reassessed and PIP was introduced regarding the level of mobility element the OP was entitled to, this caused the initial financial hardship, then to compound the problem, an overpayment made by tax credits was found and this now has to be paid back (at the amount set and is presumably non-negotiable). This is what has caused the financial difficulties imo.

Firstly, I said
Why did OP have another child when they were already struggling both financially, AND to manage with OPs disability ?
Her problem are also practical....which is adding to the financial problems.
For example, now her children get to school and herself to Drs and hospital, using a taxi. Which costs money. Before she was dependent completely on benefits.
She has now put a deposit on a vehicle - without any adaptions for her, so SHE will not be able to drive it.
Does her partner already have a car ? if so, why put money on another?
If it is not going to be practical long term for them both to use, I would suggest they revisit their decision.

The opening sentence of Op was

Lostformoney wrote: »

I cannot afford to stay in a relationship with my partner due to benefit cuts .....what is coming in from OHs wage and my benefits isn't even covering the basics.

OP is being judgemental - blaming the benefits system for her decision to split up her family.
Following HER logic, would it not have been a lot less dramatic and traumatic to all members of the family if they had said
We cannot afford a 4th baby
She is astute enough to calculate they would be better off financially if they separate.....without considering the life-long effect on their children.
Why was she not astute enough to not have a 4th child?

If OP had posted saying, we are in this terrible situation due to benefit cuts, but we were wanting to have another baby - would the helpful advise from here have been - yes, go for it?

Perryface wrote: »

At no point does the OP suggest she had money worries prior to the under-entitlement by PIP .....
For all we know, the OP was doing quite fine balancing the books until the mess made by PIP.

Wrong!

Lostformoney wrote: »

he earns 2100 per month, after rent, council tax, electricity debt (as we can't pay in full), wheelchair loan, fuel for car and a nominal payment to all our debtors, he has £5.50 left. We then relied on my income from tax credits & child benefit to cover food, clothes and school taxi/lunches fees. My PIP pays car finance & insurance. I am normally left with nothing in my account each week, so losing tax credits means we have no food money unless we don't pay something.

This was before the latest benefits cut, so they seem to have been living hand to mouth anyway - he had £5.50 left each month, and she - nothing.
So would you say this was doing quite fine?

And as for implying I am passing any comment on disabled people having children - get over yourself. Has anyone said she should not have a child? - NO. She already had 3.
What I question is, at this point of time - when Benefits and the disabled have been attacked year after year .... and they are already living close to the bone financially...... why have another baby ?

I would have thought the same thing whether OP had a disability or not.
OP says she needs home help - for getting the children off to school and batch cooking etc..and is struggling with the oven, and lifting and bending. Surely she will have even more of all that with another child? If all her other children are at nursery or school - she would have perhaps be able to go to work/or work from home when they were gone - even if it was stuffing envelopes or using her phone or computer.

As others have posted, OP has got a similar income (salary and benefit/tax credits) as thousands of others who have to manage. But, due to her disability has more outgoings - such as the wheelchair, home help etc

There has been numerous excellent suggestions made.
I would add another - to pursue Social Services, which she dismisses from the start because

Lostformoney wrote: »

social work are over run and unable to see me anytime soon.

and

Lostformoney wrote: »

social work have been contacted but they are overrun and I've been advised it will be months before I see anyone,

I have also mentioned this money being used as a deposit on a vehicle SHE will be unable to use.....

She could also contact the Nursery, and ask if they know of any parent who lives near her - who may be willing to collect and drop off her children, for less then she pays a taxi.

But even if OP has her benefits re-calculated and substantially increased, I would advise her with 100% sincerity to start thinking long term about the best for her family - because at the next assessment, they may be cut again, if they tweak the rules.

p.s Pittance that is CA is a bummer - in effect less than £2 an hour - so OP would be struggling even to get a school leaver to help her with children, and be a home help AND take kids to school, for say £110 wage, and £62 CA for at least 35 hours week - about £5 an hour.

bspm

^^^^^^^

Very well said.

dippy3103

Don't forget that if you claim IS then the CSA will become involved and he will have to maintain your kids. Then he will have to pay rent & council tax elsewhere.
So maybe not as viable as you first thought?

Perryface

The Old Bag

There is so much I could say in response to your post, however, I am not inclined to flog any dead horses today.

If the op is no longer responding to this thread.... Bickering amongst ourselves without full knowledge of OP's position is moot along with the question you pose re: whether her 4th child should or should not have been born.

happyandcontented

I infer from the OP that her husband is in the armed forces, surely they have support mechanisms in place for their families? Also, maybe they could get base accomodation which would mean there was a supportive network around them and likelihood of school transport.

Like another poster I remember a very similar post to this one a few months ago.

With regard to Old Bag's comments, I agree, most people make decisions regarding the number of children they have on all circumstances, the OP sounds as if she had a lot on her plate physically, financially and she also has other very young children. To have a fourth child was probably not the best decision.

Clearly, the Op is not in a good place but splitting up doesn't seem the way forward. What if her OH met someone else? The ramifications of that could be worse than current financial issues.

Darksparkle

Whether or not the OP should or shouldn't have had another child isn't relevant here. This forum is for advice on benefit entitlement, not for judging their lifestyle choices. Not all children are planned either.

NYM

Regarding the title of the thread, it might have been better posted on the Marriage, Relationship & Families board.

Regarding the content of the first post, it might have been better if it had been posted on the Debt Free Wannabe board.

bspm

Perryface wrote: »

The Old Bag

There is so much I could say in response to your post, however, I am not inclined to flog any dead horses today.

If the op is no longer responding to this thread.... Bickering amongst ourselves without full knowledge of OP's position is moot along with the question you pose re: whether her 4th child should or should not have been born.

Seem to remember that's what happened last time, maybe that is why it got peoples backs up who remembered her trolling posts before.

Never got the full knowledge of OP's position last time either.

rockingbilly

Deciding to split up for financial reasons is quite common, especially amongst the mega rich. I've just had a quick look at the welfare benefits that would be paid if this were to happen to a couple post 65.
Currently the government say that a couple need £237.55 a week to live on and a single person needs £155.60. This excludes any housing costs.
So legally spit and between them the government say that they need in total £311.20 to live on.
I know it's not a lot of difference but for those that rely on benefits for their income, between them they would be £73.65 a week better off by splitting up.

p00hsticks

rockingbilly wrote: »

Deciding to split up for financial reasons is quite common, especially amongst the mega rich. I've just had a quick look at the welfare benefits that would be paid if this were to happen to a couple post 65.
Currently the government say that a couple need £237.55 a week to live on and a single person needs £155.60. This excludes any housing costs.
So legally spit and between them the government say that they need in total £311.20 to live on.
I know it's not a lot of difference but for those that rely on benefits for their income, between them they would be £73.65 a week better off by splitting up.

But in real life you can't just arbitrarily 'exclude any housing costs'. People need to live somewhere, and housing benefit and council tax reductions rarely cover the full cost these days. Not to mention other costs such as insurance etc. That theoretical £73.65 saving and more could quite quickly be swallowed up by the additional costs involved in having two households rather than one. (and that's why the benefits system pays less for a couple in a single household than two people living separately)