'The UK’s hidden one-child-per-family university policy' according to Martin Lewis

silvercar

Starrystarrynight1 wrote: »

The government doesn't stand there waiting for parents to hand over a cheque for their 'contribution.' What parents can afford to give their kids at university is their own business.

Sure, but the parents are the 'enablers', without their contribution a lot of students won't be able to manage financially at university.

Tabbytabitha

Spendless wrote: »

Certainly,but they will receive the minimum due to the household income (plus a company car is added) and I doubt they actually cost that much at home compared to the difference x 2 between what they'd receive as a student loan and what the maximum loan is and is the 'expected' parental contribution. A quick look tells me this would be £9K a year or £750 per month. I am quite sure my own 2 children don't cost that much to keep per month. Her eldest wants to study medicine so the course is longer and I think options to work are more limited during the duration of study

We've had to tell my 2 that though we can and will pay for 100% of accommodation in eldest's first year, this is due to his sister still being at the local Secondary school a few streets away and being relatively cheap for that year, he will need to find a job and save during this year because for yr2 we will be funding his sister at a further away sixth form due to the subject she wishes to study. We've had to veto his suggestion that he studies in London for this reason.

silvercar wrote: »

Your figures don't match the article. For 2 children studying outside London with a parental income over £60k, the contribution is £4,100 each child= £8,200 total.

Given that teenagers supposedly leave all the lights on, eat mountains of food, turn the heating up full blast, shower for hours, have the latest iPhones, use Mum & Dad as a taxi service and cash machine and need wardrobes of clothes, there must be some saving when they leave.

Exactly. We found ourselves about £80 a week better off when our teenager left home and we didn't spend anything like the amount of money on him that friends earning double our income did.

Spendless

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Exactly. We found ourselves about £80 a week better off when our teenager left home and we didn't spend anything like the amount of money on him that friends earning double our income did.

What sort of things were you paying for that meant you made savings of £80 a week when your teen wasn't there. I've had a look at our figures (admittedly quickly) but see nothing like these amount of savings to come.

peachyprice

silvercar wrote: »

A bit of a non story.

When you plan on having children close together, you realise that you may be doubling up on the amount of nappies you need; that they will probably overlap in nursery, so double fees there etc.

Have a bit of compassion for those of us unfortunate to have given birth to twins;)

No way could we have afforded for both my boys to have gone to Uni.