Rent from g/f's daughter

LateStarter

I may have to re-consider my use of the word 'rent' then - it seems to have many emotional connotations to some.

And I would certainly not consider 'evicting' the daughter if she were unable to contribute; the reality though, is that she can.

NYM

Just imagine how much more pleasant this thread would have turned out if you'd asked the same question but replaced the word with 'contribution' instead?

I don't think it's unreasonable to consider the term rent as being anything other than what it is. A regular payment to a Landlord to occupy a room/house/flat.

Pollycat

LateStarter wrote: »

I may have to re-consider my use of the word 'rent' then - it seems to have many emotional connotations to some.
And I would certainly not consider 'evicting' the daughter if she were unable to contribute; the reality though, is that she can.

So why are you (or were) considering this:

LateStarter wrote: »

I'm actually starting to think this should now be a formal arrangement - maybe a lodger agreement. This thread has helped clear my head, so I'll be talking to g/f about it.

You wouldn't have a formal agreement about 'rent' or 'board' with your own children.
Or would you?

Tabbytabitha

Sncjw wrote: »

So your girlfriend doesn’t pay anything towards the mortgage yet you want money from her daughter who is disabled. That’s low.

How is that any different from a couple charging their child for their keep? The daughter receives ESA to pay for her living expenses, just as she'd receive JSA to do the same if she were simply unemployed. People don't get those benefits to use just as pocket money or savings.

teddysmum

I agree with someone who posted earlier that it is insulting not to have a contribution, which another 'child' whether your own or someone else's would be expected to pay, just because they are disabled.


If the young lady is too disabled to ever work, the OP can't be expected to subsidise her into his old age. Also, if she later chooses to move to sheltered accommodation she will have a nasty shock if she has no concept of costs. Even 'children' who have worked for a number of years and then move away ,find it a shock to find what has to be paid and realise how much parents were saving them.

LocoLoco

teddysmum wrote: »

I agree with someone who posted earlier that it is insulting not to have a contribution, which another 'child' whether your own or someone else's would be expected to pay, just because they are disabled.


If the young lady is too disabled to ever work, the OP can't be expected to subsidise her into his old age. Also, if she later chooses to move to sheltered accommodation she will have a nasty shock if she has no concept of costs. Even 'children' who have worked for a number of years and then move away ,find it a shock to find what has to be paid and realise how much parents were saving them.

Yes, completely agree with this; my son is disabled, fifteen years old so not old enough to pay keep yet but he's always had pocket money and has had to do chores around the house for it. I've always taken from his DLA to pay towards mobility costs (vehicle when we've had a car, train at other times) and always saved a regular amount out of it for larger expenses. It's essential to teach children to be responsible with money and to live within their means, in my opinion, and the additional costs of disability along with the (sometimes) lower income that accompanies that makes it even more important.

The focus on the OPs terminology in this thread has astonished me; it seemed quite obvious to me from the context that he was talking about asking the daughter to contribute to the household expenses, not to become her landlord. His relationship with her mum and their financial situation is nothing to do with anyone else, nor is it anything to do with the daughter. She's eighteen; old enough to go and live somewhere else if she wants to and no longer a child. If she lacked mental capacity the situation would be different but it seemed from the information given that she has physical problems, not intellectual ones.

LateStarter

NYM wrote: »

Just imagine how much more pleasant this thread would have turned out if you'd asked the same question but replaced the word with 'contribution' instead?

Imagine how much more pleasant the world would be if people didn't use some imagined offense to jump down other people's throat.

trigger_fish

Registered disabled-I didn't know that existed.

Mojisola

trigger_fish wrote: »

Registered disabled-I didn't know that existed.

It doesn't.

https://www.scope.org.uk/support/disabled-people/becoming-disabled/overview
How do I register as a disabled person?
This is a question people often ask but there is no longer a ‘register’ of disabled people so you don’t need to register.

LocoLoco

trigger_fish wrote: »

Registered disabled-I didn't know that existed.

It's often just used as a term when talking about someone with a recognised or accepted disability (which often means they are in receipt of some sort of disability benefit). I tend to use it when talking about my son to people who can't seem to get their heads around disabled people who 'look okay'