Paying for 25 year old child

silvercar

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Writing something like that makes it sound as if parents have to, which they don't - it could put some students off from going when the reality is that they can either,

1.Live on a reduced income
2.Work to supplement the loan
3.Take a year out to save to supplement the loan
4. Support themselves for 3 years to achieve independent status
5. Study for a degree by a different route

I don't think a situation where a prospective student could wave a piece of paper at their parents and say "The government says you have to...." would be a particularly appropriate approach.

1. Not possible unless living at home. The full loan is hardly enough.
2. Not possible on a lot of courses
3. Fine if you have applied and secured a deferred place.
4. So 3 years out of studying, not one. Would mean not applying to university for 3 years and no guarantee of a place. Would also require earning enough income in each of the 3 years to get the status.
5. Not possible on a lot of courses.

Tabbytabitha

silvercar wrote: »

1. Not possible unless living at home. The full loan is hardly enough.
2. Not possible on a lot of courses
3. Fine if you have applied and secured a deferred place.
4. So 3 years out of studying, not one. Would mean not applying to university for 3 years and no guarantee of a place. Would also require earning enough income in each of the 3 years to get the status.
5. Not possible on a lot of courses.

1.Depends on the amount of reduction and where studying/living.
2.Only a very small minority of courses don't allow it - it's really unusual.
3. Better to have a deferred place but IME, most universities will keep the place open, if not, no great effort to apply again.
4. Even claiming benefits for 3 years gives you independent status and, if working, the amount required is below NMW.
5. As for #2, the vast majority of courses have a part time/work based route that can be taken as an alternative.

In both a personal and professional capacity I've know people do all of those things - where one of them isn't possible, another will be. I always feel it's worth looking at what's possible rather than being negative and I'm also a great believer in offering people choices in both education and life.

Going to university straight from school with parental support may be the most common way of working towards a degree but it's by no means the only one or the best route for everybody.:)

Tabbytabitha

Spendless wrote: »

Personally I'd say they can't do #1 and live away. The cost of rent is too high for those on min loan.

On minimum loan you're right but lots of people, like the OP's son, have their loan reduced by a much smaller amount. You only get the minimum loan with a household income of well over £60k, which is pretty high.

foolofbeans

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Are you facturing in the possibility that the lone parent could also be servicing substantial debt?

I was referring to income differences and not expenditure. The income was slightly reduced but as a couple we have additional costs to our expenditure (two cars etc). I didn't factor in debts as they would have to come out of the income either way. Of course being two separate people could mean the debts are split between two so the single parent is even better off than I first calculated!

Tabbytabitha

foolofbeans wrote: »

I was referring to income differences and not expenditure. The income was slightly reduced but as a couple we have additional costs to our expenditure (two cars etc). I didn't factor in debts as they would have to come out of the income either way. Of course being two separate people could mean the debts are split between two so the single parent is even better off than I first calculated!

Surely you've been arguing for expenditure to be taken into account as it's your debts that are the problem here.

I can't understand your logic that a single person with debt is better off because a couple can split the debt between them, rather the opposite, I'd have thought.

BrassicWoman

these days I would 100% try and find a degree level apprenticeship instead

annandale

My mum wasn't better off as a single parent. She didn't have a car. She's never had a car. She worked her whole adult life with one wage coming in. Back then she gave my brother money every month. He got student loans too. She said it was a struggle. She worked full time but was nowhere near the top of her pay scale.

My mum was not better off as a single parent. In any respect. There was no working tax credit back then. All she got was her salary and child benefit.

She was much worse off than if she had had a working partner contribute to the household.

And yes. You still get a min student loan even if your parents earn over 60k combined. You could get a student loan if 100k was coming into the home.

They are supposed to make the difference up.

And if a working couple have debt you have two incomes to pay it off.

A single person gets 25 per cent reduction on council tax for one. You pay everything from one income. Fuel. Travel. Food. Council tax.

How can anyone think single people are financially better off than a couple with two incomes coming into the house.

Bills don't automatically double because there are two of you. Like fuel for example. I still need to heat my home in the same way as a couple even though there's one of me. I don't pay half the council tax of a couple.

Unless people are terrible with money and have tons of debt. Two incomes will always be better than one.

My mum used to work with some people who had husbands in very good jobs. Some households had four times what she had coming in in income. They used to go expensive holidays more than once a year.

KxMx

foolofbeans wrote: »

I was referring to income differences and not expenditure. The income was slightly reduced but as a couple we have additional costs to our expenditure (two cars etc). I didn't factor in debts as they would have to come out of the income either way. Of course being two separate people could mean the debts are split between two so the single parent is even better off than I first calculated!

Is needing two cars not down to where you live though.

If you've chosen somewhere to live where two cars are needed, I'm not sure that's something you should complain about.

Another 0 car household here. And we moved for better access to public transport, because moving to a rural area without a car in the first place was a mistake!

Tabbytabitha

BrassicWoman wrote: »

these days I would 100% try and find a degree level apprenticeship instead

That doesn't work if you want to study a Humanities subject or MFL.

annandale

Every single persons situation will be different. I have always lived alone, I have had jobs that paid me 12 grand a year, 14 grand a year, 26 grand a year and much much less than that. For the bulk of my time living in my flat I paid full rent. Off one salary. If I had been living with someone else who earned 14 grand when I did as long as we didn't have significant debt I would obviously have been better off.

.Someone else posted on another thread that a single parent on tax credits and 35 hours x min wage would get their wage and around 6 grand tax credits on top. But not everyone is in that position either. There are people who work much less hours than that, people in insecure work. And tax credits are only paid in the first place because people's wages are so low. Employers know if they pay min wage their wages will be topped up by tax credits.

I don't agree that it's people in the squeezed middle who have the hardest time helping their kids through university. You'll get a loan if your parents earn 100k and you'll get a loan if they earn less than 25k.

Poverty is a barrier to people starting uni. There will be families who can't afford to help their children through university full stop.

I am sure there are some wealthy single parents. I don't know many in that position though