Paying for 25 year old child

Tabbytabitha

LilElvis wrote: »

Graduated in 1989. Still occasionally have nightmares that I'm about to sit my finals - 30 years later!

Mine are always about A levels - 50 years earlier!

Red-Squirrel_2

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Mine are always about A levels - 50 years earlier!

Me too. Admittedly its only been 20 years but still occasionally have the dream that I've got an A level exam the next day and haven't been to any of the lessons!

Tabbytabitha

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Me too. Admittedly its only been 20 years but still occasionally have the dream that I've got an A level exam the next day and haven't been to any of the lessons!

I dream of writing my name at the top of a paper and then writing nothing for the three hours we had to sit there. Unfortunately, it's an exact rerun of what really happened with my A level European History paper.:o

foolofbeans

Tabbytabitha wrote: »

Surely you've been arguing for expenditure to be taken into account as it's your debts that are the problem here.
I meant the costs of housing and childcare as they can vary wildly throughout the country and can mean that a higher income in the South is swallowed up by high rental costs and high childcare so the net income after these could be less than that in the north.
I mentioned the cost of servicing our debts to explain why we have a good gross income but available funds are actually low.
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.

If a couple have debts of twenty thousand pounds and they agree to split them fairly then each individual will have a debt of ten thousand pounds. Dual income by my calculations show the couple have approx £90 extra each week but costs associated with being together mean the net difference between them and a single parent is not actually that much. Paying off debts of £10k compared to £20k could mean a difference in expenditure of more than £200 per month.

Tabbytabitha

foolofbeans wrote: »

If a couple have debts of twenty thousand pounds and they agree to split them fairly then each individual will have a debt of ten thousand pounds. Dual income by my calculations show the couple have approx £90 extra each week but costs associated with being together mean the net difference between them and a single parent is not actually that much. Paying off debts of £10k compared to £20k could mean a difference in expenditure of more than £200 per month.

Sorry, I don't think finance is your strong point.

foolofbeans

annandale wrote: »

My mum wasn't better off as a single parent. She didn't have a car. She's never had a car.
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.
Different times. Nowadays a single parent can have a good income made up of wages and tax credits.
And if a working couple have debt you have two incomes to pay it off.
But the couple have a similar amount of income as the single parent and yet the single parent would have access to many benefits. Two separate people mean the debt cost is halved.
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.
Tax credits, housing benefit, free school meals, free healthcare costs and a full maintenance loan for any of my children attending university. These would all be available to me as a single parent but aren't as a couple.
Unless people are terrible with money and have tons of debt. Two incomes will always be better than one.

In our case two people are marginally better off according to my calculations but the additional gateway benefits could mean the single person is actually better off financially.

SingleSue

Some single parents would be, just like some couples would be. I was most def not better off as a single parent compared to pre divorce even when benefits were included and one less mouth to feed and dress taken off.

No free uniform or trips here and as a single parent of two currently at university (and one graduated last year), my income is not at all generous when compared to a couple (approx. 13k including HB etc - I can only work very part time due to disabilities, not enough hours to claim any top up tax credits etc so I survive on my PIP, HB, CTC and meagre wages) and I am still expected to contribute and make up any shortfall.

SingleSue

Spendless wrote: »

No, he's 18. We're on water rates so it makes no difference. The electricity might go down.

Yes, we'll pay for his food in the hols. . I was doing the calculation to show how much we'll save whilst he's at Uni (so for the weeks when he's not at home and we have a lower grocery bill than when he was here). Clothes he's never been interested in, so we had to kit him out for Uni because he didn't own enough. I'm not seeing this as an on-going cost because anything additional will now comes as presents for birthdays/christmas.

I was actually shocked how much my gas, water and electric usage went down when eldest went to uni and even more shocked when the subsequent children went too. Unfortunately it rockets back up again when any of them come home again....

And the food bill? Best not talk about that, I'm still traumatised :rotfl:

Spendless

BrassicWoman wrote: »

It's sad, but that feels like a luxury as hobby study while you are learning.

Why are History, Geography or a modern foreign language seen as a hobby? I'd have thought they were very traditional subjects?

Though speaking of something as a hobby, when our son was mid-teens and suddenly interested in computer 'hacking' my DH (who works in IT) encouraged him to follow this for a career. (ie do it for good not evil) Maybe it will have changed by the time he graduates but at the minute it seems to be an area that's only going to get bigger.

annandale

I'm a single person without kids, I get 25 per cent reduction on council tax. I get 317 a month of universal credit and anything I earn over that the dwp take 63p in every pound. I keep my wages and the Uc is adjusted. If I had kids I would keep 192 of my wages before the taper applied. I'd personally actually keep double that as I don't claim housing element. People with kids would get a child element as well but the uc taper would still apply to them.

You have to work a certain number of hours before you qualify for wtc. Which is now being replaced by uc

School meals are means tested and I believe in England and Wales there was a recent vote which means that families on benefits earning over 7k won't automatically qualify for them. In Scotland every pupil in p1-3 gets a free school meal

On uc people are also being benefit capped and you get the lha rate for your rent which means that if your rent is more than that you need to pay the difference from your uc personal element. If you have a spare room in England you also may need to pay the housing benefit cut. Dhp isn't given automatically as it is in Scotland.

I believe people on uc in England pay for prescriptions if their monthly income is above a certain level. I think its around 450 a month

If someone was working 35 hours a week x min wage and got tax credits for two kids as a single parent their income would be around 19/20 grand a year which I assume would mean that they wouldn't automatically qualify for free trips or school meals anyway

Working tax credit is counted as income for housing benefit purposes as well.