Student Finance when you have more than one child at University

kaMelo

RayDan said:

Hi,

I Have two children currently at University with another starting next year. Last year I was unemployed so was able to get full support. However, I am now employed and confident that when means tested we will only qualify for the minimum amount. 

There doesn't seem to be consideration that I have to support two/three students or my outgoings which are high with little to no disposable income on a monthly basis.

Any guidance appreciated, I just do not no what we're going to do?

Thanks

The maintenance loan does take into account when there are more than one child at university. The academic years where there are more than one child an extra disregard is applied to the household income used in the calculation for the maintenance loan. Essentially the parental contribution (the one they expect you to make but don't tell you about it) is split between siblings which should see an increase in the maintenance loan offered to each child accordingly.

The exceptions to this are when the chid receives the maximum maintenance loan already or the household income after disregards is still above the maximum amount used for the calculation, I think around £70,000.

The calculation is based upon last years household income, if you think the household income will be substantially different you can ask them to calculate based upon this years figures instead.

68ComebackSpecial

silvercar said:

When I went to university in the mid 80s, everyone qualified for some student grant, but there was still an expected parental contribution from those whose families earned above a certain level. The difference then was that in most places, the total student grant/ expected parental contribution was enough to live on, in the majority of the country. I don’t think that is the case now.

I’m trying to work out when it would be obvious that a parental contribution would become a necessity at the same time as the number of children intending to go to university became relatively high. I would say we reached that point somewhere in the 00s. 

It wouldn’t surprise me if we are now at the point where this is a natural consequence of having children with a small age gap. In the same way that it doesn’t come as a surprise that children with a small age group both attend nursery at the same age or both need nappies at the same time, is it a wonder that they both go to university at the same age?

I went to university in the mid 80s - graduated '88 - and I didn't receive any grant at all owing to my parents' income. I was 100% funded by my parents at a cost of around £2,200 pa, which was the equivalent of a "full grant" at the time. There was no minimum grant payable to all.

Madmel

kaMelo is correct.  This year and last I have had both DDs at university. On the Student Finance website, I stated that they were both dependents and both at university. The accounts are linked.  The calculations are based on last year's income.  DD1 has managed to get all 4 years of her degree whilst DH was self-employed on minimum wage, so she qualified for the full maintenance loan plus a bursary from Cambridge due to our household income.  DD2 has done 2 years.  DH got a job in September, so DD2's 4th year will cost us quite a lot, but this year they only asked about the tax year 19-20.

To the poster who advocated getting a p/t job, it really doesn't work for Oxbridge students.  Yes, their terms are shorter, but the amount of work they get is insane.  DD1 is motivated and hard-working, and spends the first week of her vacations sleeping and catching up on bits. Christmas and Easter are spent working on university assignments or revision.  She worked in the summers after her 1st and 2nd years, but last summer couldn't work due to the pandemic. She has lined up some shop work for this summer as she hopes to go back to do a PhD in October providing she gets the grades this summer.

thepurplepixie

GeordieGeorge said:

silvercar said:

The government continually fails to consider that the level of the max grant/ loan combination is often not enough to support a student. Even expecting parents to make up any shortfall in loan to the maximum would leave a lot of students with insufficient income.

All very well saying they should get a part time job while they study, but some courses don’t leave sufficient spare time to do so.

Which courses are you thinking of? I don’t think that there’s any course that doesn’t leave enough spare time for an evening or weekend job.

My university didn’t allow students to work in term time, but even then there were 28 weeks of the year when we could work.

One of mine did a nursing degree, half the year they were on placement working shifts which made it difficult to get a job with enough flexibility for when on placement.  Six weeks holiday a year didn't leave alot of time for working in the holidays.  They spent their summer as unpaid staff on the ward.

68ComebackSpecial

I'm surprised that after several decades of student loans there still isn't a culture in this country of saving for your child's future education akin to the American "college fund". 

Sandtree

GeordieGeorge said:

My university didn’t allow students to work in term time, but even then there were 28 weeks of the year when we could work.

Which university was that? I know some discourage you from taking jobs but never heard of one saying they'll kick you out of uni if you do... they'd certainly be open to arguments of discrimination if they say only those who's parents will support them are allowed to attend.

Spendless said:

Medicine I believe can be restrictive in terms of trying to take outside employment. Acting believe it or not, not at the Unis but at the drama schools (many run degrees) where the contact hours are long eg I've heard of someone training at Bristol Old Vic who can't take term time work because the hours are long and spare time filled with rehearsals. 

I did Medicine at uni, for a few years at least, and know a good proportion of those on my course had jobs including me. To the OP - the problem appears to be that you've set an expectation... you've funded 2 and now the third is expecting the same treatment. Personally I got the minimum available due to my mothers income but that didn't consider the level of debt she had after my fathers death nor the fact that when she sent me money to help with the rent and hoped there'd be some left for a night out the envelope had a £5 note in it. I like many had to get a part time job and with uni lectures, studies and work I still had time to get to the student union for as many hours a week as my job.

Spendless

Sandtree said:

GeordieGeorge said:

My university didn’t allow students to work in term time, but even then there were 28 weeks of the year when we could work.

Which university was that? I know some discourage you from taking jobs but never heard of one saying they'll kick you out of uni if you do... they'd certainly be open to arguments of discrimination if they say only those who's parents will support them are allowed to attend.

Spendless said:

Medicine I believe can be restrictive in terms of trying to take outside employment. Acting believe it or not, not at the Unis but at the drama schools (many run degrees) where the contact hours are long eg I've heard of someone training at Bristol Old Vic who can't take term time work because the hours are long and spare time filled with rehearsals. 

I did Medicine at uni, for a few years at least, and know a good proportion of those on my course had jobs including me. 

I know someone who is a Vet and she had a job at Uni, in a national petstore chain, but that's not the experience someone further up this thread when her child was interested in studying it. Which makes me wonder if some courses/Unis  have put additional workloads/placements in place the past few years which now makes it difficult to do. 

silvercar

68ComebackSpecial said:

silvercar said:

When I went to university in the mid 80s, everyone qualified for some student grant, but there was still an expected parental contribution from those whose families earned above a certain level. The difference then was that in most places, the total student grant/ expected parental contribution was enough to live on, in the majority of the country. I don’t think that is the case now.

I’m trying to work out when it would be obvious that a parental contribution would become a necessity at the same time as the number of children intending to go to university became relatively high. I would say we reached that point somewhere in the 00s. 

It wouldn’t surprise me if we are now at the point where this is a natural consequence of having children with a small age gap. In the same way that it doesn’t come as a surprise that children with a small age group both attend nursery at the same age or both need nappies at the same time, is it a wonder that they both go to university at the same age?

I went to university in the mid 80s - graduated '88 - and I didn't receive any grant at all owing to my parents' income. I was 100% funded by my parents at a cost of around £2,200 pa, which was the equivalent of a "full grant" at the time. There was no minimum grant payable to all.

I graduated 1985, so 3 years earlier. In my final year I think there still was a minimum grant of something like £200 for the year. Then again rents were cheap, I paid £11 a week for a room in a university owned self catering flat. I seem to recall we could claim housing benefit to cover rent due in the holidays, as the student grant was deemed to be for term time expenses only.

amanda_p

My son studied Medicine it was a five year course plus an extra year doing an additional Anatomy degree. Apart from maybe the first year there was no way he could have worked during term time. Apart from the sheer volume of study once placements started he was placed all over Yorkshire for 3 months at a time.
However over the holidays he worked in a Doctors surgery inputting data, very boring but gave him enough cash to help him through the next academic year. He managed this until his finals year when there was no time for anything apart from revision.

GeordieGeorge

68ComebackSpecial said:

silvercar said:

When I went to university in the mid 80s, everyone qualified for some student grant, but there was still an expected parental contribution from those whose families earned above a certain level. The difference then was that in most places, the total student grant/ expected parental contribution was enough to live on, in the majority of the country. I don’t think that is the case now.

I’m trying to work out when it would be obvious that a parental contribution would become a necessity at the same time as the number of children intending to go to university became relatively high. I would say we reached that point somewhere in the 00s. 

It wouldn’t surprise me if we are now at the point where this is a natural consequence of having children with a small age gap. In the same way that it doesn’t come as a surprise that children with a small age group both attend nursery at the same age or both need nappies at the same time, is it a wonder that they both go to university at the same age?

I went to university in the mid 80s - graduated '88 - and I didn't receive any grant at all owing to my parents' income. I was 100% funded by my parents at a cost of around £2,200 pa, which was the equivalent of a "full grant" at the time. There was no minimum grant payable to all.

And of course, only about 10% of us went to university back then, so those who did qualify for a grant were a relatively small drain on the state, and nearly all of the courses were valuable enough to society that central funding made sense.