Maintenance Payments Ending

I don't think it's at all unreasonable for the parent with more money to pay more of uni costs. But this isn't for you to ask your ex. Your kids are adults now. It's between them and their father. Equally, any support you are able to provide us between you and them.

Thank you for the advice, I have checked a few times with the claim line and also checked myself online.

Well ,yes someone has told you- but unless it is in black and white make a claim and see. I have been given incorrect information on eligibility several times- the only way to be sure is to make a claim and get a decision. I discovered I could have claimed UB when I was a student because lectures were less than 21 hours a week- but I had been told at benefit offices I was not eligible. Only the claim decision makers can make this call- everything else that is not printed is anecdotal and should be disregarded.

@Laurmolonlabe I've been surprised by the whole thing tbh! Didn't realize how much the whole situation had changed - I'd thought, "Oh well, she'll get a loan" - then realized that for some unis, loans wouldn't even cover hall fees. I don't envy students today - I worked part-time in a chippy when I was at uni, but that was to pay for drinking and travel!

I'm surprised, because when you Google it lots of student jobs come up- no uni is particularly thrilled if you work, particularly bar type work as it means you are often tired/ sleepy. It depends what sort of student you are, I didn't work except in the holidays and I was still very busy with reading and essays when I wasn't in lectures, but if the financial situation demands it I don't think they could really penalise you.

@Laurmolonlabe I need to make a correction. DD's financial agreement with Oxford didn't say she had to agree not to work in term-time - just that the funding was available to cover her going. However the Oxford uni website reads: “Term-time employment is not permitted except under exceptional circumstances and in consultation with your tutor and senior tutor. During vacations, you will be required to complete academic work and this should take priority over other commitments. However, the Careers Service can help you to find work experience placements during the vacations, with the agreement of your tutor."

Again though, Oxbridge is generally more affordable than other unis because of the shorter terms, cheaper halls and bursaries available.

I'm not saying that part-time working /Gap years are a bad thing. In fact, they can be positively advantageous in many circumstances - but it's important to realize that it's not as simple as "Well, they can get a job/do a Gap year". There is an expectation of parental support if you have a higher income. Martin Lewis' website explains the situation really well; https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/students/student-loans-england-plan-5/

@Laurmolonlabe I need to make a correction. DD's financial agreement with Oxford didn't say she had to agree not to work in term-time - just that the funding was available to cover her going. However the Oxford uni website reads: “Term-time employment is not permitted except under exceptional circumstances and in consultation with your tutor and senior tutor. During vacations, you will be required to complete academic work and this should take priority over other commitments. However, the Careers Service can help you to find work experience placements during the vacations, with the agreement of your tutor."

Again though, Oxbridge is generally more affordable than other unis because of the shorter terms, cheaper halls and bursaries available.

I'm not saying that part-time working /Gap years are a bad thing. In fact, they can be positively advantageous in many circumstances - but it's important to realize that it's not as simple as "Well, they can get a job/do a Gap year". There is an expectation of parental support if you have a higher income. Martin Lewis' website explains the situation really well; https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/students/student-loans-england-plan-5/

No, their student finance is paid in instalments so that stopped quite a while ago as they are too ill to attend uni atm.
PIP is the only benefit payable but not enough to live off. We have been told that DC would have to give up uni to claim any other benefits. They now have a long term disability, but are hoping to eventually be able to go back to uni. They may have to give up uni eventually but it’s something that took a long time to get a place on so still hoping for the best.

In order to claim UC you have to be available, and actively seeking, work. Being a student and being unable to attend university due to ill health would preclude Dc on both counts. PIP would appear to be the correct financial support, as they presumably have already received student finance for this year?

Sorry to intervene, just wanted to make people aware that as far as I’ve been told you cannot claim UC as a student (unless very very specific conditions apply).
My DC is a student and has become too unwell to attend uni atm. They claim PIP but we have been told in order to claim UC they would have to give up their course. They are also not eligible for student funding atm as not able to attend uni so I am having to try a support them financially.

Well.it wouldn't just be PIP it would be UC too I'm just pointing out that as a disabled adult you wouldn't be expected to financially support him ,not what my own particular philosophies are .

I love my son and, until the day I die, I want him to have the best life he can, not just exist on whatever's left of PIP, after it's been ravaged by the current government. I can see we have very different philosophies.

Come 18 your son will be entitled to PIP and UC in his own right so it won't just be you supporting him
Even you don't have to financially support him once he's an adult if you didn't want to.

Are you still going on? I'm done explaining to you and the last repetition I'm making to you is that my son cannot do overnights away from home. You do you boo.

Op, I get you. My ex earns at least 4 times as much as I do. I work fulltime.

Eldest dc goes to uni this year. I have said that I cannot give a regular contribution as having her home in holidays will cost me. My second dc finishes school next year and so maintenance will stop there also.

I honestly am really worried how I will survive. Second dc doesn’t want to go to uni so willl get a job and of course I will charge rent etc but depending how much he earns it probably will not be as much as the maintenance I receive.

I get a lot of maintenance but I am living in a house which I can not afford without help. If it were just me I could easily afford my own housing on my salary but I cannot afford to run a family home with the rising costs of living.

I would never have chosen to have 3 kids on my salary alone and had that many because we had a good combined income. Little did I know that he would have an affair.

It’s shit.

Oh yeah, no, I do think OP is out of their mind if they think getting 50% isn't enough 🤣 and post 18? I mean, I fully expect to have to support my son the rest of my life and I'm doing the best I can to leave him provided for but once he's 18, I know for a fact his father will be dusting off his hands. Aside from the issues it causes with the benefits bill, there's just something so soul destroying about people doing the bare minimum for their kids, whether out of spite for the other parent or total lack of decency as a parent. Equally, I hate it when the RP (is that residential parent?) expects to be supported themselves. It's about the kids. It should always be about the kids.

I've done a lot of research into student finance - my DD is just waiting for her A level results and had just been awarded her minimum loan of under £5k. She had to sign an agreement with the Uni of Oxford (for which she has a conditional offer) not to work. A gap year to earn money can be a good thing but we were told BY ACADEMICS AT THE UNI OPEN DAY that it is not well regarded on maths and hard sciences - unless of course it's in industry doing something relevant - obviously it can be absolutely advantageous in languages, social work etc. Also my DH is a university professor and talks to his personal tutees about this all the time. Obviously if your DCs could get a job and do it without affecting their coursework, that has lots of advantages - financially and in terms of personal development- but I know many parents whose kids have applied for many, many jobs with no success. I checked in with my daughter and she confirmed this was the experience of many of her friends.

If CMS is less than 10% then he's getting reductions for overnights, which means he also has costs for a bed, clothing and toys.

If you want DLA to be means tested for separated parents, it's going to be means tested for everyone which is completely unfair to disabled people who have significant extra costs but still earn decently, and means that disabled people at higher levels are never going to have the quality of life of their colleagues.

Frequently, absent fathers do pay around 50% of the costs of the child (more complicated if disabilities are involved, granted). What they don’t have to pay is 50% or more of RP’s costs, which is what’s frequently complained about, because RP largely can’t work FT.

Not naïve at all. I have got fat fingers though. I meant to type could instead of would but can't seem to change it after the event.

What I am getting at is that I don't know any single mother, who is the primary caregiver, whose CM equates to the "50%" OP is alluding to. I then go on to say that if fathers actually did pay 50%, it could pave the way for restructuring of benefits for such families, to achieve the benefits bill savings that the government is currently trying to strip from disabled children and adults.

I feel it's inherently wrong that fathers can get away with not contributing 50% and, in our case, paying 10% or less of their income, and the state, aka the taxpayer, has to pick up the slack.

🤣🤣🤣 goodness, you are naive! Maintenance is not counted as income when assessing for benefits, so it wouldn't matter whether DF was paying £400 or £4000 per month, the benefits bill wouldn't change (unless RP put lots in savings, then UC would reduce).

So basically, you want DLA to be means tested, so that well-off families with disabled children just have to absorb the extra costs associated with disabilities. I couldn't disagree more, but there we go.

Nope are you ?
You seem somewhat disingenuous?