To not pay stepchild’s private school fees. part 2

If the father can muster £1200 a month, put the child in state school and use those funds to provide supplemental support, tutoring, activities, whatever. Replicate the best aspects of the private school as best as possible, while letting the state school continue his education in fundamentals like math and reading.

And the father can put in more time with the child, too, reinforcing and supporting whatever seems to work best. It doesn't sound as though the boy is profoundly neurodiverse. Some extras might bridge the gap without completely disrupting his home and putting his father in penury. Let alone tapping the OP's earnings.

Exactly.

What if the child's father were living with a mate from work. Would that man's income be counted toward the father's ability to pay? How absurd. so why should the unrelated OP's? Because she is romantically or sexually involved with him? What has that to do with anything?

Not sure if you've covered this @CloverRiver .

If the mother had the money to cover the fees, how is it that she doesn't have the money to pay child support?

One more thing to add...when my DD's tuition was raised at her university, and she only got half the scholarship funds, DD, DH and I worked extra jobs in the evening and weekends that year to pay for it. But DD is our child. DD didn't go ask her DP or his parents to fund her, despite loving them.

This is on your DP...where there's a will . . .

I feel for you, OP, I really do. And my advice is to not give in to PP's request (or is it now demands?) because it essentially puts a non-relative above your own children, and you.

In blended families, it's really shit for the side who has to subsidize the much lower earner because it means the children of the higher earner are forced to give up what's rightfully theirs. If you were a billionaire, OP, I would feel differently, but the amount of money you are concerned about tells me you are not. You have no reason to feel bad about this. This unfortunate situation is your DP's responsibility. You are not married, and I would caution to not get married.

You haven't shared DP's background, whether he could have been a higher earner, if he has parents or other relatives who should be stepping up to help his DS. DP should look to those things, like getting a second job, to fund his child's needs.

Also, you and he should have a face-to-face sitdown w/ school and explain clearly that you are not married and you don't want any financial responsibility for the child.

Again, on paper it makes little sense, but it's how its calculated, and its the schools decision at their total discretion.

I know of schools who will, before offering a bursary, look in fine microscopic detail at parents outgoing, questions as to why you need a 5 bedroom house or why you need a Mercedes on contract are common - parents are expected to drain every bit themselves first.

I know of a parent who both downsized and traded in the luxury German model (car!!) for a second hand Skoda to gain the bursary. In that case the school were offering bursary discount on a bulk purchase of years - which of course would preclude the school ever re-assessing.

I would be saying, if he loses the bursary because they insist on taking OPs salary into account he would have to remove him and his child from his current home, causing more upset and disruption to this child.

I'm quite surprised by this tbh OP.

Historically many private schools have shown empathy to children in difficult circumstances.

I suppose they're up against it, may have wind that you are a high earner and see you as a cash cow.

I suggest your DP goes to speak to them and tries to have a reasonable conversation explaining that you are not married and you have no PR for the child and he would have to remove DC from the school if the bursary is removed.

Because if they were desperate to full them they would offer 150 bursary spaces.

Schools rules. Your boyfriend needs to sort it.

Because the high earner is not the child's parent.

What if OP and her boyfriend had a third person living with them; friend, cousin, parent, uncle... would that person's income be fair game, too?

Just because someone is under the same roof as the boys' father doesn't make that someone responsible for the expenses of raising the child.

On paper any paying bum on a seat represents at least more cashflow. So yes £14K would be effectively free money if they have space, the teachers will be there, the lights on, regardless.

However the trouble can come if the parental grapevine starts whispers of "they are paying less" - we had a run of this as a head shortly ahead of my time had been making random discounts - the fall out cost about 5 full fee parents walking away, and they had more children to come through. It's a well known pitfall.

For that reason a competent bursar will be making sure scrupulously fair play is adhered to.

But this is nonsense. The child had 2 parents who qualified for the bursary because of their joint income, one of them has fucked off (which sounds for the best) and the child now has 1 parent, whose income in even less again… there is no replacement parental figure. The child now just has a father who is responsible for him.

Just because the father has a GF who he happens to share a bed with, why is she now expected to be a replacement parent figure? It’s ridiculous. They wouldn’t ask a housemate the father was living with to sign these contracts and be responsible for this child’s fees.

Exactly, not all independent schools are heavily oversubscribed.

In the one my son goes too there are some very tiny years.

Same with local state schools now tbh, all under subscribed except the most desirable.

Perhaps this is why they are so insistent on your agreeing to pay - they are in a bad financial state and may have to close?

Haha, it made me lol a bit too! I had an image of you walking to the door of the school and delicately setting your stool in the step… ‘this is what I think of your demands! 💩’ 😅

Anyway, jokes aside, I think you’re completely correct. This is bullshit. If he lived with a housemate would they assess his income? No. So why, because you share a bedroom, does your income come into it? It’s bullshit quite frankly.

Could you both arrange to go to the school and ask them the above? Tell them if they insist on your income being taken into account, you will be splitting up, your partner will be moving out, causing more disruption for his child?

I don’t think you should have to pay this, but why should the school subsidise a child who lives in a household which has a high earner in it. They are trying to balance the books too, if he no longer qualifies he moves to state school. Funding it should always be a consideration when attending private school.

I’m responding to your posts on your previous thread @CloverRiver

Firstly you kept asking why the school are asking for verification of your income now and not when the care was a 50% split. You also said the mother recently cut contact and made a big deal of this by asking the school to be totally removed with any involvement with her son and behaving in a strange manner. To me, it’s obvious that both are connected.

They didn’t need your income before as both parents were amicable, paying 50/50 and were engaging with the bursary process. But now that she has dramatically flounced off, the step-son’s account has likely been scrutinised in more depth and the school seem to feel the standard of engagement isn’t sufficient for the bursary. The school now want a replacement parental figure on the record and are basically placing you in that role, because it protects the school as they would make you jointly liable for fees.

It’s logical in a sense, because they likely accepted the bursary claim based on the previous set of income declared to them and now that circumstances have changed, need to see if the bursary is still valid.

Unfortunately it may be that they withdraw the bursary in any case, because of the mother withdrawing from the arrangement. Don’t let anyone guilt trip you into making that your fault. The mother obviously signed a contract that she’s now pulled out of, the school are pissed and want to make sure they aren’t going to be out of pocket. But they likely know they aren’t going to get anywhere with chasing the mother so are going after you instead, because your side of the parenting divide is more easy to pressure as his dad cares about the son’s education when the mother doesn’t.

I wouldn't want to pay in your shoes either.

One thing you haven't mentioned is what your DP thinks of the whole situation, what does he think should happen?

This is what I find obnoxious. Who decides how much "impact" is enough? Surely that is up to the earner herself.

If OP has arranged her life and finances with no reliance upon anyone else to afford five luxury holidays a year, or to fund her kids, or whatever, who is anyone else to say that her choices are "more than enough" and that she can "afford" to pay toward this unrelated child's school fees?

It's not necessarily a "household pot of money" just because some outsider decrees it to be so. I have never mingled finances with anyone I've lived with, and never will. We pay our share of agreed-upon bills and the rest is private.

The idea that my money could be claimed by a third party that I have no relationship with (the school) to benefit someone I have zero kinship with, or legal duty toward, is just grim. That so many commenters here think it's A-OK is concerning.

We have legal marriage to distinguish between those who are obligated to one another financially, and those who are not. Everyone else is basically just roommates, whatever they may do behind closed doors.

This is reason #347 to never get involved with someone who has children, as far as I'm concerned.

(again, I realize the bursary office can do as it pleases but it's wrong in principle to go after a bystander like the OP).

There is more demand for bursary places.

Completely invented scenario but as an example, in this climate if your stepson's bursary money goes back in the pot they could offer it to some existing students whose families are struggling. This could potentially keep, say, 4 current students paying 82.5% rather than losing them all.

I think it's far too simplistic to assume that they will be desperate to keep him. They might be, if course, especially if he is very academic or makes a big contribution to the school in other ways.

We looked at various private schools for our autistic child and about 50% said they had space but their "SEN quota" was full. So they'd take our money, but not for a child with additional needs. And this was paying full price with the additional funding that an EHCP brings.

They may not be oversubscribed but they presumably staff the school according to the number of students on roll. They would need more staff if they were at capacity.

I am shocked that you think you DH will be entitled to benefits and that if he is he will be able to continue to pay £1200 in private school fees. That isn't what benefits are for. It just doesn't sound right.

Also as others have mentioned, you don't get the rent part of benefits if you have more than a few thousand in the bank. Your DP will be required to house himself from the equity from your joint home. Not sure what happens in the short term. There may be a grace period or it could cause him problems. If you were relying on him getting his rent paid to enable him to pay the £1200 I wouldn't. It's a few years ago but I was in this situation. I was 'between houses' having sold one and renting before buying another when I split with my exH. I had about £40K in the bank. I did not get housing benefit.

Hmm, thinking on this, if your DP takes his equity from the house you share, presumably he could afford to pay the fees. Could you remortgage and draw up an agreement to say that you get extra if/when you sell protecting your children's inheritance? While I commented early on about you being a family unit once you move in together, I also understand why you don't want to pay your SS fees to the detriment of your own children. The tricky thing is forseeing this type of issue before deciding to co-habit which I know isn't always possible.

@dontmalbeconme I agree that he should prioritize his child, but he needs to sort this out without blaming the OP, which seems to be what he’s doing. He’s expecting so much from her, none of this is her responsibility.

@CloverRiver Did you not think my suggestion of a loan secured against his equity in the house was a possibility? Or does he have so little equity that it would not cover the annual loans for fees?

The one thing you haven't answered is how much the additional costs/you subsidising for living costs would impact your? If it means you'd be on 4 luxury holidays a year rather than 5, I think you're being tight. If it means having to seriously economise as a family, I think he's being unfair on you.