Savings for UC, does this count?

[beautifulsun]

Are they counted if in child's name?

My daughter (3) has a savings account. It currently holds about £4000

My monthly payment of UC is 1350. DLA about £650 (part is automatically paying for motability car). Carer's about £300. Salary of £1910 a month

I don't really have the cash to make premium bonds worthwhile

What would be the best way to put some savings away for her without the impact on UC savings limit?

Obviously I'm thinking very long term. She isn't reaching the 16k limit anytime soon (they only charge for it per £ or so once you're over £5099 in savings)

To be totally transparent, no, it isn't 'secretly' for me. Her current savings Account is an ISA and I cannot touch it. She gets money from family and friends for birthday etc on top of small contributions I make

Keep saving for your daughter consider a savings account she can access at 17 too for some savings as driving lessons and tests on average costs 2k now for them.

I know your child is only three but do be aware that if she has significant savings this may impact her future entitlement to benefits as an adult
I font know what her disability is or if she will be able to work etc
Whilst DLA and PIP.are not means tested other benefits are .

The thing is, tax credits are a benefit for employers, to enable them to pay lower wages. It perfectly reasonable that anyone receiving them should be allowed to save out of their income if they can. What's not ok is to change society suddenly so that employers are subsidised by taxpayers so they're allowed to pay low wages, then telling their employees that they'll have to accept lower pay or apply for universal credit (meaning they're not allowed to save much any more).

Just seen the example below on gov.uk of the type of thing that may be disregarded by DWP/UC 'if' declared.

I do think the thresholds should be raised, though maybe not to that level. We've not bothered claiming yet because of our savings, but the savings are there because we need a new roof. There's no way we could get a loan, so we just have to struggle on until the new roof is sorted.

Funny thing is we only have the savings because we got a payout for missold PPI. We were over the £16000 for a bit, but needed a new boiler, so that knocked a few thousand off, and we've had to pay for things from savings for DS (waiting for a DLA decision), we're clinging on to the rest to get the roof sorted and after that we'll be well below even the £6000 and with little hope of building it up again.

Yes I've been on that thread too. Quite unbelievable but then people on tax credits have, for the past 20+ years been virtually allowed to have as much in savings as they wanted to without there really being any limits except needing to report any earned interest over £300 a year. I have also come across people on tax credits having second homes that weren't counted as capital because on tax credits they only looked at earned income. It is a crazy system that's been allowed to continue for so many years that you now get these people who have been on tax credits who are up in arms that they have to move to a different benefit where capital is limited to 16 k and their sense of injustice is very real ! There are numerous similar posts right now about the injustice of it all !

Op has already explained it is not her dd who is disabled but rather her ds. Just warning you before ' caringcarer ' comes along and swears at you too for not realising !

Some banks allow a grandparent to open an account for their grandchild. Then birthday money etc can go not that account.

Ask UC if a child’s pension will affect your UC. Okay she cannot access it for many years but it would help her eventually.

Yes, I've also seen them. I've been disabled many years now, bed bound, on UC and can't fund my care even. But these.... well, I don't even know what to call them tbh.... think nothing of stashing tens of thousands, then coming on here asking how they can hide it when they migrate, whilst others read that thinking how they're going to eat next week!

Incensed really isn't the word. 😤

I may have misunderstood, but I was referring to where OP said, "I put £80 a month away for her from my account." I assumed that wasn't from the gifted money, but OP's own earnings.

You only save if you can afford to. I work full time and have no money left over to save, so I don't. I don't save my money then ask for money from the taxpayer! That's just bonkers!

I work full time, I get UC and I save. I do not "ask" for money from the taxpayer, I claim what I am entitled to. What I do with it when it's in my bank account is my own business, there's no rule saying what I can and can't spend it on.

Yep your decision, it just doesn't sit right with me. If you don't have enough money to live on and you have to claim UC, then you can't afford to save. I'd feel bad squirelling money away then needing UC to pay day to day costs. Just because you're entitled, doesn't mean it's right.

I don't NEED UC to survive, I could survive without UC personally. Would be tight but doable. That's not the case for everyone though, it's very dependent on rent costs and things. I have very small outgoings. I claim it because I'm entitled to it so why wouldn't I. I don't feel bad at all, I read a thread on here yesterday where someone was trying to avoid paying tax on a second rental property. I'll start feeling bad when everyone else who uses these "legal" tax loops does.

You should be more bothered that we have to claim because of how low wages are or like me on a zero hour contracts not getting many shifts. Pretty sure those who hold views like you would claim in the same way.

And there's me thinking that UC is to help with your living costs! I wish I got free money, I'd be able to save then too!

Maybe do a calculator, you might be entitled, you never know.

No a junior ISA will not affect your entitlement, just did a quick google search and answer came straight up top of the page.

I am sure many claimants would rather not have to claim. 🙄

If you ever want people to be able to break the cycle of claiming, allowing them to save/budget is crucial.

@ImthatBoleyngirl you need to sort your head out. She can do what she wants with her money once her bills are paid. She goes without in a roundabout way because she could be going out and buying things she don’t need for her or the kids getting every beauty treatment going etc etc but she chooses to save for a rainy day but she’s in the wrong. I’d love to be able to save for my 2 year old and I work full time 35 hours per week and still get £1200 UC because the government say that I don’t earn enough to survive without it which correct. I wouldn’t be able to afford my rent and childcare without them so they are enabling me to have a roof over mine and my 2 year olds head and enabling me to go to work. Which I’m better off working either way.
peiple like you are so narrow minded.

If the money is from the child's relationship then what has this got to do with the taxpayer? The taxpayer doesn't get to control how relatives spend their money. The child is not claiming UC

If you can't afford to live without it, then that's fine. That's what it's for. It's the people who don't need it but still claim that I don't agree with. And if you think that's narrow-minded, then I guess it just shows that our moral values are different.

Oh, come on. As if you wouldn't do the same.

Employers paying so little that people need UC top ups leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Underpaid working people being treated like criminals for budgeting and putting money aside for their children leaves a bad taste in my mouth. People forgetting that underpaid working people who need top ups are also tax payers leaves a bad taste in my mouth.