I dare you to think this benefits couple is reasonable

[lainiekazan]

Dh's brother and wife are very comfortable: large house, Range Rover, etc.

Their dd lives with her boyfriend in a country cottage on housing benefit. Neither work due to depression. They run a car, have holidays, nice clothes financed by their parents.

Now the dd is having a baby, and they are awaiting a new-build HA home in dh's brother's village.

The boyfriend is a professional student (he told me he can always find funding as he is unwaged and independent) and he said that their dc will be privately educated because it/they will be eligible for bursaries.

Surely IANBU for all this majorly sticking in my craw?

Unless they are committing fraud then they are only claiming what they are entitled to claim.it does not really matter if its town or countryside.

What are these 'reasons' for claiming extra benefits for children? I expect its only you who think they are dubious as I know the only way of getting extra benefits for children and I know how hard they are to obtain, the dwp have a list and if your reasons not on that list then your fucked you also have to prove it with evidence (anybody who hasn't figured it out its disability related) actual formal NHS medical evidence.

People who are on benefits are allowed to have gifts they are even allowed to receive cash gifts (as long as it does not put them over the savings limit) what they are not allowed to accept are regular payments intended to regularly be used to fund normal household costs.
So cars,clothing,days out,holidays, expensive items are all ok as is someone giving you cash as a gift even if it was to pay for your sky tv or broadband someone taking you grocery shopping a few times is also fine, as is someone funding activities for your children but it would not be ok for someone to give you £50 every week with the expressed or implied intention of you including it in your normal household budget for essential living costs.

Now purely due to your comment regarding the extra children's benefits I'm having a hard time working out if your disablist or just lack knowledge

you know what, my sister is very much like this and it does fuck me off. she has never worked. she lived with, and off, my parents until my dad finally put his foot down when she was about 28. she moved 10 mins down the road, has a nice flat on hb and still spends loads of time with my (very over indulgent) mother, and at their house, eating all their posh food, lounging on their expensive sofas, watching sky tv on their huge flatscreen.

I contrast this with my friends who are on benefits without rich parents, or myself when I wAs living hundreds of miles away and refused to take money from them. I lived on white bread sugar sandwiches ffs. my friends who are on benefits struggle to get through the week, if they have a car they often can't afford petrol, of course holidays or even visiting friends are out of the question.

when I see my sister living a life of luxury funded by my parents while also taking benefits from the state it does stick in my craw tbh. she has no incentive to work becayse my parents cushion her from any hint of hardship

there's nothing to be done about it but it's not right and is unfair on those truly relying on benefits.

I should also add that she is literally the laziest person I've ever encountered (doesn't put lid back on milk, doesn't pick knickers off bathroom floor, will only eat ready sliced food level of lazy) and this does not apply to any of my friends who are or have Been on benefits, who mostly have to work fucking hard to survive.

It's not right that some people play the system. eccentrica your sister sounds like a selfish lazy arse and I can understand your frustration.

For people like your sister, that is life. Stretching on endlessly with no achievements, no aspirations, and no financial security for old age. It may be 'easy' on a day-to-day basis but it is foolhardy, slowly erodes self confidence and self-esteem (though she may put on a bravado act to hide this) and is a complete waste of a life.

Presumably you are proud of what you have achieved, proud of your resilience, working towards a better future, have hope, dreams and ambitions for that future, are creating a life where you will hopefully have some financial security in the future, etc.

I know which life I'd rather have, despite it being much harder work.

Who gives a fuck?

I certainly don't.

You shouldn't either.

You will find life much more pleasant if you stop worrying about what other people are doing and concentrate on enjoying your own life.

ecent in the situation you describe your beef should be with your parents for the 'top ups' she gets from them, not the welfare system.

compos it is, mainly (my mum more than dad). but I wanted to add a non 'benefit bashing' voice to the thread to acknowledge that there can be something quite off about people bring supported by wealthy parents while also claiming benefits.

dahlen thank you, that is very insightful - as my partner says, I wouldn't want to swap with her. she plays on being depressed, having panic attacks etc but I am familiar with mental health issues and she is basically fine. but it's not doing her, or the rest of my family, any good.

catgirl not sure if that was aimed at OP or me. if me, the reason I care is because it's really tearing my family apart (plus she's my sister, we all live nearby, I see a lot of it and it does stick in the craw when she buys things we can't afford)

Well, perhaps I am misinformed, but all I know is that the bf (who is about 30, btw) said that in order to maximise benefits, you have to look like you have nothing, and leave no paper trail of any assets.

I' m not complaining about what the parents hand to their dd, that's utterly their right and prerogative, but to be plotting how best to position yourself for what the state (taxpayer) can give you as well... It just seems wrong.

People who don't care what happens to your money or if other people take it illegally or on the mickey, can I come to your house and have some of your money? I've got low self esteem and think it will really help me.

yanbu.

from upthread

"If the young couple cannot work, for whatever reason, when the baby is born the child will benefit from having both parents present"

ugh. just, ugh.

My kids might have benefited from having either of their parents at home, but we were out at work subsidising people like this.

And yes to the bursary thing. private ed. out of the question for us - both work full time - but very much within reach for a couple I know who don't work (no health issues) and are blithely confident of getting enormous bursaries for their dc.

How is the situation in the OP ok? How?

I don't get MN sometimes, I really don't. The posters seem so intelligent, but then there is this massive, hysterical blind spot about pisstakers on benefits. Why is nobody allowed to speak out without being buried under hail of biscuits?

MummyMastodon I have just found this on getting private school bursaries (advice from the Telegraph):

"5 Be ready to be means-tested

Schools want to know about all your financial circumstances, not just your take-home pay. What kind of house do you live in, what car do you drive, what savings do you have, what size is your mortgage, where do you go on holiday, do both parents work, could you borrow against your house, are there relatives who could help?

?Schools today are much more aware of people?s sources of income,? says Mike Lower, general secretary of the Independent Schools Bursars Association. ?And if parents claim they live in a humble two-up, two down, Google Earth is a wonderful beast in showing whether that is true or not.?

To me, this says it will not be an easy ride for such parents to get bursaries for their kids. And surely too many scholarships will be merit-based so the kids will have to be bright and/or talented at a particular thing to get a scholarship? Why are the couple you know so confident?

I don't think the situation in the OP is ok, but I do think there is more to it and money isn't being handed over by the state quite so freely as it seems.

"If the young couple cannot work, for whatever reason, when the baby is born the child will benefit from having both parents present"

yes - this shows the benefits system needs to be overhauled.

There is certainly a difference between a baby having both parents present because neither can work for various valid reasons and a baby having both parents present because neither one of them has any intention or desire to work. Unfortunately, we have no way of discriminating between them.

The trouble with making benefits so watertight that they cut out all but the deserving is that you automatically exclude a great deal more who are deserving. That's a price you have to pay in a fair society I think.

Benefit fraud - even extrapolated - is tiny. It's less than a 5th of the amount in benefits that goes unclaimed each year because people don't know they are entitled to them or choose not to claim them.

So-called scroungers may exist in greater numbers. I wouldn't ever deny that as I think most people know one and to deny them fails to acknowledge a wider social problem that needs addressing. However, again I am convinced that for every scrounger there are many many more who deserve that helping hand and find themselves in unfortunate circumstances for no price of their own.

Lastly, we have to consider the human rights element. Even lazy entitled wasters are human, and as such have human rights our country has enshrined in law. If we start awarding those only to the deserving we are on a slippery slope. You can judge a society based on how it treats its most unfortunate members and all that.

I double dare you to flash the postman.

Dahlen: you can't deny it would be better to have fewer lazy entitled wasters, and to stop paying people to be lazy entitled wasters. Hope you don't mind me borrowing your phrase.

Crumbled I can't stop you doing anything but I can point out that your phrase bears no similarity at all to mine bar the words 'lazy entitled wasters'.

Personally, I'd rather keep the lazy entitled wasters out of starvation and homelessness because to punish them punishes many more innocents and leaves the wasters with nothing to lose if they resort to crime.

I think flashing the postman is the best way to deal with all of this though.

Personally, I'd rather keep the lazy entitled wasters out of starvation and homelessness because to punish them punishes many more innocents and leaves the wasters with nothing to lose if they resort to crime.

Yes - that's not really the choice is it? The choice is giving money to people who need it and giving money to people who don't, OR giving money to people who need it and not giving money to people who don't.

As for the rest - the threat of crime in most civil systems is known as protectionism. I have to give money to people to stop them robbing me?

irony of ironies that today we are besieged by benefit bashing threads when the country's biggest amd most costly 'benefits family' the Windsors have addes another to their number.

I bet most of the daily mail types who resent benefit claiments having anything more than bread and water and believe all the poisonous made up shite in the Daily Mail are foaming at the fanjo with excitement about the costly royal sprog.

Crumbled - don't be facetious. It adds nothing to the debate.

The point is how do you make that choice? What parameters can you put in place to ensure those who deserve get and those who don't, don't.

Do you have the answer? Because right now there are countless people who are suffering. A case in point - 59 year old woman suffering from autism and who needed heart surgery had her benefits stopped because she was declared fit to work. If you think that's a price worth paying to weed out those with a 'bad back' falsely claiming incapacity benefit, you and I will never see eye to eye.

Is there some kind of competition on to come on MN and write goady threads about benefit claimants?

OP if you think they are committing fraud report them, if you are jealous they have more than you do what they are doing, otherwise err get a life?

In what way is that not the choice, Dahlen ?

Of course that's the choice and it's not facetious to say so. Obviously there are parameters, and there will be new ones.

Your friend fell victim to scroungers, cheaters and Labour. Without them there'd be no need for extra stringency.

What I said also applies to those who are on some big power trip and bang on about "their money" as they pay tax.

A power trip lol. In what way, Fanjo, is it not my money?