To believe £780 month lone parent benefits income is adequate to live on.

[goldfacegreen]

There's some myth busting required at last I think.

As a lone parent of two under 6, I receive a total of £780 a month in benefits:

Income Support, Child Tax Credit, Child Benefit, CSA (£5 a week).

I receive full housing benefit for a two bedroom house (£75 shortfall which has to come out of my income support, currently being paid via Housing Discretion Award) which doesnt go into mybank account, it gets paid direct to landlord, and £16 a month council tax shortfall also has to be paid out of income.

I'm on meters and gas and electric are around £20 a week each, some of which pays off accrued debt. Water is deducted directly from my income support via an 'attachment of earnings' type court order.

I don't have loans or credit cards, no landline, no satellite tele, no car, no travel expenses, no socialising costs, don't smoke, my Internet is paid for by someone else although I should have organised a bill swap ages ago and I run an old phone on £10 month contract. My other costs are regular swimming, yoga, wax salon, and I buy school uniform and children's clothing as and when required.

Childcare such as nursery (pre-school), morning and after school clubs are free to those on income support, school holiday clubs are heavily subsidised, as are school meals, dentistry, doctor's prescriptions, council run leisure centre swimming and gym classes, and many other recreation facilities.

My budgeting skills are atrocious but having recently done some sums, I actually have around £250 a month 'spare' from all benefits income. Although for the past year or two I've been constantly overdrawn by around £500 so whenever income is credited, I'm always 'one step forwards, two steps back' amd because of this will never get back in the black again.

So, with better budgeting (I don't buy a regular weekly food shop for instance, instead spend a fortune every few days buying dinners and sundries at the overpriced local Tesco Metro) I just don't understand how so many lone parents claim they can't afford to live on these same benefits.
Even if you have debts, there are features in place to reduce your debt payments to just £1 a week or even write them off altogether as a last resort.

Also, the father of my children earns thousands but fraudulently claims benefits, so he is only required to pay the minimum £2.50 a week per child direct from his benefits. Many lone mothers receive full child support which isn't deducted from their other benefits income, so can be receiving up to £800 a month on top of their benefits depending on what the chikdren's father earns. I have noticed that rarely will lone parents on benefits state this fact or include it in their income along with their complaint.

Yes, it is a struggle trying to support myself and two young children on £780 a month (but mostly because I can't get over this overdraft debt shackle) but on paper, budgeting well, it is entirely doable, and if you are frugal, you could even save a little too.

Why does the Daily Mail stereotype exist that single mothers are rolling in handouts, given the above figures? Just under £195 a week is an adequate income for one adult and two young children, surely..

They'll probably want to ration what we buy to. The vouchers will only be valid on purchases of rice, beans and tesco value bread.

Vouchers?

Yes because I can get electric for the meter in vouchers and pay for the bus in vouchers.

Cant see places accepting vouchers. I have to go Co-op to pay for electric. Tesco doesn't do it and ASDA will if you pay in cash.

If I go to the shopping centre only the small independent newsagents xo electric. Chances of them accepting vouchers is very very slim.

People don't think when they talk about these vouchers. So all benefits? So all CB, WTC and CTC will be vouchers then?

The only sense of entitlement I see on this thread is those people who are wanting people who claim benefits to live their lives of the margins of society.

QueenBee - you don't claim tax credits then?

It is entirely possibly to work FULL TIME and STILL qualify for benefits because your pay is so low. Are you honestly saying that someone who works 40 house a week with a child or children on minimum wage should somehow get by on £250 a week BEFORE rent, water and council tax are paid, thus leaving the household with around £100 (depending on where you live) to live?

I think I'll retract that Alice.

In all honesty, I'd rather be me, struggling but paying my own way, than worrying about whether or not I'll get actual money or vouchers or all the other complications that go with being in receipt of benefits.

I know how hard it is when money is tight, so I don't want to have a go at those struggling even more than me.

Queen bee

That's one of the best posts I've read on a thread like this, thank you for making me smile

I work in a benefits office (pretty much for free after paying childcare actually! ) and don't claim any benefits but have had this kind of conversation with so many people I know.

The allowance the government provides is enough to live on if you have no prior financial commitments. No contracts or mortgages or debts to pay which most of us have accumulated by the time we are adults and in decent paying jobs, even if only a mobile phone contract or overdraft or similar.

This is where most people start to run into problems. Late or non payment resulting in extra fees, bank charges, court action which can ruin you financially in a short space of time. Then the washing machine breaks or the children all need new school shoes. You're desperate, have just enough to live on and you (quite rightly) can't get credit. Not everybody has family in a position to help so Provident or Bright House or some equally ridiculous company step in and you have even bigger financial obligations to keep and even less money to go around. I've seen it happen time and again.

Most people are a divorce or an accident or a redundancy away from having to claim benefits themselves, savings or not. I only know of one person in my social circle (late twenties) who is completely independently wealthy and doesn't have to work and that is through an inheritance .

Most people are a divorce or an accident or a redundancy away from having to claim benefits

Indeed. Sadly, from the many benefits bashing threads I've seen on MN there are plenty of people who believe they are completely impervious to life's pitfalls.

I think if someone is on benefits they should be paid in vouchers for food, electric/gas and the rest in money vouchers which should be accepted as cash everywhere.
It would help the honest people budget and stop the less honest, like the OP DH sponging off the Tax payer.
And how would it help those already discriminated against, to be less so?
The disabled for example. And who dictates whether I, as a carer who frequently does an 18 hour day, am allowed the occasional bottle of wine?

Thank you QueenBee.

I'm on benefits, but I budget carefully and we're okay. But I'm well aware of others that are not okay, both those on full benefits and those that are working full time but still relying on benefits top ups to make ends meet, even though they are budgeting. And I also have friends that are living paycheque to paycheque to keep up, but are well aware that it would only take one financial disaster to wipe them out and end up on benefits, so they struggle like mad to keep things going.

None of us are really "better off" than each other. Each situation has it's pros and cons. This race to the bottom benefits nobody.

happytalk, what is frightening is the number of people who put no measures in place to help protect themselves from life's pitfalls.

I'm not talking about those with disabilities or long-term health issues but all the rest of us.

Getting a job, maintaining a skill set, learning how to manage household finances, squirrelling away the pennies on the months where there is a bit left-over - basic stuff to help yourself.

A lot of the dire straits people get into could be avoided.

I'd love to see Household Finances as a core curriculum course for all secondary schools, along with Cookery. I can't think of two more needed subjects.

QueenBee I agree with you that household finances and cookery (proper cookery, not making just making a pizza, thank you very much), is much needed for teenagers.

I think you'll find many families are simply so exhausted trying to keep up that they reach a point where they're just reacting to everything rather than being more proactive. I know I've hit times where that's happened - something breaks down, an unexpected bill, followed by something else... it just honestly gets on top of you and all you can do is pinball from one train crash to another, just hoping to be in one piece at the end so you can move on from there.

I will have to disagree with you about household management and cookery being school subjects as I see them as an essential life skills which it is a parents responsibility to teach. It's in part about taking responsibility for yourself and farming that out to someone else to do makes a mockery of it. Besides if you teach it in school will those who really need it engage properly and take it in. Budgeting and meal planning suggestions could be sent out with the initial paperwork for claims with regular top up suggestions.

I agree with Jacks My mum taught me all that.

Been on benefits doesn't mean you don't know that

so, jacks365 how are all those kids whose parents don't have a clue ever going to learn? If it forms part of the curriculum then everyone gets a chance.

SPs I don't mean for those on benefits. For all students in secondary. My parents didn't teach me anything about budgeting - I had to learn it all on my own. Interestingly, my father DID teach me how to change the oil in my car. But not how to budget for the expenses pertaining to that car. I don't know anyone from my group of friends at that age that was "taught" to budget or do household accounts from their parents. They generally were just given money to spend and given more when they ran out (somewhat affluent so no budgeting required on their part).

I taught DD when she was a teenager, but it was never discussed in any way in her school. I'm sure there are loads of parents that just don't think of it or don't know how to approach it or perhaps just don't know much about it themselves (or don't care).

There are courses available for budgeting etc that are available through places like sure start if they are required I just feel that doing things like that within schools is eroding away at parents responsibilities. As parents we need to be teaching our children these things daily, making them aware and if we don't do it we are failing them, parents need to stop passing the buck onto schools and expecting them to pick up the slack. Schools should be educating about subjects not teaching children how to live.

Schools should be educating about subjects not teaching children how to live

Sorry, but I don't agree with this. There is already health education and sex education in schools. Ideally, yes things like this can be taught by parents. But so often they are not. And if even a few weeks of one of their classes focuses on this and it helps them to grow into financially responsible adults, then so much the better.

God, people go on and on about how they hate seeing people on benefits, but don't want them to be educated in a manner that will actually help them to be more financially astute and inspire them to do well, get further education, and get a good job so they won't be on benefits!! After all, surely a brief course on household finances would show a teenager pretty quickly that they will be much better off financially if they are in a well paid and secure job.

God forbid we actually give them the tools to improve themselves and make good decisions right from the start.

Queen Bee rest assured. Most Single Parents on Benefits don't have enough spare for Yoga Classes! .

Most single parents not on benefits don't have the money for yoga classes either! Not really sure what the yoga thing is about?

However, I think schools are for educating children to be functioning economically self sufficient adults. I can't understand how a course on household finances is any less relevant that Sex Ed? Surely, all children should have the chance to learn stuff - not just those with sensible, well-educated parents?

The OP states she gets full DHF to pay the shortfall of her HB. Yet can afford Yoga Classes etc. Even at a reduced rate that's £3.00 odd towards her rent. Did she mention waxing too?!. I'm the first to roll my eyes at some of the comments when a Benefits thread comes on and someone comments that they can afford x y and z but claim they struggle. I literally did read this open mouthed because the DHF set up by the Coalition wasn't to keep someone in Yoga and Gym classes. It was set up to keep someone in their home!! This has grated me too and made me go a tad Daily Maily which I suspect was the Intention Please OP. Could you direct us to what ever mobile provider has an internet package for £10a month. We would all like to switch!! Just saying.

And yes I agree with your second paragraph.

Judging by the teen pregnancy rate the sex ed has been very successful. As a parent it's my job to raise my children to be fully functioning economically independent adults, successfully done with one just three to go. I don't think things like budgeting teaching would work in school because children model their parents behaviour more so they need to see parents do it regularly. I regularly sit down and write a budget both short aand long term, my eldest does exactly the same. Yes I believe the help should be there if needed so maybe someone like the op should be forced to go on a course but I don't think teaching it in school is the answer.

Misspixie, if you are interested in internet packages, I've just signed up with TalkTalk for an internet only package. £126 line hire for the year & £2.50 per month for unlimited internet usage. Not quite £10 per month, but is only £13, which I thought was pretty good.

jacks365, if sex education has been very successful, despite young people modelling their parents behaviour (according to you) - why wouldn't household financial planning be equally successful?

Just because you do budgeting and show your kids how to do it - which is of course, really fantastic for your kids, doesn't mean that those kids with less savvy parents should miss out?

I speak French, so I can teach my DC's French - doesn't mean I think that all the other kids at their school should go without French lessons, just because I can teach my DC - IYSWIM.

The sex education comment was sarcastic. I just believe that something like budgeting needs to be seen in practice, how it changes and adapts over time, how improvements affect it in real terms same with set backs. It's a practical subject that you can't actually do the practical with except at home.