to think i will have too much money on benefits.

[5toocoolforschool]

OK so dh and i have split up.He is staying with a friend and is finding somewhere else to live.We have 5 children.He is a relatively high earner and i have always been at home with the kids.

I have applied for everything i am entitled to (income support,child tax credits,child benefit,housing benefit, i will not have to pay any council tax- was not entitled to any of these before)

On top of this i will be receiving maintenance from Ex.

All in i will be receiving £3,300 per month!

That is only a couple of hundred less than dh gets paid.

I am porting this partly because i am sure i have missed something,should i not be getting maintenance from dh as well?Everywhere i have looked says i can.

Partly,i just think its bad.I mean i wont be claiming these forever,i have been accepted on a course (again which i wont have to pay for,which i will be given a grant for childcare)and after that i will be working again,so 3 years max.

But now i can see how easy it must be for someone to just see this as a lifestyle.

London is really expensive and outside most peoples reach. Is the OP in London.

If you aren't working should you really still feel entitled to live in London and expect the state to pay for it. Not sure whether the OP is in London though, if she isn't then rents are of course cheaper

Sorry, been a long day. So the benefits cap includes rent?

That's how they apply the cap they are not allowed to take money of tax credits, income support, child benefit etc they can only take money if your HB. If you were a home owner in benefits the cap would be meaningless.

Yes hand cream the cap includes rent.

That's why the cap is unfair a family with lots of kids in the north would be better of than a family with two children in London.

If you aren't working should you really still feel entitled to live in London and expect the state to pay for it. Not sure whether the OP is in London though, if she isn't then rents are of course cheaper

Where should they be sent? to poor mans land

I lived in London and lost my job should I have been made to leave my family and support network and area I grew up in?

Btw I did eventually but I wouldn't of been able to until I was in right frame of mind to up and leave to start with nobody and nothing.

are you suggesting if people lose their job, have difficulty finding another job they should move out of London, move their children to different schools and maybe leave their network of support

We aware that many councils are trying to move out low income families (Westminster have been trying to do this for years) but people should not have to move to another part of the country because they have fallen on hard times

op when I signed on a few years ago at first maintenance was counted then it wasn't but I choose to opt out of getting housing benefit as I felt I did not need it, maybe after a while you will feel more secure and not need it I guess it depends on how you few the benefits system, get what you can or use it when you have to

There does need to be a cap though doesn't there? I have my tin hat at the ready but you are long term unemployed why would the state agree that you can stay in London. I would love to live in London but sadly even though we are both higher rate tax payers we cant

hold on the link that was posted earlier says that TC,IS,CB etc is included in the cap

handcream you could if you really wanted to but you may not have the same standard of living you do now and more likely to live in a smaller property

many people live on a lot less without benefits in london

If I lost my job I would have to move, I have a support network around me, why am I not 'entitled' to stay where I am and allow the state to support me!

maybe they could turn disused tube stations into underground poor burrows to keep them away from the deserving Londoners

I love Christmas the benefits you mention are included in the CALCULATION that make your benefits over £500 but then in an attempt to reduce people's income to below £500 they reduced the HB to either an amount that means you are below the £500 OR you have 50p left if HB whichever comes first.

Hand cream where do you purpose people be moved too? Who will pay for the removal? Is it not just a case of shuffling the burden onto another council.

Should I have stayed in London my teen would have part time job now but where we live now jobs are scares. I did not foresee that many years ago.

Arghhhh.

I don't want anyone living in poverty.

I don't want anyone having a room used for wheelchairs or carers being called 'spare' & having to move/pay for it.

I don't want people unable to access or afford respite.

I don't want people having to move when hard times fall on them.

I don't want RP's being left at the mercy of NRP's paying/paying on time.

My issue is

• that people can walk away from their families & either not pay or pay feck all while the state picks up the tab. That's all really.

Oh and less money spend on duck houses and more on those who need it!

Ignore I wish I hadn't moved out of London too. It's a bitch trying to get back again :(

Example 2
April has six children and lives in a housing association home. April’s husband died a year ago so she receives widowed parent’s allowance. At the moment she receives the following benefits:

Widowed parent’s allowance £108.30
Child tax credits £323.82
Housing benefit £100.00
Child benefit £87.30

Total £619.42

Because April is receiving over £500 a week in benefits, and none of the exemptions apply to her, the benefit cap will apply, and the amount of benefit she receives will reduce. She receives £119.42 more than the £500 limit, but because her housing benefit is £100 a week, her housing benefit will reduce to 50 pence a week. No other benefits will be reduced.

Copied from a council website as you can see April will be left with 519.42 a week so slightly above the cap.

good example i get it now

Chipping I still miss London too and I left 7years ago, if I had my time again I would of stayed.

When I was on the 90s equivalent of income support any money the new CSA got of the child's father was taken off your benefit.

It was a ridiculous waste of administration and money. Clunky and pointless.

It may have been pointless for you, but it wasn't for the government. When the CSA collected maintenance, it reduced the amount the government had to pay you.

CSA was thought up by John Major's government. It may have been sold to the public as a means of supporting children, but I'd guess the MP's who voted for it saw it as a means of reducing the benefits bill.

It was right in theory to and prevent absent parents from off-loading financial responsibility for their children onto the state, unfortunately it just didn't work well enough, so roughly 20 years later government has given up on this idea.

Soontobe I think you have had a really hard time on here with people nitpicking as you are actually just being factually correct.
Say if you hadn't had a lot of a available funds and also knew you has to make your funds last a month it's easier to live week to week. I have a similar rent to you for a four bed and get working families and child tax weekly. This structure suits me.
I wish you all the best.

CSa if not paid voluntary should be deducted at source- no exceptions. We are too lax on absent parents.