Im not benefit bashing but AIBU to think this is a bloody joke??

[Candyflosshair]

NC for this. My sister is 29, she is living with my mum, pays no bills, rent, food or anything and is currently pregnant. She gets £60 pw in JSA (soon to be IS) and the baby's dad has a high paying job, although they don't live together/ aren't together.
She has recently been given a £500 grant from the government as she is on benefits and pregnant. Today she has told me her grants come through and she's on her way to buy an iPhone 6 with this money plus the extra JSA she doesn't use/need.
I no it is more a moral situation but I can't see woman queuing up to reject £500 for nothing..
AIBU to think this is a joke

I haven't read the whole thread, but I see nothing wrong with her taking the 500. Money is fungible, so if she's spending it on an iphone because her mother has gifted her things it was meant to help with, then she's ended up in exactly the same situation as if she bought the baby things and the mother bought the iphone. No-one would be jumping up and down about that.

Should everyone on benefits who receives gifts refund an equivalent amount of benefits so they're no better off as a result of the gift? I don't think we believe that.

It may well be a poor choice of what to spend available funds on, but again it might not. If it is she will likely regret it/come unstuck later down the line, but she will only learn this when she is ready/needs to. The extent to which your mother is/isn't helping with these important life lessons is the issue.

One thing coming over very loud and clear from your posts OP is that you are not receiving any/the same support from your mother. That is why so many people are saying this is not a benefits issue (and it's not). It has everything to do with your relationship with both your mother and your sister.

I absolutely agree with other posters that she has already been means tested, in that she is claiming JSA/Income support. She has only been able to spend money elsewhere because her mother has gifted her in other ways. Your anger at the system is misplaced and the benefits issue is a red herring.

The mother may be being silly and not helping long term, but OP (and others) are you really saying that we should not be allowed to receive gifts from family members when we are going through hard times and claiming benefits? How far do we go with that?

If the mother was not putting her up, the state would be picking up the tab to house and provide all sorts of other benefits on an ongoing basis, which would cost us WAY more in addition to a £500 grant.

x post Fraidycat!

Why not report her to a benefits reporting line or your mother? She is supposed to use the money for the baby and hasn't. Doesn't your mother think it unfair other tax payers are paying for this and your mother has had to pay for the baby clothes?

Why do we give £500 to people on benefits when they have a baby? I have always worked full time. We bought the baby clothes in Oxfam shops. This is yet another example of people on benefits having more and better things than those of us who are mug enough actually to work full time whilst having children.

Greengrow there is nothing to report, the sister is entitled to the maternity grant, she doesn't suddenly become ineligible simply because she did not spend that pot of money on the child. Over time she will end up spending more than that on the baby. The mother hasn't had to buy anything she has chosen to. The mother is not helping the daughter by infantiling her like this. They may not have behaved within the spirit of the grant but they have followed the rules of it. There is no rule that states it has to be spent on things directly for the baby.

Lots of excited grandparents actively want to buy lots and lots of stuff for a grandchild, the cot/pram and outfits are not a unusual gift.

Some people like it some don't.we are only calling it infantilising because of the way its been presented to us

I would very much hope we give grants based on evidence that in the majority of cases, the children from recipient families have better outcomes than they would otherwise, which benefits us all.

And also Greengrow you are forgettingagain the people who genuinely cannot work or find work.

I totally agree that things should be easier for those in low to middle income work though.

This is yet another example of people on benefits having more and better things than those of us who are mug enough actually to work full time whilst having children.

I you really think that then you know what you should do then dont you?

She is not a benefits cheat. She is spending what she is entitled to. The fact that she is spoilt rotten by her own mother is neither here nor there but clearly it matters to you, OP

The problem with benefits is they don't look at individual cases (to many people to i know) .
When i was made redundant I had 60 a week to pay gas electricity food etc where as my sister still lived at home didn't have to pay bills or buy food . Every case is different so they can't discriminate or there would be uproar but some people struggle to feed their families let alone buy clothes and electronics while others seem to be able to afford holidays and weekly treats.

I'm surprised people are saying that the mother is doing something wrong here, because I really don't see that she is. Your mum has more responsibility to support her daughter than the random taxpayer does.

The only person in the wrong here is your sister, who is wrong for claiming money she doesn't need. It's people like her that make others see single mothers on benefits in a bad light.

Any benefit system needs to rely on the public acting like decent human beings, but as longs as there's people like your sister around, then there will always be some public support for benefits cuts.

Your sister is a twit really. She will need that money when people stop helping her (and they will).

I couldn't get the grant because, as a student, the benefits people told me they weren't sure where they stood on students so "you probably can't get it". No attempt to find out for sure, I'm still sure I should've had it. I struggled to get things for DD with just my student loan (which was also paying rent bills and food) but I still wouldn't begrudge anyone else having it, regardless of what they use it for, because it is vital for some parents.

I had the grant as DH was made redundant just as I hit the five months pregnant stage....great timing that was!

Unlike the OP's sister it went on baby stuff...and by shopping careful and looking at second hand too I made it go really far. It was a massive help.

Yes the OP's sister has been very silly, she didn't need the grant at all but she will spend far more when the baby arrives. Madness really....a phone quickly goes out of date.

because it costs too much - the extra money doesn't go to deserving claimants it goes to government to employ more people to check claims.

i'd like to see the accounting on that. it would help if welfare was more targeted to the lower income. we have a system where a lot of people claim a little, so of course it will be expensive. that should change from everything from child benefit (which I get and don't need. yes, if you earn 100K you don't need it) to fuel allowance.

And some of the most deserving won't claim if it means shaming themselves by declaring their lack of income so openly.

I am sorry, but I don't see that saving face should be taken care of in the accounting.

The only person in the wrong here is your sister, who is wrong for claiming money she doesn't need. It's people like her that make others see single mothers on benefits in a bad light.

she's claiming what she is entitled to. perhaps the system is at fault. she doesn't need the money yet she is entitled to it. THAT'S the problem.

That's not the problem written.

The system shouldn't have to legislate for people being dishonest, and basically scrounging. There are too many people genuinely in need who would be hurt by a system that was too rigorous, and wouldn't it make for a nicer society if we could just trust people not to take the piss and support, and be supported by, their own families.

She's not being dishonest.she's legally claiming money her financial circumstances allow her to claim.

Should the lady who lives down the road from me have her benefits cut because when ever its icy I send hot meals over? If you want to include gifts to grandchildren/children as income that should be counted for benefit purposes how much do we deduct for the furby a child got for its birthday or for the shower gel and body spray set your mum gets you?

The idea of vouchers instead of cash really pisses me off. When I got pregnant my dp had to move here from 200 miles away, therefore out of work. Our grant went on a deposit to rent our own home, 2 years later dp is working and we have a family home.

Assuming that a pregnant woman on benefits gets given a mothercare voucher for example, £500 won't buy everything you need for a baby, you can get more for your money buying second hand.

She's being dishonest because she is claiming hen she doesn't need to.

We shouldn't have to look at how much money is going into her bank account and start scrutinising what she is given in gifts from family, why is it too much to ask some people to just do the morally right and socially responsible thing and not take something they don't need.

It's no better than me getting myself a food bank voucher and then helping myself because I am genuinely skint but knowing that I will be staying with my mum for the next week and that she'd be planning of feeding me.

There's no real difference. People who take thinks they don't need just because technically they are entitled are taking away from people in genuine need.

It's not about deducting benefits, it's about not claiming money (especially one off large sums) that you don't need.

I think YABU, none of your business. Sounds like sibling rivalry.
Even though an iphone6 is a foolish choice.