Charging "digs" for 19 year old.

[BlackLabsAreBest]

Posting here for traffic and advice on what is fair to charge a 19 year old living at home.

Wages are £700 a month but they have car insurance of £140, gym membership £10 and phone contract £15 per month. They help with washing/cooking/cleaning/dog walking daily and do weekly shop on their own which we pay for.

What would you charge? I have no idea what to charge (if anything).

I just wouldn't charge full stop. Saying that I've never spent more than a few days at my parents house after becoming an adult, they'd have to pay me to live there.

Rather ironic hoobypickypicky that you 'don't work to subsidise other adults'. If you're complaining about teens turning eighteen leaving you ineligible for their share of housing/council tax/tax credits etc, other adults are working to subsidise you. Now most of us don't have a problem with contributing to the safety net, but for whatever reason it has rankled to see you shooting off about not working to subsidise your own offspring.

I'm going to really stir the pot here but never mind.

We get a lot of hand-wringing about how our young will never be able to afford a property, how difficult it is even to rent. Of course it was so much easier for my generation...
I'd suggest that maybe the reason why I was able to rent a flat at 20, and put my share of a deposit on a house when I got married at 24 was not simply because we had it easier. It was because I'd been saving at least 1/3 of my wages since I was working in a paper shop weekends at 16. My DH had also been saving for years. We moved into our house with garden furniture, a mattress on the floor in the bedroom and an ancient black and white telly. We also both had a completely realistic idea of what it cost to actually run a household, because we had been paying keep for so long.

Maybe I'll go name change now because last time I expressed a similar view I got stalked around the forum by an outraged mother for weeks.

It depends what you need from them. If you are financially strapped then you could go for about £200, if not then £150.

What I did for my 2, and we now do for DSS2 who lives with us is take the £150 to get them used to the idea that rent/mortgage has to be paid first before anything else, but the money was saved and given back when they left home for a deposit on their first house (or car) or whatever you feel is worth saving for.

This continues with the parenting by teaching them money management in the real world but also gives them a good start when they do leave home.

DSS2 pays the money to his father's account because if it was in my name then we would have to pay 40% tax on it so be careful about stuff like that!

Yes, Eliza, I found those comments jarring too but couldn't articulate why

Our two ds paid us a quarter of their take home pay (about £200) once they had started earning as we needed the money to keep the home going as we had a large mortgage. This was 15 years ago. With Dd we take a smaller percentage as we don't need as much and we know that she is saving very hard to buy her own home but she pays enough to cover her share of the food bill and heating.

vycount , I think I was stalked after expressing similar opinions on the same thread ! . i never paid keep to my parents and managed to budget very nicely when I moved out .

I agree with anyfucker.

A lot of people are saying that the young adults should be treated as adults and pay 1/3 of their income in keep. Surely if you are treated them as adults you wouldn't be aware of what their earnings are because it's none of your business.

I find the attitude towards teenagers and rent quite mean on Mumsnet. There is nothing wrong with charging teenagers rent but I have noticed on some threads that some people seem quite mean in the amounts they charge.

Our generation had it so much easier I bought my first home with a 100% mortgage this generation have to work so much harder than the generation before. I want to help my children get on the property ladder I don't want them to struggle even harder because I'm taking a large proportion of their earnings in order to teach them to budget. We live in a family home and I'm not a landlord.

I wonder why these threads (and they come around fairly frequently) engender such drama ?

I don't think anyone has suggested a third of income, thehumanjam. I believe that came from people inaccurately interpreting my post where I was talking of an equal share of bills and housing costs - i.e. 1/3 in an adult household of three, 1/5 in an adult household of 5, etc.

hoobypickypicky, your post was ambiguous and as you can see here, I wasn't the only one who read it that way. My point still stands, regardless of whether it applies to you personally or not.

I think I'll stay here and discuss the issue with people who can make a point without telling someone to shove it. Though as you're all about not divulging your own business, maybe a participating in a thread where people are talking about their own experiences in relation to the topic isn't for you?

hooby aren't you a delightful soul? I think you should stop charging, so that your 'offspring' as you call them, can have a chance to save up for a place of their own.

My parents never charged me any rent, even when I moved back home briefly in my twenties due to changing job. I used to do my share in the house - cooking, laundry, shopping etc. They encouraged me to save my money for when I moved out and bought a house so that I would be able to buy some basic furniture and have some savings incase the car broke or the boiler blew up.
I am supremely grateful.

And a third of the household expenses would have wiped out my entire salary, and then some.

Ooh dear, it's so mean to charge a half-realistic amount of keep to an adult living in your house. Even if you plan to give some back as a happy surprise at some point on the future when they are in dire need.
I accept that some youngsters who don't get charged will emerge with realistic expectations of the world outside, a nice savings pot and a good budget plan. But I'll suggest that many won't.
Take my niece for example. She's always had pocket money, but then her parents are soft and constantly buying her things she wants anyway. This continued until she was a strapping 18 year old student at college 2 days a week but not bothering at all to get a job because she didn't need the money did she? Now she finally has one because a friend's dad practically forced it on her, and mum and dad aren't taking any keep from her. So she's having a lovely time spending all of her dosh. It's never going to end well is it?

mate of mine is charging then giving it back to them as a deposit for a flat

I wouldn't charge unless I needed to. Plenty of time to learn about the soul crushing disappointment of having barely any money after bills etc as she gets older. I'd let her enjoy having her own money for a little while at least!

I don't think it is relevant to bring up individual examples of teenagers who have taken the piss out of their parent's generosity

my kids have never been allowed to take advantage from a young age

Vycount that is different. They have given her a budget, but not allowed her to manage it because they've always bought things over and above!
That is in no way comparable to giving a working teen control over their own money.

I do think that encouraging youngsters to save in this situation is a good idea, because they probably have more disposable income now than they will have for a long time in the future.

I Paid rent once I left school, I think it helped me to learn to manage my money. I would charge mine once they were working if they were still at home.

I charged my DD 20% of her take home pay. She worked variable hours so it wasn't the same every month. I don't need the money but she wanted to contribute to get her used to paying bills etc when she gets her own flat.

I also don't really get the idea of taking board and giving it back in a lump sum. It's a pleasant surprise for the teen at the day of handover, no doubt, but they haven't actually learned as much in the process about saving towards their own goal. If they have full reign over their own wages, then every decision to purchase something or not is an opportunity to learn the lesson of delayed gratification which would get them a little closer to their own goal. Sure, they can still learn it if they're only keeping, say, 60 per cent of their wages - but it seems patronising and petty if you don't need the money.

I also agree with AnyFucker and a few others who have noted that it's not entirely fair for a teenager to pay proportionally to expenses, when they'd be paying for the higher standard of living of people who have been working for decades with much lower wages.

If I want to bring up examples I think relevant that's up to me AF.
My suspicion is that leniency about finances tends to stretch back over years and that I would suggest does not foster a responsible attitude to finances. Of course some will emerge sensible, but I think it's our responsibility as parents to do our bit to develop a good attitude.

Go for it Vy., no mad stalking from me

On the contrary, eliza, I think that if you can't read a post and work out that the benefits scenario was an example given by someone who mentioned their wages then maybe this is not the place for you.

Alibaba, you're assuming that I have adult children. Where did I say that I did, or that I didn't?

Ah rats, it might have been fun to be stalked by MN Royalty. Have some cake. Paid for from my poor son's earnings.