Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that a 23k benefits cap will drive some families in the SE

987 replies

Minifingers9 · 28/05/2015 11:14

... Into destitution?

I live in a pretty unappealing and comparatively cheap part of greater London but you can't get a 3 bedroom rental for under £1400 a month.
If we lost our jobs we wouldn't be able to live on 23k a year as a family of 5. Not when 15k of it was going on rent.
Why don't they have regional benefit caps?

OP posts:
fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 10:43

What tethersend said. Guess that's OK since they have a lot of kids then.

Original poster
Minifingers9 · 29/05/2015 10:45

"Adults get to make choices."

Yes - but children don't.

I know children whose families will most definitely will be plunged into utter destitution by this cap.

OP posts:
PtolemysNeedle · 29/05/2015 10:51

Yes but it's not a bad choice if the parents were earning at the time.

Unless they were earning a huge amount of money and had reason to believe that that they had a reasonable, level of financial security, then it probably was a bad choice. One child is expensive, let alone three, four or more. You have to be really very rich and high earning to believe that there is a high chance you will be able to provide for three or more children right into their adulthood without needing state help.

LotusLight · 29/05/2015 10:52

"If you can't afford a three-bed on your income, then you squash yourself into a two-bed like plenty of other people have to do."

Indeed.Here in zone 5 is a two bed flat £1000 a month.

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-48259846.html

So that's £12k for your housing and leaves you under the proposed £23k benefits cap £11k a year.

Or you take yourself off hundreds of miles away from family as I did to find work or you take a second job which many of us who work full time do.

woodhill · 29/05/2015 10:52

Fanjo - I read your link and it does seem harsh.

but OOH why would you have so many dc in the first place when you are not a high earner?

merrygoround51 · 29/05/2015 10:58

That Mirror story states that the family are going to get another spacious house (I presume at least a 3 bed) in a fortnight.

Its horrible for them all to be in temporary accommodation clearly, but if they only have to wait 2 weeks then surely its manageable.

The issue is also around rent control, ideally a family would have a long term rent controlled home.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 10:59

They had all except one when he was working

Eatupnow · 29/05/2015 11:00

PtolemysNeedle no the majority of parents do not choose unemployment.

But plenty do . Or choose to work the magic 16 hours. Or have kid after kid to get out of working.

Thank god that is all now changing.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:00

You think a 3 bed is spacious for that size of family?

Eatupnow · 29/05/2015 11:02

I know children whose families will most definitely will be plunged into utter destitution by this cap.

Really? utter desitution on £29 K a year? Wow.

Newbrummie · 29/05/2015 11:04

Who the fuck has 7 kids these days..... I don't care if you can afford it or not that's simply madness because when the shit hits the fan as it has they are in a worse position than everyone else. I have four and would seriously caution against it to anyone, including my own children.

PtolemysNeedle · 29/05/2015 11:05

They had all except one when he was working

One parent working at Asda (presumably in one of the lower paid jobs otherwise the article would have mentioned it in the same way that they mentioned the child being predicted As for GCSE) was never going to be enough to support nine people. There are three working age adults in that household, why does the article only talk about the fact that one of then has been unsuccessful in finding a job? What about the others?

I really can't take anything seriously when it comes out of a trashy red top newspaper.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:06

Lotus. It's hard enough to get a first job these days never mind a second. You really need to wake up to the fact that although you think you found it really tough to get your career going in the 90s, it's a different world now. And I don't think your children are exactly going to be facing destitution having a very wealthy parent.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:06

Yet you probably link to the trashy Daily Mail.

GoodbyeToAllOfThat · 29/05/2015 11:07

You think a 3 bed is spacious for that size of family?

I would think that a couple who choose to have 7 kids on a low income are wilfully submitting to many years of cramped living conditions, aren't they?

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:07

Second post was to Ptolemys

PtolemysNeedle · 29/05/2015 11:07

I wouldn't even read the daily mail, let alone link to it. But nice assumptions you make there.

GoodbyeToAllOfThat · 29/05/2015 11:08

Yet you probably link to the trashy Daily Mail.

The Mirror is so much better, yes.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:10

Should have known you lot would be in favour of this. They are clearly "undeserving poor" in your eyes. Sickens me

GoodbyeToAllOfThat · 29/05/2015 11:10

The "Daily Mail" reader as standard insult has really gained traction, it seems.

merrygoround51 · 29/05/2015 11:11

Fanjo - I think if you have 7 children and are on benefits then you cannot expect to be housed exactly where you want.

No, 3 bedrooms isnt spacious but in many families, boys would share one room and girls the other.

I think people need to really wise up and realise that big families cost big money and the state is no longer going to subsidise to the same extent.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:11

The Mirror is trashy. But at least it has an interest in doing right by people.

GoodbyeToAllOfThat · 29/05/2015 11:12

Should have known you lot would be in favour of this. They are clearly "undeserving poor" in your eyes. Sickens me

Actually, what I said was:

"I would think that a couple who choose to have 7 kids on a low income are wilfully submitting to many years of cramped living conditions, aren't they?"

What are your thoughts on this?

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 29/05/2015 11:12

Goodbye. .yes it's a good insult. However here we were actually discussing the trashiness of newspapers.

SaucyJack · 29/05/2015 11:14

The youngest child is actually their grand-daughter, who lives with them as her mother (who doesn't live with the family) was unable to care for them and was about to be forcibly adopted. They haven't had any more children since he lost his job.

But even so, they did have seven children. That's a lot by anyone's standards, especially when neither parent has done a day's work in six years.

I feel sorry for the children, but no sympathy for the parents. I don't think he does himself any favours with comments like;

"Lee added: “We shouldn’t have to fit our family into a tiny home in this day and age. We live in Britain, not a Third World country."

Pure entitlement.

Maybe they should have restricted the benefit caps to children conceived after a certain date, but it's bonkers that people think they deserve a certain standard of living when they're not paying for it themselves.