To think the current benefits system sets single parents up to commit fraud?

[Littlefluffyclouds81]

I am a single parent, I'm currently a student and earn a small amount from self employment, so receive some housing benefit, CTC, WTC and CB.

Let's say, hypothetically, my bf moved in with me (there is no real danger of that happening for a very long time, but let's pretend). He earns £50k a year. If he moved in, as far as the system would see it, my children are his children, and therefore he would be jointly financially responsible for them. I would instantly lose all of my benefits, leaving me around £1100 a month worse off. This would leave me in a position of being no longer financially independent, and feeling like I had to go to him, cap in hand, to ask for money. Money, which often would be spent buying things for my kids.

My bf is a very nice chap and all that, but I doubt he'd cough up a grand a month to provide for me and my children. I doubt there's many blokes that would. His dd would also lose out, as through suddenly having gained two extra children, the maintenance she is entitled to would go right down.

Bearing all this in mind, I can see why many single parents are tempted to move their partner in 'on the sly'. Of course this is very risky, but only for the single parent (usually the female). As the benefits claimant it is the single parent who will be prosecuted, the partner they'd moved in would have no repercussions, even though no doubt they'd done quite well in terms of their own living costs, probably chipping in a token amount towards food and bills.

I think this makes it very hard for single parents to ever have a serous relationship, unless they happened to be a high earner themselves, so benefits weren't an issue. Or I suppose if both adults were on benefits, as they wouldn't lose out there. I'm not sure what the answer is, other than a citizens wage (which will never happen).

It is heartening to hear stories on here like indigo's, where families form and finances are merged successfully. I think perhaps it's my independent streak (that comes from many years of managing on my own) that is the problem!

It well could be fluffy, I certainly find it difficult to graciously say thank you when he offers to pay for me. I just normally go "oh no, you don't need to do that, really, here's my part" even when I am kicking myself inside for not saying "thank you, that is so kind of you".

memy - that sounds just like me! I insist on paying for meals sometimes when I go out with my bf - even though he's quite 'old fashioned' and fully expects to pay. He earns a lot more than me and can easily afford it but I won't take no for an answer.

Then I think afterwards, why the fuck did I do that?

Exactly, especially when you know well that the amount you put on the table is huge for you and negligible for him as he has a higher salary. Sigh*

I think this makes it very hard for single parents to ever have a serous relationship,

I think you mean single parents who claim benefits, not all do - please don't play up that stereotype, we have enough of that from the media and society.

There are two option for single parents who want to be in a relationship and are not financially solvent imo

We were very committed though and we'd been in a relationship for six years and got married before I moved in with him though.

^this or

Live separately and keep your financial independence

You certainly can get tax credits if you don't work, you can't claim working tax credits but certainly child tax credits. Those on JSA or income support get child tax credits.

Caseinpoint - I actually said that in my op. But thanks.

I wouldn't move in with a man who wasn't prepared to have all money as joint money.

Thankfully my DP sees it this way and doesn't view my DD (his SDD) as anything other than our child that we jointly look after a pay for despite her not biologically being his.

The only time I have been unemployed my tax credits were stopped straight away (the whole of them) as I was not working the required minimum of 16 hrs.

Jolly time that was, I was swiftly moved to JSA and awarded the princely sum of £24 a week. The advisors at the job centre conveniently "forgot" to offer me contribution based JSA that I had a right to for working most of my adult life. So DS and I spent a few weeks sofa surfing because we couldn't afford the central heating. At that time even looking at my kitchen's cupboard full with food could fill me with joy.

(And before I get stereotyped, I'm an educated professional who cannot even contemplate the idea of not having a job)

I've always worked too, apart from about 3 months I was on income support when dd1 was a baby. Even with working, there were times over the years when I literally couldn't afford to feed myself, although I made sure the DC always had food. I also have been on a long journey of recovery from depression after a relationship that was so abusive I had a book published about it! So for all the 'get a job and stand on your own two feet brigade', life isn't always that straightforward. My kids have never gone without because I have always worked, through everything, and I don't understand how it is possible to just live on benefits, it's not enough money to survive. But when your battling your own shit AND doing the job of 2 parents, sometimes working full time just isn't an option at that moment.

Well of course you couldn't claim 1k a month benefits if your partner earns 50k, just so you can remain financially independent.

My friend has had to pay her mum's rent since turning 18 and working for NMW. That's unfair.

My friend has had to pay her mum's rent since turning 18 and working for NMW. That's unfair.

That can't be right. That's not how it works.

I know very little about the benefits system but £1100? That's a lot of money! I can see why you wouldn't want that to stop misses point of thread

My friend has had to pay her mum's rent since turning 18 and working for NMW. That's unfair.

Why? Is this because her mother's child-related benefits have been cut off since she turned 18?

Hmm that doesn't make sense. The daughter is no longer a dependent child so the mum's benefits will obviously go down but that doesn't mean that the daughter has to pay the mum's rent.

Hmm that doesn't make sense. The daughter is no longer a dependent child so the mum's benefits will obviously go down but that doesn't mean that the daughter has to pay the mum's rent.

I think it means that someone other than the government has to pay the rent.

Oh thanks Apples I was overthinking it wasn't I!

just so you can remain financially independent.

the biggest lie in the UK is that benefits are "safety net". They have now morphed into something completely different. I guess the newest thing is that people should be financially independent no matter their household financial situation.

Agreed I think there are many"single parents" who actually have there BF living with them

My friends sister is currently living with her BF and claiming as a single mother there relationship is not good and she dosent want him down on the tenancey this is a issues as well or entwined in her money has they keep braking up

I never sure what to make of it

Re an 18yr old having to pay the parents rent as well as their own on NMW: assumptions may well be right, but do bear in mind that If a parent is too disabled to work, or does but can't earn enough to not need some help, then when the child turns 18 they must now pay the rent and CT for both, or get out, even if they have no where else to go and live.

Hiding an adult child, including ones who ought to but refuse to claim disability benefits themselves, is just as illegal as hiding a partner.

I think it also encourages people to to revel who the child's BF is

Because her earnings meant her mum was no longer entitled to housing benefit, CTC or CB. She pays the full rent, council tax, and has to contribute towards the household bills.

Can't find a link but out local council has a leaflet stating how much non-dependants have to top up HB and council tax.

Is the mum not well enough to work? She must still get some non-means tested benefits?

Awake - you wont be flamed by me! I totally agree with you.

Pick carefully, don't think you aren't complete with some 'bloke' and certainly don't assume benefits will still give you financial independence.

I certainly don't want to fund a women who has made mistake after mistake and then wonders how she can still keep her money....

MrsHardy if you would like the state to provide assistance to families with small children on the basis that they have to feed and clothe them, you can hardly call it unfair that this assistance stops at some point when they become adults capable of working.

I would have thought that was pretty obvious.