To think the benefit cap is going to plunge families into poverty

[Firsttheworst]

Next month the benefit cap comes in. It sets out the maximum that can be claimed in a week across all benefits. This doesn't include disability or wtc. Its aimed purely at women (mostly) claiming income support. You can only claim income support if you have a child under 5 and don't work.

The benefit cap is in the government owns words designed to get IS claimants out to work. The cap is currently £500 and will be reduced to £384 a week.

This includes, housing benefit, CT benefit, tax credits, income support. So all in total cannot be more than £384 a week. Over a 30 day month that comes to £1645.

From that £1645 I need to pay

rent £900 a month (no I can't move, its impossible to rent on benefits as it is, not giving this house up and its below market rent as it is)

CT - £60 a month

Electricity £80

Oil £80

Diesel £ 120 (rural don't drive anywhere other than school runs and supermarket/town once or twice a week)

Car insurance £49

Car tax £19.99

Phone/internet £40 (thats a basic mobile and broadband)

House insurance £13

TV licence £11

That leaves 272 a month to pay for food, clothes, car breakdown, school trips, birthdays, miscellaneous and god knows what else. For one adult and 3 children.

AIBU to think that the government have just decided that if they starve us out for long enough we'll be forced to go out and find a job? Like I said rural area so jobs are rarer than hens teeth and believe me i'm looking. It is pure discrimination against single mothers with small children (i doubt many men claim income support)

Needs my youngest is 6.
Judges aren't stupid they do look at the finances when looking at contact in the basis I guess Nrp can claim the other is making life difficult by moving but by the same token they were interested to know what contribution was being made in order to make staying in an area practical.
Fair enough I don't have experience of a man who would stay unemployed or on benefits however, that's not going to happen in the future either, jsa is only being paid for 6 months max before they get sanctioned so actually when they are on benefits that's a good time to get the csm involved as all their details ie NI numbers etc are available.
I found the CMS brilliant, we've all got horror stories I guess. I've never had a problem with them.
As for the idea of forcing him to take the children if he won't pay you know what if he wouldn't open the door, drop them to his mothers or sisters, make your point. These deadbeats think the worst you can do is withhold contact, it's not the opposite is true.

ChickenSalad I'd say 500 quid a week for sitting on my backside is more than acceptable. If you expect luxuries then you should expect to work to pay for them, and if that means moving house or taking a low paid job then that's what you do. I loathe and despise the Tories with every fibre of my being, but the sense of entitlement of some people is breath taking!

Yabu, a level 2-3 employee in my work who works full time gets £1345 pcm.

"I'd say 500 quid a week for sitting on my backside is more than acceptable"

You do realise that VERY few people in the U.K. pay enough tax to cover even of a fraction of the 'goodies' they get from the state, don't you? You included. The cost of educating one child is about 6k a year for a start, never mind the NHS. Do you have a 'shocking sense of entitlement' if your tax doesn't cover what you cost the state, but you still expect NHS care over and above what you've paid into the system? What about healthy elderly people who live decades on stonking index linked final salary pension schemes that end up costing the tax payer many many many times what was paid in?

You may say you don't like Tories but you have a Margaret Thatcher mentality about what benefits are for and how they work.

"otherwise we may as well all stay at home and then where would society be?"

But benefits have been generous for years and most people don't want to be on them do they?

A life on benefits is attractive only to people in low paid, repetitive, unsatisfying work or insecure work. Its also attractive to women with dependent children for whom the state is a better, more reliable provider than the feckless and irresponsible father of their children.

If all mothers were forced to rely solely on their own labours or the input of their partners to support their children we'd soon see a return to 1930's levels of poverty.

I honestly think there are many people here who would actively prefer a society where a fairly sizeable minority of children are raised in utter destitution, than a society where the same group are raised by parents who are overly reliant on the state.

I don't want to see children in my community living in a state of utter destitution, and it WILL happen, as the benefit system is shrunk.

384/week tax free is the equiv to a £30-40k per year salary though. Most working single mums make that work.

What are you on about minifingerz? I have no issue with people getting benefits if they need them, what I do have a problem with is people moaning that they should get more money than many people who work full time, like the OP. I don't see what is Thatcherite about that. And I'm not in the UK , so I won't be taking anything out of the NHS, but I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with people using it, even if they live for decades, and I don't get why you think I would. I also fail to see the relevance of whether someone is a net contributor to the system or not, surely if it is true that most people take more than give, then it is even more important that that money is used wisely, and that people are encouraged to not be dependant on benefits long term, if they are fit and able?

Ha! I worked for 30 years in a well paid job. I am now on benefits. I know which I prefer . The ease of one salary a month for arranging bills and direct debits is a luxury I never thought I would miss.

Benefits for most people are not £500 a week.....I don't get anything like that and I have a disabled child too. The only people getting the maximum will have several dependent children who didn't ask to be born. The bulk of that benefit is likely to go on housing costs. The rest has to pay gas/electric/water etc plus food and clothing. There won't be anything spare.

And if you have several children then it's highly unlikely that you will be sat on your bum doing nothing.

Not read all the thread as v long now. I understand position of OP and as lone parent it must be tough. We moved out of SE years ago, just too expensive. I understand that moving is not an option due to costs but the benefit cap in principle is good but just not enough help to get people from welfare in to work. OP how old are your children? I know one is 11 and one at primary school but long term this is your only chance to get out of the trap. Your ex should be helping so you are being failed on two fronts, both by welfare and ex. Getting rid of the car would also help but then you have the transport issue. There is no quick answer but I do understand how frustrated you must be. I hope long term things improve. Single parents have it tough.

She didn't say she wanted more. She said she didn't want benefits capped further.

op, what did you get before the benefits cap?

AndNow it's a reduction as an amount of benefit is applied to your bill to reduce it. This amount isn't included in the cap. So if your council tax is £18 per week and you receive £17.50 a week in council tax support, this £17.50 is not included in the benefit cap.

Therefore if the OP was expecting to have to pay £60 per week once the cap is reduced as she's assuming the amount she will receive will go down, she is mistaken. As are you presumably.

The problem has always been that benefits adjust accordingly to account for family size and circumstances.

I full accept most people have their families in one set of circumstances. However, to continue along the road where work doesn't pay was always going to lead to resentment and resentment can be dangerous.

If we are talking entitlement, as we home ed and have private healthcare are we entitled to a rebate? Or is that not how it works?

witsender good luck with getting emergency or long term care out of a private insurer.

Er no witsender. God forbid you were in a car accident but it would be a state funded ambulance with highly qualified state funded paramedics who would attend you. Plus fire services and police.

Private health care and home ed is a drop in the ocean compared with the practical benefits you would be entitled to in an emergency.

I honestly think there are many people here who would actively prefer a society where a fairly sizeable minority of children are raised in utter destitution

I don't think I'd call someone who manages to run a car and has internet, destitute. If the OP is going to have to manage on the apparently 'measly' sum of £1600 a month, she's going either have to look at areas where she can cut back, or get the ex to pay up. There are several things in the OP where posters have suggsested she can get a better deal, the energy bill being one of them.

I think there's also been a change in what some people see as 'essentials' to which they feel entitled. As a young single mother working, I didn't feel 'entitled' to have a car, internet access, big tv, computer, or holidays. I felt glad if I managed to feed my children and keep a roof over their heads. Those were 'essentials'. Holidays were a few days camping if we were lucky. Internet isn't an essential (public libraries have internet access). Car is only 'essential' because OP chose a rural house. We've lost sight of what basics are.

"I don't think I'd call someone who manages to run a car and has internet, destitute"

But you could say that they were living in relative poverty:

www.cpag.org.uk/content/uk-poverty-line

Shows that for a lone parent and two children, not including housing costs, this is £1,261 per month.

Banardos say that a family of 2 adults and 2 children need £315 a week after housing costs.

www.barnardos.org.uk/what_we_do/our_work/child_poverty/child_poverty_what_is_poverty.htm

Dontcha just love data ?

Wow we have much less left over with 2 parents working full time after childcare costs... I fully support benefits should be there if we need them but why am I being taxed to breaking point and living in the red to not see my daughter all day when someone can sit at home and get more? I disagree with the Tories policies usually but £500 a week before this cap? When your council tax is lowered, the healthy start vouchers, free school meals, free dentists, free prescriptions, half price rent (usually)

£500 a week includes the CT and rent though doesn't it.

Sadly the poverty line doesn't include childcare, but as it doesn't include housing costs it should give you an indication of where you are.

I think there's also been a change in what some people see as 'essentials' to which they feel entitled

But of course the idea of "basics" change. I don't think the internet is a luxury, nearly everything is done online now and it'll only get more so. Same with a basic computer/smartphone/laptop. I really do think without internet access you are pretty isolated these days.

Op your circumstance are not common.

You live rurally and have to drive everywhere. I'd do everything in my power to move. I know the issues with that but unless you do that you will still be in this situation in years to come.
Do everything you can to get a job, ring the council about your sons transport- they DO have to provide it for him and ring around for cheaper oil prices if your tank need filling.

Also what about a college course to re/train? What are you interested in?

It may take a while but you can do it. Many many have done so before you.