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)

You need the Internet to jobsearch. It isn't a luxury at all.

But it's not an 'essential'. There is internet access available at public libraries. Essentials are food, shelter and warmth.

Ffs it was a joke. All these people saying that their taxes pay for this lady, ignoring what they actually get for their taxes...I'm saying I would like an equivalent rebate to mine.

On the previous thread about he woman who couldn't afford a laptop etc for her child to do her homework on, posters were berating her as internet is deemed an essential.

Good luck finding a library with access near us.

"half price rent (usually"

Only if you're in a council house, and you don't need to be unemployed to get one of those.

I have pupils who don't have internet access. They're not living in poverty, their parents don't want to have it. They can use school computers.

That's great. But the point of that thread was that many schools set homework that can only be done online. I'm sure you can see the issue that creates.

I think it's ludicrous to think that you have to live on so little! You have a hard life getting up in the morning driving your kids to school, catching up on day time telly then picking them up after school you should get a lot more IMO.

I get up at 5am drive a hour to work do a 12hour shift hour drive home for less than that.

People we should all work harder do more overtime maybe take another job and pay more tax so first the worst can continue in the lifestyle she's been accustomed to.

Let's face it Jeremy Kyle isn't going to watch itself. And if no one watches him he'll be out of a job and another drain on the countries benefit system.

Now back to the real world I'll buy a house and rent it to you for £400 a month that will save you £500 how does wales grab you?

This reminds me of when I done my family tree and some of my ancestors spent time in the poor house because they didn't have a job/money so maybe you should think how lucky you are and stop bleating on about how hard done by.

And to all you hard working people out there please work harder people on benifits need you!

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

Assuming that using public transport is much cheaper than running a car in rural areas. Or even feasible...

For many people running a car is cheaper than using public transport.

In any case, if you struggle to feed and clothe your family or heat your home, then you are destitute, and many people will struggle to do this when they are suddenly asked to find £250 a month to make up a shortage in housing benefit.

It is true we need to look at why people aren't earning more not cutting benefits, honestly the Torries have got in because of this shite and people are just playing into their hands.
If we cut benefits ask yourself do you honestly believe working people will be better off ?

"If we cut benefits ask yourself do you honestly believe working people will be better off ?"

Of course not. Because the Tories have no plans for the things which will make a really big difference to the working poor: expanding the provision of high quality, wrap around, heavily subsidised/free childcare for children under 2, reducing the cost and improving the quality of public transport, and hugely increasing the stock of affordable public housing.

"Let's face it Jeremy Kyle isn't going to watch itself"

Because all unemployed single mothers are disgusting, lazy, low lifes, aren't they?

For fucks sake - stop reading the Daily Mail!

"Let's face it Jeremy Kyle isn't going to watch itself"

Because all unemployed single mothers are disgusting, lazy, low lifes, aren't they?

For fucks sake - stop reading the Daily Mail!

The real problem here is the cost of housing. It has spiralled out of control over the last few years. The housing benefit bill (around £25 billion I think) is the reason a cap has been put in place. I would imagine that landlords are not reducing their rent, so the tenants have less money left.
It may be hard for the op to find work if she is a lone parent. Yes, a lot of women do manage, but it's not a one size fits all. The support network may not be there.
Until something is done about the awful cost of housing, especially in the SE, this situation will get worse. It's depressing.

Your take home in benefits is the same as someone earning a £25,000 a year wage after taxes.

I'm sorry, but you cannot afford your rent and you'll have to move. Benefits are for helping people when they are down on their luck to not go hungry or homeless. It is not to subsidise a non-working lifestyle. It shouldn't be a long-term solution. If the rent is to high, and there are no jobs, it is time to move somewhere you can afford. Yes it is hard and scary, but there is no contract that says you are entitled to live where you want and have a job there.

I would love to live close to my family but we can't afford it. It isn't government's responsibility to allow me to do so.

I think as a nation we are benefits obsessed. Most people i know who work full time are very angry that they are over the threshold to claim anything from the state.

My cousin tagged me in a petition on facebook the other day and it was a petition for free childcare for 2 year olds regardless of if the parents are working and it should not be free for those on benefits as they dont need childcare. She hates the fact she cant claim anything ontop of her wage. She has one child and both her and her partner work full time earning £30k after tax between them. Their rent is £80 a week so imo they bloody shouldnt get a top up!

I keep explaining to her that its not free childcare, its free early years education and is free to those not working for a very good reason!

If this thread was posted by someone on a low wage/not on benefits she would be advised to move to somewhere cheaper/ditch the car/economise/try to do some overtime. It's not 'benefit bashing', it's 'live within your means'.

It's a disaster for me.

I have 5 dc, I left my abusive ex, went to a refuge and am in hiding. I am studying now and work a tiny amount from home and am not breaking even with that at the moment.

I've applied for a few part time jobs that can fit in around the hours I can do but I can't give references as I can't get in touch with anyone from my old life.

I have a dd with adhd and anxiety but she isn't severe enough to warrant getting disability benefits for apparently despite calls from the school 3 times a week because she is having a panic attack.

I am going to have to give up my studies and try and make something of my small business by throwing myself into that. It's never going to make as much money as if I had carried on studying for another year sadly.

I can't claim maintenance from my ex as the CMS can guarantee that my details will be kept 100% safe.

If this had come in before I left I simply wouldn't be able to have left at all. It's a terrifying prospect.

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?

No. There's a distinction to be made between the terminally unemployed and the low-paid. Someone who works 40 hours a week stacking supermarket shelves, for example, is making a contribution to society far above and beyond their below-threshold tax liability. In fact, I think their labour is undervalued and a manifestation of an economic distortion.

I reject this argument entirely.

Yes, Elsa it's very worrying.

I think that people need to stop and think about what they're saying here. First of all, trashing the OP and implying that she's in this situation because she's feckless is not necessary. It actually sounds more like she's in this situation because her ex was feckless and she is paying the price. She's not the first woman to land in this situation, and she won't be the last unfortunately.

Those that are banging on about her ex need to step back. She CANNOT force him to take the children more. She CANNOT withhold contact from the father due to him not paying maintenance. The worse possible thing she can do is designate him as providing childcare. Do you people not even READ the relationship boards??? Let's look at this. She gets a job, he is responsible for picking up the children from school or taking them when she is supposed to be working. Except he is "self employed" and may not be the most reliable/cooperative ex (obviously as he's not attempting to pay maintenance). So when he cancels on her repeatedly at the last minute, causing her to lose her job, he's not only managed to mess with her job, it will affect her benefits as well, because if she's managed to work a month or so, her benefits will all change, then she'll need to change them back if she loses her job, but there'll be a delay, and she's now scrambling to keep up until it's sorted. I have soooooo been there. It is not fun and it is not pretty.

If she gets rid of the car, how will she get to potential jobs? Transport the children for school if needed? She's in a rural area. Yes, it might be beneficial if she moves, but then she needs to find a place she can move, put together the money for the move, and that's not exactly going to be a piece of cake. She said she's already looked around some. And those that said "you should be looking up to 200 miles away, not just 20" need to remember that is a HUGE move and will not be cheap! And still doesn't guarantee that she will find a place that takes housing benefit. And lying to the potential landlord? Seriously? Do you REALLY think they're not going to notice she's not employed on the application? It's not rocket science.

The internet is a necessity. First - some libraries have been closed, others centralised, so getting to the library to use the internet costs a bus ticket which can really cut into finances when you have to do it regularly. Searching for jobs requires the internet. Some jobs require you to apply online and submit a CV online. Often paying bills/banking is done online when there isn't a branch within walking distance. My housing association and council tax both require you to set up an account online and strongly encourage you to deal with them online. How? Well, getting them on the phone is near to impossible. And ringing the housing association costs money - the longer you're on hold, the more it costs. I dread any kind of "emergency repair" that means I have to sit on hold for 20+ minutes waiting to report it as you can't report it over the internet account, as you can for minor repairs. It's maddening, but that's the way it is. Add to that school work for children, contacting family/friends cheaply, emailing to sort various things. Oh, and haven't people been going on about how the OP should order her groceries online and have them delivered. Do they expect her to drive in to the library, do her shop on the computer there, then drive home? Rather defeating the purpose, isn't it?

40% of UK households are net givers! Not sure where the idea comes form that the number is tiny! The % is decreasing, but is not yet as some here wouldlike to portray it! Many of us live in net contributing households!

The point at which a household switches from being an overall “taker” to a “giver” is where disposable income, after all taxes and benefits are taken into account, passes a threshold of about £27,000, Smith & Williamson found. This would be where a household’s gross income fell somewhere between £35,000 and £38,000.

I agree MuseumofCurry. Non-Disability/child Benefit should be targetted to working people on low wages. I don't think it's fair that this OP gets more money than some working single mums (nurses and paramedics mostly) I know with 3 plus kids.

Sorry, the picture covers 1990 - 2010/11, the quote came from 2014.

First - contact your council and indeed any council (choose a cheaper borough) and you will find private landlords willing to rent to benefits claimants.

You're not looking in the right place to find cheaper rent if you're going to estate agents.