To think that my friend shouldn't be claiming benefits with what she already gets?

[Alison3939]

I have a friend who is a few years younger than me (she is 22) we have been friends for around 3 years now.

She has 2 children (aged 4 and 1) they both have different dads, her sons dad isn't involved at all but her daughters dad (the youngest) is very involved in their daughters life. She doesn't work and hasn't since she had her son at 18.

She claims income support, tax credits and full housing benefit (however her daughters dad pays £600 a month top up rent that hb doesn't cover so she can live in a nicer house) he pays her £300 a week in child support so £1200 a month. Aibu to think she is cheeky for getting this much and still claiming benefits? She has pretty much no outgoings because her rent, council tax etc is all paid for. She drives a Range Rover (on finance) she lives in a beautiful house and has pretty much everything she wants including regular cosmetic surgery. She in effect has £1200 disposable income a month.

Her daughters dad and her are not together, infact they hate each other but he supports his daughter nethertheless. He has an extremely good job and would do anything for his daughter.

I have asked her what she intends to do when she can't claim benefits anymore (when her youngest starts school) and her solution is she is just going to live off the child support and says she will still get help with her rent even if she doesn't get income support. I've asked her if she doesn't think it's cheeky to claim when she is getting so much and her response is "if the system doesn't count child support as income therefore what I'm doing isn't illegal then I may as well claim it"

Aibu? I feel perhaps I'm a little jealous as I work 30 hours a week on minimum wage, get very little in the way of benefits and I'm usually broke by the end of the month. I know it's a rare situation but surely the system should put something in place to stop people doing this.

I no longer want to get involved in this post, just thought I'd confirm some of the figures. Her ex is a professional footballer so he is unlikely to loose his job, he has a property portfolio and another business on the side of his football career. He pays the amount that the cma advised.

£1200 is disposable as rent and bills are not deducted from this amount. Her rent is paid by housing benefit and her ex pays the top up of £600 a month (this is separate to the £300 a week he gives her for child support) she gets income support and full tax credits which her bills and everything else come out of. Many mums make do with just income support and child tax alone, so those benefits are just there to cover her out goings. She then has £300 a week in affect to do what she wants with. She has told me she gets paid £525 a week in combination of child support and benefits and from this she just has to deduct bills (as her rent is covered) her daughters dad brought her a car about a year ago (which was nice but not as nice as her Range Rover) which she sold to pay off some of the finance so she is on a lower monthly amount.

£1200 is not 'disposable income' she still has to buy food, pay bills each month, clothes, shoes, etc etc from that so I have no idea how she could possibly be buying a range rover on finance (unless its really ancient) and having cosmetic surgery with whats left! £1200 doesnt stretch that far!

Why are you not elligible for WTC if you are on a low wage? Even working 30 hours a week will qualify for them if your wage is low. (Hell when I got them I got more working 30 hrs than 16 as there is a different element attatched) Just wondering.

@Willow2017

Yes but she gets income support and child tax credits- most families have to survive on this alone with out child support and have bills to pay clothes food etc.

She does not deduct rent from this figure, her rent is paid in full that is nothing to do with her income. The £75 a week income support at £120 a week child tax pays her gas, electric, water, tv, phone, food etc.

X posted.

But she doesnt get tax credits as she isnt working, she gets child tax credits there is a difference.

Her rent is paid for as a combination of her ex and housing benefit.

She then gets £75 a week income support, £34 child benefit and £120 child tax in her bank account each week which covers bills food etc in addition to that she gets £300 a week from her ex which she will spend on what she likes.

Her excuse is that her daughters dad pays more in tax in a year than most people will in their life's so she's entitled to it

But that is HIS money. Not hers.

Jeez how do you know the drill down of this woman's finances in such detail? Maybe you should focus on something else ....

@Willow2017 I understand this, but others on income support who aren't working do not get working tax credits either, just child tax and they have to manage on income support and child tax alone.

And she doesn't have to manage on that alone because her circumstances are different. Good. One less family in poverty.

So she and her DC should live in poverty just because others have to?

When I was a single mother, I survived on just income support and child tax credits every week with housing benefit. Yes it was a struggle, but it paid the bills so I can understand her having that much disposable income, but good on her to be honest.

If I was her I would just get a job because then she would be earning £800-£1200 working full time, plus tax credits and would still probably get a little housing benefit plus child support still! She would be far better off

Have you applied for tax credits?

If you got them you would probably get discount on council tax too.

Just because other people do not have an ex who wants to provide for his dd in this way you think your friend should not get the benefits she is entitled to?

Bit mean?

So she had her first kid at 18, has never worked, has no aspiration to work, to develop any skills, to gain recognition in her own right? The father of one of her kids throws a lot of cash to enable his dd to live in a nice House and have a good standard of living?

And you're jealous of her?

Even if the father carries on paying generously for his dd, she won't be a child forever; one day she'll be an adult and move out, and presumably her father will continue to provide her with a comfortable lifestyle, but the mum will get jack shit as he hates her. She'll have no career, will have developed no skills, basically has no security in the longer term. And actually given the ages you give, that will happen before she turns 40.

It's going to be a hell of a shock to her to have to find work, get herself qualified and stand on her own two feet.

I get your annoyance that at the moment she's having the easy life and living off someone else's earnings and the state, but honestly, a few years down the line you realise a fulfilling life is about self respect, and realising your own potential.

unicorn have you been asleep for the last decade, pet? Labour haven't been in power for years.
The reason why child maintanence isn't deducted from benefits is because

1. Admin costs in starting and stopping claims based on when the NRP feels like paying would cost into the billions.
2. Not having these admin costs would mean children starve.
3. For years NRP didn't pay while RPs suffered (under both labour and conservative governments) cuts due to the fact the NRP shouldve been paying x amount and they were treated as if they WERE being paid.

Due to the amount of NRPs who don't pay and the even more shocking statistic of those who sometimes pay or pay less than the legal minimum while getting away with it it's actually cheaper to do it this way.

But, y'know. Feckless single mothers, let em starve. That'll learn them!

It's frustrating but if it's within their guidelines there's nothing that can be done I'm afraid

'I no longer want to get involved in this post, just thought I'd confirm some of the figures. '

And yet you kept on posting about her and the minutiae of her finances. Jealousy is a horrible quality. With friends like you, who needs enemies.

Why are you jealous? Have you read my post above, OP?

I can understand annoyance at a benefits system which is open to abuse; I get that.

But surely you can see that ultimately this woman is going to get shafted as she has no security longer term. And even if she finds another bloke to leech off once her dd has grown up, is that really an enviable life? What is she going to feel she's achieved through her own merit?

I underwrote mortgages for a long time and probably didn't have this level of detail on my customers finances, let alone on friends. This seems and incredibly detailed breakdown of the life of someone you're judging quite harshly.

If she's entitled to claim for those benefits I fail to see why she shouldn't. Her ex pays maintenance that's totally allowable and not taken into account when calculating her income etc, again that's not her fault but the fact that the system is as it is.

I'm totally baffled as to how your friend has managed to rent a house at £1200 a month when she's on benefits. Most landlords who rent out expensive properties don't accept single parents receiving housing benefit

Regardless of this, it's nice to read about a father supporting his child given the amount of deadbeat dads around!

YABhorriblyU

The list of reasons QueenOfVipers gives explains things nicely for those who have swallowed copies of the Daily Mail and think all single mothers are scum.

Also OP I hope your "friend" has read this thread, recognised herself and tells you to fuck right off. Wont be too hard as youve given so much detail about her finances yo might as well have added a picture of her bank statement

Given she's within the law, she's doing nothing wrong.

While I believe it's bollocks to judge her by any standard other than the letter of the law, if we were going down that road then I believe she has a valid point about the amount of tax her footballer ex is paying.

Having said all that, I would support a further cut in benefits so that instead of five years you could only go six months from giving birth without being required to look for a job. Even if the tax-payer had to pay the full cost of childcare and was worse-off supporting the mother in work than subsidising her to stay home. This may sound like a very right-wing policy, but I read that it's how things work in at least one ultra-socialist Scandinavian country. (Might have been Sweden, can't remember.)

a professional footballer so he is unlikely to loose his job, he has a property portfolio and another business on the side of his football career.

Yep - professional sport is one of those "job for life" careers. Absolutely no chance that an injury could end it all tomorrow and hardly anyone else wants to do it so it is not as if one bad game could lead to him being permanently dropped due to a load of 18 year olds willing to kill to get his job. Plus with such an unattractive job it is not as if he will ever meet anyone else who may have other ideas about what his money should be spent on.

It is easy to run a business on the side when you have money pouring in. Much harder if it becomes your only source of income. The property portfolio is great but won't be enough to keep him going from retirement from football for the rest of his life.

And whatever happens - presumably all the cash will stop when your friend's child hits 18.

If your AIBU was "to think my friend is an idiot to not use this time and money to get herself trained up to a good career" then absolutely.

But I struggle to feel anything but sorry for someone who is going to find themselves aged 36 suddenly having the tap turned off and having to figure out how to feed themselves.

How's she managing cosmetic surgery and the range rover plus insurance etc (at her age it will be expensive!) on £1200 a month? Send her my way. We have more disposable income than her and I still can't afford to get my lips fattened :(

I must admit I do know one person - family member - who has never worked, has two dcs, and her parents keep her in a very nice lifestyle. Yet housing benefit pay her rent and she is due to move into a new social house (yes, that was a pig you saw fly past!) shortly. Others on the development for purchase are at least £400k. I don't care if this person never works and her parents support her for evermore, but it does seem off that she has a brand new car, lots of clothes, Bugaboo, holidays etc and then the taxpayer picks up the tab for housing.

It's not up to her how much her ex pays though is it? I bet you wouldn't be posting if he gave her £300 a mth. Is she meant to be poor because others in a similar situation are?