Universal credit and saving for a house deposit

[Musereader]

I am a single parent with one child, i could not cope without tax credits as my rent, council tax and childcare costs are more than my montly wage so i rely on the tc to cover the bills and food.

I do work in national goverment on the lowest rung in a call centre and have been looking through the releases we get and i am horrified to find out that you cannot claim UC if you have more than £16k in savings. Between £16k and £6k in savings does mean a reduction in UC. This is not the case in tc

A house in my area ranges from £150 to 200k so a 10% deposit is £15k minimum.

Basically as soon as i save any amount of money that looks like a reasonable deposit i have to use savings to pay childcare because my UC would reduce.

So aibu to hope that the goverment does do a uturn on UC roll out which may mean that i never have to go on UC and be subject to these silly savings rules

and the max amount is 53k if you have disabled children.

Our household income is a lot less than that. One of our DC is severely disabled. We do not get any penny in TC. I wish people would stop claiming all this nonsense.

A relative of mine has a household income of around £47k, two DCs, one with SNs that is entitled to DLA and they get a couple of hundred pounds a month in tax credits, so you might want to check your claim ginger.

well, then they probably pay for childcare. but unless this is the case, I cannot see how this is possible. I double checked, played with the numbers in every TC calculator. We don't get anything.

i think you need to get a certain band of DLA or PIP for extra CTC

Don't pay for childcare (not officially anyway)
DLA at middle and lower rate for two different aspects
2 DCs, one with autism

Person in question was themselves astonished that they were entitled to CTC on their income as both parents had received a bit of a pay rise and they were fully expecting to no longer be entitled to CTC, but filled the forms in anyway because they'd done them every year for last few years and it was done to update new information.

we get the highest rate. You still don't get extra TC if your income is 53k. that's bollocks. I just keep reading these things and then wonder why friends think we are loaded because everyone assumes we get £££ for everything

Ginger if you had three dc you would.

I work with a lot of people who only work 16-20 hours a week, because they are better off with the various benefits top ups than if they worked ft. How can anyone justify that?

fatweddingguest

Could your company give them all full-time hours if requested?

Irre - and could they afford the childcare?

fatwedding Put your money where your mouth is and ask your employer if there are any extra hours available for your colleugues.

And by extra hours i mean permanent ones not intermittent inconsistent hours.

There are actually a number of ft vacancies (I know because I'm involved with recruitment) which exist because of how many staff have cut their hours to 20 or less. If any of them were willing to work longer hours they have that option, we'd far rather increase their hours as an experienced and competent employee than recruit someone new. But there just isn't any interest, because there's no financial incentive as they're getting the same or more now with additional benefits than they would as a ft worker.

Believe me there is issues if £50 a week being spent on fags but that’s a completely different thread!

Not in the eyes of the tax credit people and there are many smokers on TCs it is not an unusual scenario.

And she doesn't have 400 left over a month, she can save between 100 and 400. That is an average of 250 from frugal living.

Could your company give them all full-time hours if requested?

What does that have to do with anything? They could get a job elsewhere potentially they don't all have to work there.

From an employers point of view, it would be far easier to employ one person full time than three part time. The logistics of three lots of leave, sickness and childcare issues must be a nightmare tbf

I can't get angry about someone who is trying to better themselves. The real issue is a system that allows businesses to profit from paying poor wages and a system that seems to treat having a home as a luxury item. Seriously the housing market is out of control, this in turn effects the rental market. Housing should be so much cheaper as it's a necessity and anyone annoyed on this thread should lobby their MP about poor wages. The whole system is insane and doesn't make any sense.

Good luck OP I hope you achieve your goal.

‘On tax credits’

I do agree that tax credit started out as the way the government attempted to close the growing gap between wages and rents without pissing off either employers or landlords.

That's why they advertised it so heavily. They were well aware the gap was too wide but weren't prepared to face the problem head on.

It wasn't supposed to be a benefit in the classic sense.

The adoption of UC has turned it into a benefit though and the daily mail style hate has now encompassed it.

Hmmm I'm not sure. I think it was more to do with encouraging and supporting parents into work. For me rather than capping left right and centre the requirement for 16 hours per week of work is ridiculously low and needs to be looked at.

It has positives as well as negatives though because it keeps people in work, meaning that in the future they will be more likely to work and earn more. It is better than people not working at all and being completely out of the workplace for years.

Its not our fault we live in a badly run country where the majority don't earn enough to get by. Why shouldn't we be able to have savings if we're working.If you go out to work you should be able to live comfortably.

Tax credits wouldn't be necessary if employers had to pay a proper wage. That we have to depend on the government to subsidise these employers is not our fault. The government have managed to close all loopholes to stop any of us from bettering ourselves. Apart from the super rich of course, the ones who benefit from our toil.

Surely if you are willing to live with the bare minimum you should be able to save? Basically if you take drugs or drink or binge on takeaway that’s perfectly ok. But if you cut back so you can save for years and years for a house you are in the wrong. What kind of backwards thinking is that?

I agree with OP. I know this is an old thread. There’s a lot of sour grapes on here. OP would have saved fare and square! So I see no problem in somebody saving or spending their own money which ever way they want to.

The core issue is that’s it’s a poverty trap by the government that would rather people spend any potential saving money... than invest!

It is annoying OP.. but there’s ways.

If the OP is able to save that money for a deposit then surely that is a good thing, if she is able to get a mortgage and eventually own a house and have assets. She will be paying less for her mortgage than she would for rent and may require less or no benefits. Her having assets means that her child will less likely have to go onto benefits when they're older and the cycle will continue. The alternative is that the OP wastes her money buying food, appliances etc feeding more money into these companies who don't proper taxes and paying rent to a landlord who already has money? If you think the OP is receiving too much then surely your problem should be with the government not the OP, why are people Hating on someone is only trying to put herself in a better position. If she is given the chance then she is more likely to be able to contribute more in the future in way of taxes. If you have a problem with people on minimum wage not being able to afford a mortgage then fight the government and big businesses, not a single mother who is trying her hardest or would you rather she spent all her money on alcohol, cigarettes and take aways?

and i am horrified to find out that you cannot claim UC if you have more than £16k in savings

Really? I’m horrified it’s so high. People should use their savings before claiming. Welfare was meant to be a safety net not a choice.

If people can save for a house deposit whilst claiming then benefits are obviously far too generous.

Have people really forgotten 2004 so quickly. Families owning a detached £200k house receiving tax credits

You’d hate me. I own outright and still receive tax credits.

I can’t believe how many people believe someone working for a living is some kind of second class citizen because they claim benefits and do what they can to save.

The short sightedness of not letting someone like the OP own their own home and therefore be ever claiming housing benefit is typical of MN and benefits, cutting off noses to spite all those faces.

If any of them were willing to work longer hours they have that option, we'd far rather increase their hours as an experienced and competent employee than recruit someone new. But there just isn't any interest, because there's no financial incentive as they're getting the same or more now with additional benefits than they would as a ft worker

You know the exact circumstances of all those people working part time? Absolutely all of them do it for the benefits. None of them work part time for pin money following a lottery win, inheritance, or very high earning spouse? None of them are managing work and caring for an elderly relative, disabled child, young child? None of them are managing disabilities themselves, pain, frequent medical appointments which prohibit extra hours?