Should CM be considered as part of income

[SnowJon]

Should Child Maintenance be included when claiming benefits?

Example child maintenance is being paid to the resident carer. Why should that parent then be enabled to claim further benefits like Free school meals etc? Is that not what the cm is for?

The system is screwed in my eyes

Of course not. What of the NTP just stops paying?

NRP obviously 🙄

No it shouldn't be included. It's a total separate payment. It's not a benefit it's a parent paying for their child. Which in some cases cms is the only way possible.

It does seem unfair that some people get £1k + maintenance and some people get nothing, yet they are still entitled to the same in benefits.

I suppose the reason it’s not calculated is that men are often unpredictable in paying it, so they don’t want to leave people short if their ex decides on a whim that they’re not going to pay up that month.

I think the system is really screwed and can be played quite easy by the NRP.

With Universal Credit child benefit child maintenance plus wage the nrp could be earning at least 2k and still claim free school meals.

I believe so in theory. Then the 2 people who actually chose to procreate would be responsible and not the taxpayer. As it stands at the moment, technically, maintence is an “extra” as our welfare state ensures everyone has a certain income. (Whether or no individuals mismanage that money or have skewed priorities is another debate).

However, for this to happen the CMS system would have to be a fair cost to include the true cost of childcare for the resident parent and really have to up its game and enforce and non paying parents. It’s ridiculous how they get away without paying. I agree with other posters where they say if the resident parent didn’t feed their kids they’d get removed.

I’d have no problem with the £9.20 a week I get for my stepdaughter being deducted off our tax credits in theory, but they reality is she pays sporadically. Luckily her amount is so low we manage anyway and we both work so I support her daughter along with her Dad, but it’s not right that the state has stepped in her Mother’s place.

I think you are a bit confused SnowJon. The nrp does not get child benefit or claim maintenance.

What a load of bollocks. Sue Townsend wrote a blistering piece on this idea, ie what she had to do herself on a week when her ex didn't pay maintenance.

www.theguardian.com/books/2014/apr/13/adrian-mole-sue-townsend-welfare

Have a look at why Child maintenance isn't included in benefit entitlements anymore

It used to be. My grandparents were entitled to £64 a week from my father. So, the income support, housing benefit and the likes all included that £64 a week in their income entitlements. Except the CSA didn't get a single penny from him, so they were £64 a week short every single week

Until there is a proper, fit for purpose, department chasing non payers they should absolutely not include CM

Christ even when the government got all bar £20 of the maintenance if the RP was on benefits it didn't spur the governments of the days into making a CSA fit for purpose.

It is considered income in Ireland when claiming family tax credit, housing benefit etc. Not sure if income on jobseeker's allowance.

Cm can be included when receiving housing benefits.
Plus of your getting 2k for cm your not on a low income so wouldn't get universal unless a private payment and still I don't think you would

No it shouldn't. I get a fair whack in CM (500ish) and am entitled to free school meals, income support, housing benefit etc but i had to fight for that CM and i know my ex is an arsehole so it will stop with zero notice.

Perhaps the government should pay the CM and then get it off the NRP to ensure it is reliable for the RP and then it can be included

It will be disregarded

With the greatest respect, the system is not screwed. You're just viewing it through a narrow lens.

When maintenance WAS included as income for benefit purposes, people were left with no money when the NRP decided to stop paying the maintenance.

It also cost the DWP/HMRC a lot of money in processing costs because of the constant income changes and it left people in poverty because the systems weren't set up to cope with 'It looks like they've paid double to catch up but actually I'm still short because they've missed out a few weeks of payment'.

I suspect this is a benefit bashing thread so I'd just like to remind everyone that benefit fraud rate is under 2%.

It's cheaper overall to the UK taxpayer NOT to include maintenance as income. And it doesn't push people into poverty. Even if you think everyone is fiddling the system, they aren't.

You need to declare it but it will be disregarded from HB, and I assume other benefits as it is for the child

No, there are far too many dickheads who use CM as a way to control their ex's.

Now if the government put a shiney spotlight on the parent who should be paying and forcing them to pay from source or harsh sanctions put on them for not paying for their kids then I would support it.

I know when Ds1 put in his SASS application (Scottish student loans / grants system) he had to input my income, including child maintenance, so there are some scenarios where it counts. (Not sure that it should have included the CM paid by another ex for ds2 though.) I can see both sides of the argument.. why should I end up with more money than my friend, if we’re both on benefits, because my ex pays and hers doesn’t? But equally that money is for the dc, not for me, and wouldn’t go far compared to what a child costs.

Yes it should, it's part of your income . Ok I don't claim benefits so it's irrelevant but I get £1500 a month so why should it not be taken into account. Of course not everyone has maintenance but absent parents should pay and (unless sen) parents should work rather than claim benefits

No it shouldn’t, because the person paying it can just stop if they feel like it, and then the person receiving it is (possibly!) fucked!

Having been in the situation where it WAS included, about 10 years ago, I have to say absolutely not. My ex husband never paid what I was owed, ignored calls and letters from child support and when it was eventually taken direct from his wages by his employer to send to csa, he stole it and kept it for himself. The employer even admitted theft but wasn’t prosecuted. Disgusting. All that time (nearly 2 years), I got zero. I worked part time, was finishing my degree, and I was ill with the stress of it all. I’d never want a family to have to go through that.
If the cm was exceptionally high, from a very high income ex, then maybe it should be considered but that must be an exception.

But if a couple are living together and one of them refuses to pay for the child the other parent doesn’t suddenly get extra support off the state.

If two people decide to have a child then absolutely they should both be responsible and all calculations should be on that basis. If one of them fails to contribute then they should be charged with child neglect

It’s not money for the parent, it’s money for the child. That’s another reason why it shouldn’t be classed as income.

And really this isn’t about the benefit system but rather a society as a whole that allows people to have children and not take responsibility for them

Yes it should be. We should be doing everything possible to keep benefits as low as possible.

That's fine but you've got to get the nrp to pay month after month not just when they feel like it.