To think you shouldn't be claiming benefits if you've just bought a house outright?

[coffeerevelsrock]

I've posted about this before- ex paid noting in CM for years then about £140ish per month for a couple of years and has them about 3 nights per fortnight but buys them NOTHING. Two dc.

He recently inherited enough to buy a £200k house in cash. There may well be more money, I don't know though it couldn't be that much more don't think. I have to pay him £10k as marriage equity in about 10 years.

I just got a letter to say his CM contributions will now be nil as he's on benefits??? I just can't believe it. I feel sick. I don't rely on the money but how much of a kick in the teeth can it be? and surely he shouldn't be able to claim benefits with that money?

I've rung CM and because he's on benefits and has them at least 52 nights per year there's nothing they can do. He has arrears too which he could have paid.

Can I report him somewhere? He's ignoring my messages. I want to email him mum or something. I'm off work with stress and this has tipped me over.

I find it incredible that men like this are so feckless! Yes he has MS ,but surely sick benefits are separate to any living costs /paying for DC.How on earth can this sort of thing happen FFS!

If he’s playing in a band every week he should be declaring the income from that, too.

If he plays in a band does he get paid? If so I wonder if he’s paying tax on that…

Thanks for the responses.

Cordyceps I agree with almost all you say and have never questioned anyone's right to benefits before, but this has affect me personally so it's different (to me). Of course I see that there's lost of reasons why it would be wrong to say someone can't have benefits when they're in a house of their own but he came into that money knowing he owed arrears and bought a house not offering a penny to the dc. I think that's wrong.

He's just replied to me saying he has spent all but £1500 of the inheritance on the house and has done nothing wrong, which I suppose is correct legally, He also mentioned how he earns less than £10k per year and yet I take money he hasn't got. He just doesn't have a concept of supporting his children.

Contact your MP. They have a history of being really helpful with CMS.

There isnt anything you can do about maintenance going forward because if he has no steady income then they wont calculate anything, but you can fight for the arrears.

Tell your MP how much he owes in arrears and how much he just inherited. Quote the CMS own powers to them. They can register an interest in the house, they can force the sale of a house to pay off arrears, they can remove his driving license, they can send him to prison.

They never do any of that because there isnt a push from a conservative government for them to use the powers but if you contact your MP and keep contacting them then you might get something.

Universal credit - if he was given inheritance money then used it to purchase a home then they will see this as him using income that should have been used in lieu of benefits. Once you have that money you use it for living expenses and stop claiming benefits until the money dries up, univers credit are very strict on this. If they find out he has done so they will treat it as if the money is still there and remove his entitlement to benefit anyway.

He would only be allowed to use the money to purchase property If he was on non means tested benefit (PIP / DLA/ contributions based job seekers, contributions based ESA) and not claiming any means tested benefits

Raisedby Pangolins

Your situation is entirely different and of course your benefits shouldn't stop just because your house has gone up in value. Tbh, I do get how it would be misguided to say that someone in a house they own outright should have to sell up or lose benefits as, apart from any other issues, like fairness, it would be more expensive for the state in the long run anyway. But my issue is him coming into a large sum and giving not a thought to his dc, spending it all on a house he could have got cheaper/doesn't needs (lives in another city with his sister when not seeing the dc) and then cuts CM to zero.

I'm sorry my title is clumsily worded though .

@PingedPotato

Don't email his mum. Don't message him about it. Go to CMS and explain the inheritance. Report him for potential benefit fraud if you have suspicions. Do it all through the proper channels and let them sort it.

This.

I’ve said YABU.

Because you are expecting decent and reasonable behaviour from a proven irresponsible feckless man.

He is entirely at fault but your anger will eat you away if you don’t let it go.

Live your life, do the best you can for you and your DC and pretend you never met him.

He’s scum.

Sucks for you personally OP but from the taxpayer perspective, being able to stop paying housing benefit is a massive long term saving.

The second it becomes his residence, it ceases to be an asset (as makes no sense to then have to house him when he has a residence).

What I would be doing is ensuring that he makes the children the sole beneficiaries of the will so that they get any something out of him somewhere down the line.

I think there is some kind of rule whereby if you receive money for the purpose of buying a house...

I'm so sorry you experiencing this.

It took me eight years to get even some of what I was entitled to from ex and even then...

Sounds like a brat that's true.

Should someone be able to buy a house outright and then claim benefits to live? Yes. If, for eg, I inherited enough to buy a house I could do so and then 'save' the taxpayer £800 pcm in housing benefit. But I'd still need the rest of my UC to live on.

Of course that is dependent on actual amounts. Eg I inherited millions and bought a grand country house that was far bigger than I need it would be unfair. If I inherited enough to buy a suitable sized house but didn't have anything left after it would be a different matter.

Should NRPs get away with not paying any maintenance. No. The CMS is a fucking joke.

I think to skip over the fact he has MS so quickly is a bit harsh. My friend has had this for years and it’s an awful disease that some days getting out of bed is a huge effort. He should pay maintenance of course but he will be entitled to some benefits with MS.

Try to put this aside it will just make you unwell.He is a useless individual.Not giving anything for the children is so awful but don’t waste time thinking of his actions nothing will change.The children will see him for who he is and see you as their lovely Mum who did everything for them.He will be the loser,take care.

When you say “on benefits” I assume that due to his MS he gets PIP. That’s really hard to get and isn’t means tested so his inheritance means nothing in terms of that.

Playing a gig a week is entirely different to being able to hold down a full time job when you have MS.

But sure, report him if you must.

As Thecathouse says, depending on the exact circumstances, using the inheritance to buy a house could be considered as "deprivation of assets", which means he would be treated as though he still had the money for benefits purposes but I don't know if that would also be the case for CMS.

commonslibrary.parliament.uk/how-savings-can-affect-benefits/

The above suggests buying a house doesn't affect UC, though, so it could be he's within the rules.
YANBU, though, to feel he's been pretty selfish in regards to his children.

In theory I would support the use of his inheritance to buy a home given he has a degenerate illness. I support benefits for people who can’t work, are looking for work or who have disabilities.

Are you saying he can work and isn’t ?

@Minceandonions

Yes that's really unfair. I don't know how benefits work, but know someone who has done the same - been on benefits for a decade or more whilst doing a degree and writing a book. Noone in the house works. But they've just bought a house outright, paying cash from inheritance, and are renting it out to private tenants. Is this allowed, or is there a scam going on?

Rent counts as income so means tested benefits would stop. Non-means tested wouldn’t.

In that scenario for CM then the RP would ask CMS to look into unearned income and CM would be due from that.

@MumYourBabyGrewUpToBeACowboy

I agree with *@ClitorisAllsorts*

I also agree with *@ClitorisAllsorts*

@Thecathouse

Universal credit - if he was given inheritance money then used it to purchase a home then they will see this as him using income that should have been used in lieu of benefits. Once you have that money you use it for living expenses and stop claiming benefits until the money dries up, univers credit are very strict on this. If they find out he has done so they will treat it as if the money is still there and remove his entitlement to benefit anyway.

He would only be allowed to use the money to purchase property If he was on non means tested benefit (PIP / DLA/ contributions based job seekers, contributions based ESA) and not claiming any means tested benefits

That doesn't sound right at all. I am on UC, and if get a windfall then I wont be allowed to buy a house? That is depressing as hell.

So he works every Saturday night?

Therefore he can provide all the clothes kids needs for stays at his house .

Me ex pays me nothing, think he earns cash in hand but it’s a lost cause.

Yes it is correct, not fair or right in my opinion, especially when we arw talkimg anout people who cant work. It would save momey in houskmg benefit in the lomg run, but a depressing reality when it comes to life on benefits. You can't benefit from inheritance, other than to not have to claim for a few years

Sorry typing one handed, that was gobbledygook

He should have paid off his arrears to you.

As others have said, hopefully the kids will inherit the house on day so it will come to them eventually.

The system is total dog shit. He should be ashamed of himself.
Don't email him or his mum, it will make you feel good for a minute and then you will wish you hadn't done it.