Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Are the Radford's massive piss takers?

332 replies

NoEscapingMe · 17/12/2024 18:18

It seems they've cruised along nicely. Thank you tax payer. 20 holidays in 1 year

OP posts:
Mexicola · 17/12/2024 19:55

TheFairyCaravan · 17/12/2024 18:24

People are so naive. The tax payer paid out a fortune for them before they got successful with their social media and tv career. He’s not Mr Kipling fgs. And giving birth 22 times, sending all those kids to school etc doesn’t come cheap.

I agree. I don’t believe they didn’t claim tax credits for all those kids either - that’s why he was conveniently self-employed and it was way before the two child cap.

Another2Cats · 17/12/2024 19:55

wigsonthegreenandhatsforthelifting · 17/12/2024 18:45

The state covered their schooling and their healthcare costs. Times 20, that's a hell of a lot. Plus child benefit, and all her pregnancies and births.

Edited

The state covers the schooling and healthcare costs of ALL children. The state also covers the costs of all births.

Are you suggesting that some children are not worthy of this??

Free secondary education for all children has existed since 1944 and free healthcare for all has existed since 1948.

This applies to everyone, not just them.

Although not as many as this family, my father was one of ten siblings (my mother was only one of five siblings). Are you going to have a go at my grandparents as well for having more than some sort of "approved" number of children?

If anything, given the low birth rates in the country at the moment (the population, excluding people immigrating, is currently falling according to the ONS) we should be applauding them for having more children.

FoxtonFoxton · 17/12/2024 19:56

CountingDownToSummer · 17/12/2024 19:52

*@namechangeGOT
*
Is 'content creator' the new official term for selling your kids privacy online and breeding for fame?

Yes I would say so.
I can see thousands of lawsuits in coming years where the children realise what has been done to them without their permission.
Their medical and personal information plastered all over for anyone to see. It's bloody awful

Definitely. You only have to look at the thumbnails of certain family vloggers videos to see how despicable this exploitative content is. It's bait for a certain type of viewer, put it that way. Utterly abhorrent. I'm not saying the Radfords do this, but it's common sadly.

Pianoaholic · 17/12/2024 19:56

FizzyBisto · 17/12/2024 19:21

Yes, I was going to say pretty much this. I have a lot of misgivings about the whole set-up of their family; but whatever they do end up doing, I think it's only fair to consider each child/person on their own merit.

Each person has their one birth (very likely on the NHS) and then one person's worth of education and other costs throughout their life, balanced against that same one person's tax and other contributions.

All else being equal, no different cost-wise from 22 only-children born to 22 families.

But as other posters have said, how likely is it that the 22 kids will get jobs and contribute to society?
The girls are far more likely to follow Sue's example and have multiple children, who may also follow suit, and so it goes on and on...
From the clips I have seen of the programme, education doesn't seem to have been a priority. How on earth is it possible to supervise numerous kids' homework, it's hard enough with 2 in my experience!
So I don't think it is equal to 22 only children in terms of the outcome to society.

SchoolDilemma17 · 17/12/2024 19:56

TheFairyCaravan · 17/12/2024 18:24

People are so naive. The tax payer paid out a fortune for them before they got successful with their social media and tv career. He’s not Mr Kipling fgs. And giving birth 22 times, sending all those kids to school etc doesn’t come cheap.

Plus I doubt they never use the NHS

Boohoo76 · 17/12/2024 19:57

Justalittlehotpotato · 17/12/2024 18:37

I highly doubt that anything they may, or may not have received, in a past life is a patch on the amount of taxes they will have paid into the system since

At today’s rates, it would cost the taxpayer around £2 million just to put 22 kids through school so, no, I doubt they have paid enough tax to cover the services they have used.

Zanatdy · 17/12/2024 19:59

I used to like them but as soon as Sue stopped having babies, spending like it was going out of fashion became her new hobby. They could put money aside for their children’s house deposits given that they make their money out of them, instead of paying for 3-4 Disney trips per year (including a week’s Disney cruise this year). Yes it’s their money, but they’ve become insufferable and the comments on social media are definitely changing. People don’t like what they’ve become.

Plus their TV show is so scripted and their acting is terrible. Anyone who watches their social media knows the storylines for the show are made up. They need to go back to basics, though they have changed completely. Driving Porsches and going on multiple holidays per year, with zero thought for schooling or investing money for their future

Startinganew32 · 17/12/2024 20:00

Oioisavaloy27 · 17/12/2024 19:53

I'm sure it was 4000 pies they sold a week so if it's £4.50 that's £18.500 a week so how can you say that?

You actually think he bakes and sells 4000 pies a week?

SchoolDilemma17 · 17/12/2024 20:01

Startinganew32 · 17/12/2024 20:00

You actually think he bakes and sells 4000 pies a week?

even if he did, I highly doubt his net income is anywhere close to 18k a week.

JHound · 17/12/2024 20:01

The who?

Hyperbowl · 17/12/2024 20:03

Startinganew32 · 17/12/2024 19:29

thats gross trying to excuse it. When he turned 18, she was still 13 years old for another three months (and was already pregnant by this point). So he was an adult and she was 13. Do not try to pass this off as normal - it’s far far from it.

No, there is no excusing that sort of behaviour but there’s also no excusing racism either. Also far from normal behaviour. What is wrong with you, do you literally have no shame or decency? Trying to chalk this up to being about race - twice? Absolute thicko.

suburburban · 17/12/2024 20:03

@TaylorSwish

They probably see this as the norm and probably their only way of escaping and being housed.

Pianoaholic · 17/12/2024 20:03

JHound · 17/12/2024 20:01

The who?

I sometimes wish that I hadn't heard of them...

LuckySantangelo35 · 17/12/2024 20:03

SchoolDilemma17 · 17/12/2024 20:01

even if he did, I highly doubt his net income is anywhere close to 18k a week.

Exactly, cop on @Oioisavaloy27

Superworm24 · 17/12/2024 20:04

Women who have that many children are mentally ill and don't ever consider the impact on the children. I've read a little about her and it sounds like she had a messed up childhood and craved love. Didn't he get her pregnant under age?

Another2Cats · 17/12/2024 20:04

Librarybooksandacoconut · 17/12/2024 18:57

If anyone is interested, their pie company and media company accounts are here https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/E37rr-_AV5yz46OLnDmNS2X6KGo/appointments

Between the two companies, Mr and Mrs Radford appear to have taken out over £90,000 as "Director's Loans" during the course of just one year.

IVFmumoftwo · 17/12/2024 20:04

I used to watch it but far too scripted now. I don't believe they didn't claim tax credits. They would have been raking it in.

Coffeemmmmcoffee · 17/12/2024 20:05

Wavescrashingonthebeach · 17/12/2024 18:27

And hopefully all those children will grow into pleasant, contributing members of society. There's enough child free adults to offset their kids school costs i imagine.

Hardly

as soon as the girls reach 18 they have their own babies

ChristmasPudd1990 · 17/12/2024 20:06

I'd love to know if the children are getting paid? I'd very much doubt it as the oldest lot are all in council housing. Bet Sue thinks endless Disney holidays are payment enough 🤷‍♀️

Startinganew32 · 17/12/2024 20:07

Hyperbowl · 17/12/2024 20:03

No, there is no excusing that sort of behaviour but there’s also no excusing racism either. Also far from normal behaviour. What is wrong with you, do you literally have no shame or decency? Trying to chalk this up to being about race - twice? Absolute thicko.

It’s not racism to point out that there is a difference in how some large families are perceived compared to others

suburburban · 17/12/2024 20:07

I remember one of the older ones attempting to go to university and they couldn't handle it. Sue wasn't very encouraging and almost gleeful when they quit

mydogisthebest · 17/12/2024 20:07

Loub1987 · 17/12/2024 19:02

That’s pretty unfair, they have earned (and paid tax on) a huge amount of money. I don’t think it would benefit society to call out who are net contributors vs net takers. I think the radcliffes are likely the former.

They definitely used to claim tax credits because they said so at the time.

They have had an absolute fortune in child benefit over the years.

There have been 22 births. A birth with no problems costs the NHS around £10,000 so add that up plus I think some of the births have been caesareans which, obviously, are a higher cost to the NHS.

Schooling for that many children, doctor appointments, dentist appointments etc.

They have cost this country a fortune

ShamblesRock · 17/12/2024 20:07

ARichtGoodDram · 17/12/2024 19:21

I thought they were quite interesting in the beginning, but the pretending that tax credits aren’t benefits ( they’ve just always said they don’t claim benefits and actively ignored any direct questions about TC’s) and therefore they didn’t get any tax payer funding said a lot to me. It was totally disingenuous.

I think they used to say something along the lines of 'we don't get anything we're not entitled to' but yes did actively avoid any questions about TC. In the early days the TC system was very generous, so they would have been entitled to a significant amount.

I also remember in the early days there was another family featured who had a similiar size brood but the portrayal of the two families was very different. The Radford's were this wonderful wholesome family who could do no wrong and were fully supporting the family with the magic pie shop, the other family were total scroungers as they claimed TC, despite both parents working full-time.

I have no idea how they managed to get such a positive spin on their life.

MyPithyPoster · 17/12/2024 20:08

Tax credit was basically £100 a week per child. And then if they were in Nursery, you could claim an additional £300 up to 2 children. Per week.
It would’ve been an extraordinary amount

toucheee · 17/12/2024 20:09

How come they’re still getting child benefit?