AIBU to think this was an inappropriate use of benefits/child maintenance?

[ForRareKoala]

My mother lived on benefits/child maintenance from high income ex from age 0-13 while I was a child and from what I can gather was receiving about £2.5k a month total (I calculated this just now though it was probably even more in the past). We lived in a paid off house bought by my father so no mortgage.

Despite this there was never enough heating, not enough food so we were underweight (not drastically, but noticeable enough for regular comments) and I didn't notice it but my sister pointed out we both had far worse clothes than most people.

I think most the money went into her private pension which allowed her to retire very early and on (admittedly small) luxuries for herself. Even just little things such as her having a deep bath everyday while we had a short shower every other day kind of sucked.

I've spoke about this with my aunt (closest relative) who says the money "wasn't just for us", but AIBU to think that with this this much coming in we should have had a childhood where we didn't have to worry about the absolute basics?

She didn't work anywhere near long enough and my aunt hasn't received any inheritance or family wealth.

I think this is what bothers me. With age I've realised I would never do this myself but at the time I thought it was normal.

Where was your father when your mother was neglecting you? Why didn't he insist on residency so that you were well cared for? Why is your mother the only one being demonised?

I don't know your mother's situation or her side of the story, and neither do you, but I don't think she is solely responsible for the neglect you seem to have endured.

You can only put a v small amount into pensions from unearned income although that would have changed when she got a job. So wouldn’t have been massive, although could have been stocks and shares ISA maybe.

I don’t disagree that she was protecting her future a bit (as all women are regularly told to do) but it does sound v neglectful to not provide the basics from that

Did your mum have enough food and heating?

Why wasn't your dad around?

Yes I'm very sure. At the time I was working for income support as a benefit processor. The figures are also freely available on the government websites. Working tax credits were more generous than universal credit for people working, but as a single parent you had to work over 16 hours per week to qualify for that.

You absolutely can't base this off a benefit calculation for the current day. Benefits increase in line with inflation so in 2010 it would be nothing like the amount you're seeing on a benefit calculator now.

In 2010, minimum wage was 5.93 and it's now 12.21. So you're probably talking about half of what today's benefits would be. Maintenance would also have been classed as income back then.

I think he did push for it but it wasn't allowed due to concerns with alcohol. He was definitely the worse parent when I was very young.

Neither of them were any good really but my father at least turned it around in the later years whereas my mother just got worse and worse.

Did universal credit exist then??

Ok thankyou for clarifying. I'm going to have a look at this but it does make it better. She did get a part time job when I was 13 but nothing changed.

Maintenance did used to count as income toward benefits. Even if you didn't get it.

My father was due to pay my grandmother £64 a week in maintenance for me and my siblings. When she had to claim benefits after my grandad died they treated that £64 (the amount is burned in my brain) as income, despite the fact the CSA never got a single penny from him. It made for a very poor childhood.

Later the system changed to people on benefits being allowed to keep a small amount of maintenance and the rest being owed to the Sec of State to go toward the welfare bill. That changed when the amount owed to the SoS got ridiculously high and "something" had to be done. So they decided people could keep their maintenance and it wouldn't be counted as income because they knew so many didn't bloody pay

What are you trying to achieve with this thread? We only have your version of events and you were a child. I find it highly unlikely that your parents detailed to a young child exactly how much money they received, spent, earned, etc. And you have admitted you don’t know the full facts. And you clearly don’t understand how benefits were calculated back then, as others have pointed out.

But if your mother was a single parent and not working (because she was raising young children), how did you expect her to save for her old age? Do you begrudge her the money so that she can pay her bills? Are you looking for a refund from her because you don’t feel she spent enough on you and because she - heaven forbid - took long baths? Did your father not have anything to do with you (aside from sending money)? Because if he didn’t, he’s the real villain here, not your mother.

I don’t think this is correct. Child and spousal maintenance did not affect tax credits so if op’s mum was not working and was claiming tax credits maintenance would not have been included. The tax credits would also have brought with it free school meals, milk vouchers, free prescriptions etc. The Tony Blair years were good years to be a single parent. There was sure start as well. How times change.

Child and spousal didn't affect child tax credits when they were introduced, but they were only paid for the child element. They were still deducted from the income support element . If ops mum was not working more than 16 hours she'd have been claiming child tax credits and income support.

I’m not saying you weren’t neglected, but lots of your info seems skewed against her. That amount sounds like a combination of spousal maintenance and child maintenance, spousal maintenance does affect benefits. Also ‘the house my father paid the mortgage of’ - well no, whilst they were together it was a joint contribution. Also so much maintenance suggests she did nearly all the parenting? And he left when you were babies? There seems to be quite a lot missing from your op which suggests your father isn’t exactly parent of the year either.

It depends upon your age. Assuming you are now an adult, UC wasn’t around and if you are over 20 then CM would have impacted benefits in general.

In order to spend 13 years bringing up children, she would have gone without anything going into a state pension so a private pension would have been necessary or else she’d be looking at retiring with an incomplete state pension.

I just wanted to hear what people have to say since I suspect my aunt is biased towards my mum. I don't know exactly how benefits worked back then I did think they were meant to be more generous and when I went on the calculators now they gave fairly insane figures.

Neither of them were any good but my father at least turned it around in later years whereas mother was bad until the end. But depending on how much she got I absolutely judge her because I would never do this myself.

I say this without excusing the fact that your mother sounds awful…parenting is hard work, parenting young children solo whilst the other parent drinks themselves silly every night, and helps not at all, is going to turn most single parents very very bitter.

That is just the value I got from the turn2uscalculator and government website. It won't have been spousal maintenance because they were never married.

I believe he largely paid for it with his own savings, they were only in it together for a couple of years before they split.

He was definitely the worse parent when we were young and left when I was a toddler.

I understand where you're coming from. She was definitely the better parent when we were very young.

Ok, then again not excusing spending on herself and not on you, I expect part of her felt ‘owed’ his money after he shafted her so so badly when you were both tiny.

He might have still been expected to pay something to support her future.

Government websites won’t be correct for how things were in the past as it was all calculated very differently. Even the CM formula was a complicated one before the more straightforward 20% for two children came in.

If they weren't married, he bought the house and they were only together a short time it doesn't make sense that she got the house. Perhaps she paid him rent, or he paid for the house in lieu of maintenence.

It sounds bad but I wouldn’t be so quick to judge your mum as lesser than your dad. Maybe your dad absolutely broke your mum and she never recovered, while he ended up fine. Just a possibility. Your version of her life will be a snapshot.

CMS does not count towards income for benefits.