Couples who live separately so they get additional financial support

[slimline]

A couple I know got married over a year ago, yet they still live separately. She has two children from a previous relationship and lives in a 3 bed house. He lives in a 2 bed house and has no children. I mention the size of their homes because it’s clear that there is ample space for the entire family to live under one roof. I can’t think of any other reason for their separate living arrangements (considering they have made a commitment to each other through marriage) aside from financial security, as her eldest child has SEN and she doesn’t work. He is working, which I assume could complicate things if he were to move in. Yes, I understand it’s legal, but I can’t help but think they’re taking advantage of the system in some way. This isn't the first time I've heard of couples or families living apart in order to increase their income. I’m ready to be accused of benefit bashing or called all the names under the sun. Don’t care sorry!

No. It's not. There are lots of people in new relationships where decisions are made to live separately, usually for the sake of the children involved. Not having step siblings come and go into and out of your space, not having to negotiate tricky teen years, not expecting a new partner to cook, clean or provide childcare for children that are not thetes, supporting various neurodiversities by maintaining the status quo etc etc etc are all examples of quality parenting, self preservation and consideration for others. It is hard to see any real advantage to such an arrangement when maintaining two households in the current financial climate, even with state support, is going to be crippling.

They aren't his children so why should he financially support them

He would be much better off.

Single adults with no children get little or no UC help.
Any money he gets would have to pay all of his bills by himself.

If he moves in with her, he would receive the same income but only pay half of the bills.

There is a reason why so many men try and find single mothers, so that they can move in with them and be financially better off.

Maybe the child with SEN might be troubled by too much change, IE Someone new coming into the household. Maybe she would get less help if there was another adult in the household. Maybe they are trying to do the best they can for the child. As Joey Swoll says. “Mind your business”

From the welfare state which was designed to support people when they need it obviously. I to "pay a shit load of tax" but don't resent others.

Why should the tax payer financially support them then? Can’t have it both ways.

Exactly we don’t know why they have chosen to operate separate households.

truthfully, I wouldn’t feel comfortable with my child living in the same house as a man not his father, grandparent etc.

that’s due to my old fashioned view of the world hence I will most likely remain single until my son flys the nest.

Actually she can

Doesn’t make it right. I’d rather have morals and self respect personally, but hey ho.

well, it is OP's business (and mine) because we're funding their lifestyle as taxpayers.

Which if he lived there would be fair enough as the tax payer can't be expected to carry on paying her housing costs while another working adult lives rent free with subsidised bills.
But he hasn't moved in. He is maintaining his own seperate household and gaining no advantage from the tax payer.
Neither is she, as she gets what she would always have had. She receives money in benefits because she has personal needs that predated her relationship with him, two children that he is not the father of. Why should he move in to support them to save the tax payer money?

"The system" treats all married couples the same for purposes of financial assessment, regardless of whether kids belong to both parents or not. Why should he support her kids?

Good for you! You’re a hero x

Poor parents of disabled children take the piss?

Talk amongst yourselves while I find the alternative thread that's all about some poor woman whose kids have additional needs, doing her best while worrying about her neighbours dobbing her in to the social.

💯 💯 💯

They all think there’s a magic money tree in the back garden!

You are right OP, it does happen. I know two instances where I know for a fact it was a choice made to maximise benefits.

However, in you instance it doesn't make sense because you state they are married. Married people can't claim separately even if they don't live together. If they are doing so, it won't be long until they are found out and they'll have to pay any benefits claimed. Or alternatively, they only claim the benefits they are entitled to as a couple.

Who are "they",

Situations like this, yes

Benefit claimants, and most of the people on this thread too

So you think mums of disabled kids should be made to find men to live off even if it puts them or their kids at risk? You can’t see anything wrong with that?

Wow. You know what it is to live with and manage disability? No, thought not.

Because people don't support your views, they must be benefit claimants?

Wife's family is fully funded by taxpayer. Husband earns and pays mortgage building an asset. If they move together wife loses state support and husband has to pay for the family. When kids grow up and wife loses state funding she move is husband's house.
Out total benefits bill exceeded income tax receipts this year.