To be cheesed off with Universal Credit entry fees?

[MaturingCheeseball]

I know it’s been done before, but…

I thought I’d like to visit Chatsworth House with (teenage) dd. The cost is £33 each PLUS parking at £7.50. So £73.50.

Then I saw the universal credit/pension credit/pip etc price. THREE POUNDS. And free parking! So £6.00 for two adults (age 17+).

I do not have 12 times as much money as someone on these benefits. I doubt many people do. I’m not begrudging the disadvantaged a day out, but come on! The price differential is ludicrous.

When I saw the £73 price I just decided we couldn’t go, and so be it. But upon seeing the potential for a £6 entry, it made me feel mugged off.

Just to say re art fund-You have to have an Art fund card to get the discount- it gets checked as there are a lot of dodgy codes out there.

To add insult to injury, our seventeen-month-old also typically gets into events and attractions for free, despite never having worked a day in her life. Babies are such freeloaders aren't they?

You’re missing the point. I was talking about disposable income, so what is left over after bills etc.

You don't get 'given' the car 🙇🏻‍♀️

you don't own the car
you don't get back your hefty initial contribution to it

I'm nursing my old car along because getting one on the mobility scheme is expensive & requires a lump sum, which I'll lose when it has to be replaced in 3 years (I think it is)

The lower admission is offered by the trust in charge of Chatsworth, not subsidised by the government, though? They almost certainly offer it partly because increasing accessibility helps them with their charitable (and therefore very likely tax-efficient) status. Complain to them, maybe?

This post could so easily have been "Chatsworth's way overpriced - can't believe they've got the cheek to charge that much". I sympathise. We can't afford stuff like this at the moment either. But instead you chose to complain about people with zero control over the system for - God forbid - wanting a nice day out. And then the usual suspects joined in to say they think cheap tickets to a fancy house make people lazy and feckless.

Dear God, I just looked up the net worth of the Duke of Devonshire. You're being very unreasonable!

It's very, very rare on MN to be able to start a thread such as this one, have a grown up adult discussion about the actual subject and it not be turned into a benefits bashing thread.
Notably by those that claim benifits.

As long as he earns over the AET she is allowed. Oh and no you don't need to work 30 hours when your child is three especially in a couple. I can work just one shift a week and I don't get in trouble although I am now down as carer for my four year old.

A family with two or three children on UC is likely to have the same - if not more - disposable income as a family with two NMW workers.
Assuming all UC claimants are struggling financially is wrong, and that's why blanket discount schemes which include high-level UC claimants but exclude low-paid families is unfair and breeds resentment.

I have a friend who works full time but she is still entitled to uc. I will let her know you think she’s a lazy bastard with no self respect.

UC wants canning, too many are gaming the system, I think it’s immoral.

Hello! I have three kids, I work and receive top up from UC. After I’ve paid all the bills, we have £122 left a month.

I’m not sure where you’re getting this hate brained idea we’re all rolling in it. But I can tell
you were absolutely not.

No that’s not quite right. But if you do know any unemployed with no reason not to be working (kids at school age without disabilities isn’t a reason to be sitting at home) then you could tell them.

Serious question: why doesn’t your friend find a job that adequately supports her life/children?

Technically in a couple as long as one is earning a certain amount the other is left alone and can stay home if they want.

what exactly are you basing this on? Do you know and understand the UC taper rate? Meaning that like for like someone with 2 or 3 kids on nmw would be our earning the same family on UC, thus having more money….

This attitude really pisses me off. I worked until I physically couldn’t drag myself in anymore. I’d love to work but my disabilities make me unreliable so I can’t. DH works, and has done since he was 16, including serving this country for 35 years. When the going got tough we didn’t give up we cracked on. I stayed at home for months on end, with 2 kids, not knowing if he was coming home, some days not able to drag myself out of bed. My kids leaned to cook full meals before they left primary school because they had no choice.

My sister had to go on UC for a time because her, late, DH had the audacity to get to early onset dementia. They both worked, but he was the main bread winner, so when he had to give up work they needed help. She eventually had to give up work to care for him, then he died leaving her a widow in her early fifties with a child just about to go to university.

Anyone’s circumstances can change in a heartbeat and it’s incredibly arrogant to think yours won’t. Soldiers, teachers, nurses and a whole lot more are on UC. The vast majority of people on benefits aren’t sitting at home taking the piss, that would be those at the top. But keep punching down because it’s much easier.

Or you could ask why wages are so low for the lowest paid workers they require top ups to make it to a liveable wage?

There are FREE public stuff to go to

Skill, supply and demand.

Then they shouldn’t be claiming. The second adult should be going to work to bring in money to fund their families lives. Tax-payers should not have to fund this

As long as both are physically and mentally able to work ofcourse. Looking after kids is not a reason not to work.

If good jobs were that easy to walk into we wouldn’t have a youth employment issue.

It's not 'faiiir'.

Seriously, you need to adult here.

The participants in this scheme are in it for the money (mostly) they sell the vast majority of tickets at a standard orrcs. In ADDITIKN to thus they sell around 2% of their tickets at a hugely reduced price to bring in people who wouldn't otherwise go. Thereby getting ticket sales they wouldn't otherwise get (plus income from food/drinks/gifts etc).

it's adding to their profits, it's not taking away from other people. It wouldn't bring them additional profit to increase these discounted tickets & decrease the discounts.

it's simple economics, it's about profit, nothing to do with being nice or fair.

It is when your child is SEN. Plus it won't save tax payers money if you force parents to work as UC will be paying the childcare fees. May as well let them be at home.

Probably because she can’t.

Like I understand kids and being a single parent....... But like surely most people should be self sufficient barring major health issues