Husband earns over 100k. Do we get 15hrs free funding?

[Bermuda1102]

Sorry I know a lot of people have asked this but I’m still confused.

My husband earns over 100k. I earn 30k.
our son will be 2 in Jan 2024, so come April 2024, will we receive 15hrs funding from the government? Then, if we are to have another child (not pregnant yet), by the time other child is born, when they start nursery, they too will get 15hrs?

Someone said you get nothing if one earns over 100k, but I thought EVERYONE gets 15??

it’s so irritating if you compare our situation to parents who both earn 90k each. I know we’re fortunate but with my husbands salary comes higher mortgage payments and we live and work in London.

anyway, I hope someone can answer this for me.

thank you so much

It sometimes feels as if the higher rate tax payers can do anything right on this site. I live in the southeast bear my family as my job involves travel and I can't afford a full time nanny on my wage alone. As I am a lone parent I pay all the bills including mortgage and childcare. I get taxed on my private health care but get charged £40 for a referral letter to private so not to take up nhs resources others may need.
I am happy to pay taxes and donate to charity and help friends and family where I can. I am rich in terms of uk income and I am blessed but I suspect many people would assume in their heads I live in a nicer house, drive a nicer car and have better holidays.
I have been a very low earner too and had to survive on 8p noodles for weeks on end and colleagues feeding me. I think we all need to be a little bit kinder to each other regardless of our situation. Anyone's situation can change at any time. A high earner might have just got a payrise. A person on benefits may have recently lost everything.

Really we should just ban anything nice, that way all those nasty rich people can afford to pay even more taxes for things they aren't even allowed to use.

Do you realise that if rich people buy the smaller houses then the price for them will go up and availability down? Ie you won’t be able to afford to or have the choice for a house?

You were there presumably at their mortgage advisors. That is such a silly baseless statement.

In the spirit of the nonsense you've spewed, you should rent somewhere dirtcheap and have no resources to benefits whatsover.

@Myfabby
@ShirleyPhallus
@Oliotya

etc

nope. I didn't say they needed to buy a tiny house, or rent or anything else. But they didn't get lumped with a mortgage because of her husband 'large salary' they chose a higher mortgage than necessary

Living within your means applies no matter what your means are,

but what they should do is not blame 'my husbands huge salary' on being the cause for a large mortgage & take responsibility for their choices

@Myfabby

its not'baseless' try reading the OP's posts.

I think you are fundamentally missing the point.

If the OP and her husband borrowed 4.5x their joint income and had a 10% deposit they could buy a property worth £650,000.

Depending on how close they need to be to central London for work, that budget might only get them a modest flat.

Assuming that a couple with a child needs a minimum of two bedrooms, not borrowing the maximum a bank will let them borrow isn't a luxury everyone has. Many people have to borrow as much as possible just to get a home which is adequate for their needs.

They are living within their means. 15 funded hours for 3 year olds are part of that, whether you like it or not and whether they live in a massive house or not. They have absolutely no obligation to forgo any entitlement, however much many they may or may not have spare. It's really that simple.

It's really quite tone deaf to accuse people like the OP and her husband of not living within their means just because they want to claim the small amount of non means tested childcare allowance they are entitled to.

Imagine the indignant howling that would ensue if the OP said she and her husband shouldn't have to pay for these funded hours through their taxes and that people on lower incomes should live within their means and not take out large mortgages or have children if they can't afford it.

It is competely baseless. I have been on this thread since it started. She said she has a high mortgage- where did that translate to maxed out?

There is so much resentment because her household income is £130k. That is the crux of the matter.

They are living within their means and subisidizing heavily I might add people that don't!

At the moment you will get it in the term after your DC turns 3 but who knows what will happen if Labour getsin in 2024. They often means test everything.

Yes, she literally posted what is in the OP and then a second post after she got a shitload of abuse saying she was deleting her account and not coming back.

Don't blame her really.
I hope she's enjoying a lovely meal in her lovely large house and that her husband gets a big fat bonus this year. And she's since been able to claim the 15 measly hours.🙂

Because it's a universal benefit? Should people on 100k salaries also send their children only to private school and be treated by private doctors and hospitals? Should they only have private pensions?

This thread took an utterly mad turn. The people here suggesting that the OP shouldn't be using it really need to understand what a universal benefit is.

You'd really hate it here. All children here are entitled to three hours of free preschool education for two years, and all parents qualify for a subsidy for child care on A sliding scale depending on income. All parents get child benefit regardless of income, it's not means tested.

It's a pity more people don't think that about the winter fuel allowances to pensioners

Age 3, not age 2.
The age 2 free hours were from my understanding if you are claiming a relevant benefit at the time, or possibly just Universal credit.

How are they living within their means when she is complaining about the big mortgage?

You’re right @Redruby2020 that this is the case as it stands but both Labour and Conservative parties have pledged free hours from 2 from next year which might be why OP has raised the question

I don't know her breakdown, but for me

I now pay more than £700 more on my mortgage because my 2.2% fixed rate ended. My son's tuition went up 7%. My daughter who rents in London- final year uni- her rent has gone up more than £200 p month all in the same year.

I am not in debt ( well except mortgage), but I have less disposable income. I am NOT living outside my means, but I think unless you are being disingenuous most people people have been affected by the cost of living. Food is expensive, heating bills etc. Everyone has been stretched.

And no I don't want or need any sympathy- before the mocking violins come out. I realise I am privileged, but does this mean I cannot complain that my mortgage has gone up significantly?

So if I had a 3 year old child you can bet I would be first on that queue to get my 15/20 hours or whatever. I pay a lot of tax, I have never had to get benefits, I have private healthcare.

@MargotBamborough

No, I'm NOT fundamentally missing the point.

The OP is bleating on about having a large mortgage because her husbands large salary

. I know we’re fortunate but with my husbands salary comes higher mortgage payments

A salary doesn't come with a compulsory mortgage.

they CHOOSE to have have higher mortgage payments. CHOSE.

I've lived in London, I now live in the SE, I'm well aware of how expensive housing is, most of us need to make choices & they aren't always nice ones. But they're chouces none the less. She's acting like he was made to have the mortgage as part of his salary, he wasn't.

@Myfabby

thst is such a lazy & baseless

I'm not even slightly resentful if their joint income, why would I be??

You ARE fundamentally missing the point.

With a high salary usually comes a requirement to live in an expensive area with high house prices and high rental costs. With a child comes a requirement to have more than one bedroom.

That's where the large mortgage comes from. It IS a consequence of her husband's high salary.

Of course they could choose to have lower paid jobs in cheaper parts of the country and NOT get it in the neck from people like you for claiming the childcare benefits they are entitled to.

But if everyone did that there would be less tax revenue to pay for childcare benefits for your children.

@MargotBamborough Why do they have to live in a more expensive area because they earn more 🤔

Is this a serious question?