Benefits - does this seem realistic?

[Ivy44]

I was giving our office cleaner a lift home from one day (we chat a lot and she lives on my way home) last week and she openly told me how much she gets in benefits, I was a bit taken aback by the amount she gets as I keep reading articles about people on benefits being in poverty, due to all the cuts. She is a single parent of two children who works 16 hours a week as a cleaner, the children are 9 and 13.

Salary - £550 per month
Housing benefit - £360 per month (covers rent on a 3 bed council house)
£180 per month child maintenance
£1,120 per month in child/working tax credits and child benefits

This is the equivalent of a 35k a year gross salary. This isn’t supposed to be judgemental as she’s a nice lady who does a good job for us but I am a bit shocked at how much money is available in benefits, given the articles I keep seeing about poverty, food banks, teachers having to buy food for kids who go to school hungry etc.

Just for comparison. I work full time earning £1,400 per month. I am a lone parent to one child without any special needs but in wraparound childcare. I get around £360 in UC including their childcare contributions. So yes it does seem like something's not right there. However it might be due to the fact she's not on UC but on tax credits.

Did you whip out a pen while you were driving and make careful notes?

I love the fact you started the thread questioning benefits and now want to offer free childcare and housing!

I don't disagree BTW

As for the problem people (normally women) experience when benefits and maintenance stop we need some sort of awareness raising campaign (with no judgement) that tries to inspire them to take preventative measures.

I'm very involved in an area that is trying to do this in a small way.

And yes, there is real child poverty in this country. And its not due to lack of money because families on low incomes get child tax credits to top up their income (the clue is in the name, child) - that money is to be spent on the child NOT the adults.

rubbertreeplant

No, I’m an aspie.

I'd imagine the £1120 is inclusive of the housing benefit?
Also I believe the child maintenance isn't counted against any benefits? Not 100% sure on that. The government doesn't pay the CM so I'd imagine she only actually gets £1120 plus £550 and £180 a month, that's not a lot with two children after bills.

In our area the housing benefit you get is capped at £500 for a two bed entitlement and yet the average two bed rental is £850. I can totally see how people are in poverty when housing benefit doesn't even cover rent.

So am I but I wouldn't memorise private financial information.

Those figures must contain disability premiums/ and or childcare credit to be right, anyway.

As previous poster said, she will be worse off when she gets switched to UC. If she changes her circumstances at all it will trigger a change and less benefits. Those children living in poverty have parents who are new claimants on UC or they've been switched. The old system of tax credits actually paid people enough to live on which was why at one stage we we're actually reducing child poverty.

*were

I think that’s more or less right op. I agree that sort of income is not poverty in Manchester. If she didn’t have a council house it might be more difficult but I agree that’s a reasonable disposable income for not a long working week.

Ofc all the usual suspects will be dripping bile for saying people on benefits are anything other than saints who live in terrible unjust poverty, but as someone who has been on benefits and has been better off, I would agree that’s a reasonable standard of living.

rubbertreeplant

She gave me 4 figures. That isn’t hard to remember. I deal with many more complex things at work.

Everyone has different circumstances and therefore get different amounts so not everyone will get as much as her.
For example, there was a point where my DP was earning 18K and I couldn't work because I was unwell (but couldn't claim any disability because I wasn't diagnosed yet) and we got £500 in benefits in total a month and out rent was £800 a month and council tax £160 (over twelve months) on a one bed flat with our DD. Luckily our situation has massively changed now because we wouldn't be able to survive on that for very long.

There is a very deep problem with the current working tax credits which ensures that it simply doesn't pay to work more than 16 hours a week

Actually, working 30hrs plus and in receipt of wtc and you get a 30hrs premium.
So yes, it does 'pay' to work over 16 hours. Shame it's the government paying and not employers though. Someone should be able to live on a full time wage. And no I don't mean a 'massive' salary because you're in an 'unskilled' job. I mean a wage that you can get by on, from an unskilled and minimum wage job? When will some people remove their heads from their arses and realise we rely on these unskilled roles? If everyone in unskilled jobs got better jobs tomorrow society would collapse. They should be paid a wage for ft hours that can be lived on without needing top ups from the government so people can live. And as for the attitude towards it all from some, well to my mind you're a damned hypocrite if you have the attitude that someone working ft hours in an 'unskilled' job doesn't deserve enough to live on if you use services that rely on such workers - like shops, childcare, garages, elderly care, pubs, cafés, restaurants......

SciFiScream
I think we’re coming from different angles though. I think everyone should have access to free childcare so that everyone has the option to work or educate themselves out of poverty.

I don’t think housing should be free. I don’t think housing should be a “market” though, the costs to rent and buy are out of control.

superpoppingaction child benefit should be universal. Due to the reason you gave but also because universal benefits mean that the people who contribute more feel that they are getting something back and are therefore more likely to support a welfare state. This is the logic that Beveridge used when implementing it originally.

Lovely weather today dont cha think?

Op it is true that tax credits do store up problems for the future. I know quite a few women in my community who won’t be able to afford to live once their children leave school and will basically likely have to move back in with their own parents. Part of the problem in these cases is the cost of private renting in London. But another part of it is the benefits have allowed these women (the ones I know who I am talking about) to live a lifestyle In areas that they could obtain have afforded with the work they were doing a few years ago. I think it’s will also be pretty hard on their kids as when they go to uni or work, they will hugely struggle for years in London having to private rent themselves and with no one who can help out (in fact their mothers expect them to help them).

It annoys me a bit as I am expected to help them financially (in the case of those who are related) despite being a single parent and having a lot less disposable income at times. But at least I know that I have set up my own dcs future and my own.

I do think we should question everything including benefits/tax. I have no time for dogma.

I can’t believe that people think you’re “benefits bashing” for your legitimate question.

I agree that seems excessive. I recently took a low paid job. Everyone in my department earns £16k. A colleague is a single parent with 3 children, none of their fathers pay maintainence. She lives in a council house and drives a brand new Mercedes. She is always showing off her latest hair/nails/handbag etc. She takes her children to Florida every summer. She is always sharing memes on Facebook about being a proud momma, working hard and providing for her kids despite their feckless fathers blah blah blah. I know for a fact she only has one job.

I know MN rules state that she must be deserving of all benefits she receives and only a heartless monster would question it, and I certainly don’t begrudge her anything, but I am completely baffled by her very comfortable life I am not going to apologise for being curious since it is seemingly funded by the taxes the rest of us pay.

SciFiScream
I forgot to add that I think free childcare should be a universal benefit. So that women can, if they choose, have a better chance of financial independence.

I was almost fully reliant in benefits when I had my first and second children quite young and was soon completely on benefits when their father left me.

While the benefits were enough to live on, I did want to improve all our prospects for the future. So when they were still small I went to college, then uni and slaved away in a mimimum wage admin role as my first graduate job.

However the payrises, promotions and further job opportunities followed. 11 years since I had my first child I have a great, flexible job, I'm currently buying my first home, pay into a pension and most importantly have a relatively secure future. I currently pay out a lot of childcare (child 3 arrived a couple of years ago) and still receive a small amount of tax credits towards this. When DD3 starts school I won't be claiming any benefits, hopefully ever again.

I'm massively grateful for the support I've had to get to this point, but it's been hard and stressful. Benefits were not the easy option by any stretch! But I am very glad that I will be done relying on benefits long before my children hit 18.

I do think you have a point in this respect (even if it wasn't the original point!), I know several people who are either partially or fully reliant on child related benefits and I worry about their futures a bit when their children eventually grow up.

I guess I'm trying to say that benefits especially for lone parents may seem a lot, but likely they change a lot, aren't reliable, and are certainly not a long term solution! As is often said, if anyone thinks it's that great maybe they should try it and see if they prefer it! I know I wouldn't, and that's coming from someone who has genuinely lived both ways!

I haven't given any suggestion as to which "angle" I'm coming from though. So how can you think we're coming at it from different angles?

As a PP said, everyone should have, as the minimum, a salary that gives them enough to live on.

As a society we rely on everyone having a role to play. So everyone deserves fair recompense for that.

You are obviously close enough to this woman to discuss private financial matters - you are in a great position to ask her/prompt her about her plans for the future. If you can do so in a non-judgemental way.

Maybe she plans, like some people I know, to live fast and hard and die young. Some people even talk about helping the death part along...because they know they are financially fucked.

A lifetime of just about managing will lead to a retirement of poverty.

As for pp saying there is real poverty in this country, yes agreed. But nothing like all being in receipt of benefits suffer from it and there are still many on benefits who are better off than those in work.

Its hard to tell if its accurate or not without knowing your cleaner's childcare costs but it doesn't sound outrageously wrong.
I'm not sure your she would appreciate you pouring over her finances with a bunch of strangers on the internet, though OP.
Even if she was very open (and she has no reason not to be) she probably didn't expect you to do that.
What were you going to do if your assembled army of amateur forensic accountants said it sounded too much? Not report her, I hope.

Tax credits also don't take into consideration maintenance, I'm not sure about housing benefit. So what she's getting on tax credits would be no different at all if she received no maintenance for the children. That's where the big divide comes imo - someone in the same circumstances, but minus the maintenance, would be a lot worse off than the lady in question, and it'd make a big difference. And it seems to be accepted that father's can walk away and dodge paying, it certainly was 10 years ago when I tried getting maintenance from my DDs father, he quit his job and moved in with his parents and that was that. And his reasons?
"Why should I pay you anything when you get all that money from the government"
The fact I worked ft, and still do, totally escaped him.

@scifi - different people have different standards though. What some people think I should just enough to live on is luxurious for others. I have one family member who has basically been on some sort of benefits (plus maintenance) since she left her husband about 15 years ago. She has really had quite a decent time of it - at one point pre benefits cap her income would have been over 50k and she was living in a house worth over 1m (private renting).

I have tried to help her budget numerous times but she is just not interested as she thinks she doesn’t have to as someone else will provide. Her last child has turned 18 and is now repeating his last year at school, I suspect because she wants to keep her income flowing. WHEn he leaves school she plans to basically go and live with her own parents and tell him to look after himself.

Not to say that’s the same as your friends situation op, but there can be perverse incentives in the benefits system and I wonder if there are not better ways for the funds to be directed.

rubbertreeplant

She gave me 4 figures. That isn’t hard to remember. I deal with many more complex things at work.

Did you memorise them with the intent of posting them online?

Aren't you worried she'll read this?