Partner says my Child Benefit should go towards his bills as well

[PrimeCrush]

Been arguing about this since yesterday and wondering if im being unreasonable.

Me and my partner have been together 3 years and living together about 18 months. I have a ds who is 7 from a previous relationship, he lives with us full time and sees his dad alternate Saturdays. My partner has no children of his own.

We have a joint account for rent, bills, food etc but dont put all our wages in there. He earns more than me so he puts in £1000 a month and I put in £650. We agreed this when we moved in and its been fine up until now. We both keep the rest of our money in our own accounts.

I get child benefit for ds and it goes into my account. I use it for his school stuff, clothes, shoes, trips and all the little things that seem to come up constantly when you have a child. His dad pays £180 maintenance a month which helps but it doesnt cover everything and he buys him presents separately as well. Ive never really thought about putting the child benefit into our joint account because its for ds.

Anyway our joint account was a bit lower than usual this month because a few bills came out close together and my partner said I should start paying my child benefit into it. His argument is that ds lives here and uses the heating, eats the food etc so its not fair that I keep that money to myself when we’re supposed to be a family.

I said I already pay £650 a month towards the bills and food and he earns more than me so thats why we agreed on different amounts in the first place. He said thats not the point and if we had a child together the benefit would go into the joint account so he doesnt see why it should be different just because ds isnt biologically his.

I do get what he means to a point. Obviously ds uses things in the house and my partner does buy food he eats and things like that. Im not saying he should have to pay for everything for my child. But I also dont think the answer is that money I get to help bring up ds should automatically be used to cover bills when we already have an arrangement.

He reckons Im keeping it separate because I dont see us as a proper family. Thats not how I see it at all, but now Im wondering if Im being unfair.

Should child benefit go into a joint account when you’re living with someone who isnt the child’s parent?

My ex always insisted I deducted half the CB from his share of the bills. When I paid for most of kids clothes etc. Ex, and no wonder.

But I think the difference here is that when CB is paid into a big income pot, clothes for the kid is also paid out the same pot

??? I am not suggesting the OP shouldn't house her child. The point being though that - quite obviously- the household bills to which he is contributing more than she is are significantly greater because she has a child. £400/month at least.

a couple of decades ago there was big campaign about this called 'money to mummy' - i.e. the child benefit was for the mother.

Of course that campaign is entirely undermined by the subsequent change to base child benefit on the couple's joint earnings which meant that a mother earning very little could receive no child benefit if her partner was relatively high earning, with no obligation on that partner to give any money to the mother who was also losing her child benefit. But there we go, institutionalisation of financial abuse. Sorry for the side-track.

Back to the question: 'money to mummy' still is the correct moral answer.

@PrimeCrush

From your take home wages you're both paying approximately 45% into the joint pot, but your 45% doesn't include your total income, just your wage... does he have any money coming in that isn't taken into account?

If not, I think it would be fair to increase your contribution to 45% of your total income of £1747 (which inc maintenance and CB), which would be about £783pcm.

You are 2 to his one, so will use slightly more in terms of bills and food, so that seems fair (assuming you pay for bills and food for the 3 of you out of this joint money).

The only way I'd leave it as it is, is if he has moved into your house.

I do think you have to balance this with the fact that if they were claiming UC as a couple there would still be a child element as well as a work allowance.

I don't get it. He is paying significantly more than OP despite the child not being his and yet he is the bad guy here?

So the state picks up the short fall?

He’d be better just asking you for another £50 rather than saying where it comes from
but your paying £650 for 2 of you and he’s paying £1000 for 1

The £180 was agreed when we split up and it hasnt been increased since. I know thats probably not a lot now and I have thought about asking him but we dont have the easiest relationship and I tend to just leave things alone if theyre working well enough. He does work but I dont know exactly what he earns now. He has always paid what we agreed and buys ds things for birthdays and christmas so its not like he does nothing at all. I know that doesnt necessarily mean he shouldnt be paying more though.

Ds has never really stayed overnight at his dads. It started off because he was little and his dad wasnt that confident having him on his own for long periods, then it just became the arrangement we had. Ds is happy going there for the day and I havent pushed for more because I dont want to force it if his dad isnt comfortable with it. I know people will probably say thats ridiculous but thats how its ended up.

We did look at benefits when we moved in together and I lost some of what I was getting before. I cant remember the exact amounts now but I was getting help with rent before and obviously thats not the same now we’re both paying into the household. I wouldnt say Im worse off overall because the rent is cheaper between us than it was when I was on my own, but I do have less help towards my own costs if that makes sense.

The joint account isnt massively short every month. Its been a bit tight recently, maybe £100 or so, but its not like we’re hundreds and hundreds behind. Bills came out close together and we had a couple of other things to pay for. I said we could both put a bit extra in if thats what we need to do, I just dont think it should automatically be my child benefit that fills the gap.

I do understand what people are saying about him paying more towards the household while ds lives here. He does pay more into the joint account than I do and ds obviously benefits from that, so Im not pretending otherwise. But I also pay for a lot of ds’s things separately and do most of the childcare, so I dont think its as simple as saying my partner is subsidising him and thats the end of it. Maybe we need to sit down and look at the whole arrangement rather than arguing over one payment.

I don’t think it’s about the CB. I think it’s the fact he’s subsidising you, your son and your sons dad. £650 into a joint pot for bills for 2 people is very low.

How do you know he has lower bills than when he lived alone? He may have lived in a one bedroom flat, but now in a three bedroom one so paying the equivalent of 1.5 and he also contributes to the child's food.

He is subsidising child care in that his higher wage means you can work only part time and still be housed and fed, and I can see why he would be feeling put out by this arrangement particularly as you haven’t claimed proper CMS (so essentially your current partner is topping up what your ex should be contributing).

I do agree with him actually in this context the child benefit and CMS should be counted towards the shared pot, as long as you can then pay expenses for your son out of that pot too.

Also just because he was previously happy with the agreement when it was originally made I don’t think that means he can’t now review that. Cost of living has changed a lot!

@Rosscameasdoody I'm not sure why you feel the OP should be getting benefits purely on the basis that she is single mother?
I didn't, and I didn't get maintenance either! My private rental was paid my myself and myself alone.
When my now husband moved in of course he paid some of the rent, but the responsibility to house my children was still mine and not his.
If the OP is in receipt of benefits as you say, plus working, plus maintenance from father, plus CB and plus a reasonable contribution from her new partner, then surely she should be OK?

right. It’s awful that the contribution from the father is so low tbh. Op what does he earn?

Okay I’ve just seen Op latest posts this is what I don’t get when some women just stay silent and don’t even try and get more from their exes. Unless he’s violent or something and you’re scared of him it doesn’t make sense to tolerate such a low contribution. You need to speak up.

The £180 was agreed when we split up and it hasnt been increased since. I know thats probably not a lot now and I have thought about asking him but we dont have the easiest relationship and I tend to just leave things alone if theyre working well enough

You are saying it’s working well but it’s not since it’s causing issues in your current relationship. I think as others have said you need to slightly increase what you pay, I am not good maths but others have worked out the proportionate figures based on what you both earn.

How have you arrived at these figures ? I get OP’s total income to £1738 not £2188. Where did you conjure up the other £450 ? And the total figure she receives for her son is £288 not £338.

So her partner is actually paid £462 a month more than OP. And OP has already said that sometimes she doesn’t spend all of the extra income on her son, and sometimes she spends more, depending on his needs.

I haven’t said I think OP should be getting benefits on the basis that she is a single mother or anything else for that matter. Are you confusing me with another poster ?

They could still claim UC as a couple and may do. She would likely only get help with childcare costs, although it depends on rent. The partners income is expected to help pay for the child.
But if they are not claiming, yes they should apply.

You being reticent to deal with your ex over money is costing your current partner, because he's having to make up the shortfall because your ex likely isn't paying what he should.
Thats not fair on your current partner. Use the CMS calculator and talk to your ex about what he is paying towards your shared child, you can't just avoid the conversation thinking your current partner will top things uo instead, its not fair

My apologies - I was replying to @Constantrunner

The comments on this thread are a demonstration of why so many mothers are financially abused. All this talk of fairness that means the man ends up with lots of money and the women with far less, while she also has to pay for the child.

I see it all the time. Man with nice clothes and expensive hobbies, while the woman is scrimping to meet her children's needs.

@Rosscameasdoody I didn't say that either

@Constantrunner So what if mother doesn't work or barely works? Still reasonable for her to rely on others to support her child? Even those not biologically related to the child?!!

I think OP- and some posters- need to let go of the idea that partner is desperate to 'take' the Child Benefit, swishing his cape with a maniacal laugh whilst he does it.
It seems quite obvious that he's trying, possibly in a cack-handed way, to say the split is not fair in his view and that OP should consider upping her share. It's entirely up to her where this money comes from, if it feels safer to take it via her earnings then so be it. From everything we've read I really don't see why that's unreasonable?

👍