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?

Where do you get £400 from? Do you think a 7 year old uses £400 worth of water/electric/food? No they don’t.

How can you stand to live with such a money-grubbing man? It's so unattractive.

And if it works that way (which is not necessarily unreasonable) don’t you acknowledge that if child-related income goes into the pot then all child-related expenses come out of the pot? Currently op is paying most of the child’s costs from her own money, so she need to keep the cb for that.

I agree with this - your total income including maintenance payments and child benefit should be used when calculating the split of bills. If you’ve already done that and that’s what your current split is based on, then he needs to wind his neck in!

If anything the only person financially abusing OP or just taking the utter piss out of her is her ex. He’s only paying £180! He should pay way more and some of that extra money can be put in their shared pot.

Let’s start there - with the actual father!

Honestly this is why I likely wouldn’t date a man with kids but if I did he’d have to be earning a significant amount more than me .

Because if I was earning a bit more then paying more, I’d wonder why am I effectively contributing more to my step kid than their (non-resident) parent? The maths isn’t mathing!

But that said this man knew the situation so he knew what he was doing I guess . So it is what it is . Wouldn’t be me though!

@PollyPocket80 I agree they just need to rethink how much they each pay. He shot himself in the foot by specifically mentioning child benefit.

Agreed. I'd be pretty unimpressed to be your DP and the joint account is going short while you don't want a difficult conversation with your ex. If you bring it up, he won't pay more and you aren't able to enforce it, that's one thing. But at the moment you're choosing to make yours and DPs home life more difficult for the sake of not wanting a difficult conversation. And it's not like DP gets the benefit of you doing the majority of the childcare for DS. It's XP who does!

It sounds like DS was pretty little when you split and the £180 was agreed, so a few years now. On the BOE inflation calculator, what would cost £180 in 2021 would be £230 now. That £50 is your half of the bills shortfall.

£250+ for the increased cost of renting a house with an additional room. £150 for additional food, water, electricity (the ONS estimates food for a child being £26/week. Water includes bathing, loo and laundry. Electricity includes laundry, personal devices etc).

You are conflating things to conclude this.

If she cohabitates the state assumes her living costs are reduced and she doesn’t need the same level of support as a single person. It isn’t handing off responsibility to her new partner. It is saying she doesn’t need as much welfare. It was also say she doesn’t need the extra bedroom.

The two people who need to be on the hook for the cost of raising the child are the parents. They should be grateful another person is putting in £450 per month for that.

Just done a quick, very basic calculation. No idea of rent so assuming £1000 per month (OP says it’s a three bedroom house) for rent and similar LA rent cap. With a combined after tax income of £3650 the maximum UC entitlement would be around £1970 and the assessed income would be £3223. After the 55p taper rate this reduces to around £1772 so UC top up would be just under £200. Definitely worth a claim.

Thank you. This was the point I was trying to make, but you said it much better.

If you bring it up, he won't pay more and you aren't able to enforce it, that's one thing. But at the moment you're choosing to make yours and DPs home life more difficult for the sake of not wanting a difficult conversation

This is exactly it. If you ask and they say no, okay fairs - you can’t force a man to be decent, but you need to at least sit down and have these tricky conversations and then see what happens. This avoidance of tackling a difficult topic is costing them hundreds every year.

I said this in another thread recently, but I wish society wouldn’t let these non-resident fathers off the hook so easily and it wasn’t so normalised for them to just pay paltry sums.

And yes of course I wish even more that men would step up and do the right thing in the first place. Why can’t they all take pride in supporting their kids?

Why do so many fathers and indeed people in general think it’s okay for men to leave the financial responsibility of their child to the mother and /or the new partner or the state? Shameful.

Yes. While you have a situation where there is no rent control on private landlords and employers are allowed to pay wages on which it’s impossible to make ends meet, what else do you expect ? UC is nothing new. Support for low incomes has existed in some form or other for as long as the benefits system itself.

You see so many of these posts on here. She ends up paying for so much and has nothing left over for herself while he has expensive hobbies. plus she's doing the majority of the housework, shopping, cooking, cleaning. I reckon most of these men have never cleaned a bathroom

@LemonTT Exactly. People should stop passing the financial buck for supporting their own child.
I wouldn't expect my now husband to pick up the bill for my two children who are not biologically related to him. My kids, my responsibility. We privately rent so it's not exactly cheap either!!

@grinandslothit The couple you describe in this situation are together though, no?

That sentiment should be directed at the father of her child. Who knows what’s he spending his money on while he sends a measly £180 a month.

OP says that the sum for child maintenance has been the same since they broke up. So the question is whether or not it’s enforced by CMS. If it isn’t, and he refuses to increase the amount then she can do the CMS calculation based on his wage and see if she would be better off going through them.

Is he happy for the costs you pay for DS to also come out of the joint account?

Yes I agree she needs to have a look at her options if he refuses. But she needs to actually ask him first.

I could be wrong but from what I’ve gathered this is not CMS enforced and it’s a private arrangement they’ve come to - which bizarrely hasn’t increased at all even with all the inflation over the years.

Of course the father should be paying more. the op has not said why she hasn't gone through CMS.

The father - who has shared financial responsibility for his child with the mother - should be paying what CMS stipulate.
The stepfather - who has no financial responsibility to the child who is not his - should not be expected to make up any shortfall.

The clue is in the name CHILD benefit to buy school uniform, shoes, clothing for your DS. Tell him it's not partner benefit.

You are 100% wrong. If she house shared with a friend the rent she would get in UC would be reduced, but that is all. She would get more in benefits because only her income would be counted.

Living with a partner the partners money is counted as well when calculating benefit entitlement because the state assumes the partner is sharing all his money and helping out financially with the child.

I agree the father should be paying more, although CMS amounts are not high.

But if you live with a partner then yes he does need t contribute to the child.

@Constantrunner I've never expected my now husband to support my children who are not his; that's my responsibility. I work hard and always have done to make sure there is enough for them. As does their bio father.