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?

Yes do this. He will be much worse off because children are expensive. If he refuses say it feels like you don't see us as a family.

Please don't have another child with this man. Your son will be treated worse than the new child.

180 c.s is pittance.
..has costs increased alot or he wants to control your

No, the clue is in the name, otherwise it would be called adult benefit

No he doesnt have children, sorry if that wasnt clear.

Im on about £1450 a month after tax and he gets around £2200. So its not a massive difference but he does earn more than me. The £1000 and £650 was what we worked out we could both afford when we moved in, it wasnt a percentage thing if that makes sense. We had enough to cover everything and a bit left in the account most months so neither of us questioned it.

Child benefit is £25 odd a week isnt it, its not some massive amount. I dont think he realises how much of it goes on things for ds though. Its not like Im putting it away in savings every month.

His dad pays the £180 maintenance into my account, not the joint one. I use that for ds as well. I know that probably sounds like Im keeping everything separate but thats just how we’ve always done it and my partner has never asked me to change it before.

Most people pay their child benefit into the income pot and don't solely use it for specific child related costs.

The "income pot" covers the food that the child eats, the water that he uses to wash with, the bigger house that is needed to house him. Those all sound like things that are for the child?

Your total income should be considered, along with his. And then you pay into the joint account an amount you both agree. Currently that’s £650 and £1000.

in this situation he is essentially asking you to contribute more, the fact it’s CB is irrelevant. You need to decide whether you can afford to pay more and if it’s fair and reasonable to do so.

sorry cross posted with op - this answer was from before the numbers were given

People can’t possibly answer without being given figures.

If your child benefit and maintenance means you end up with more money left than him (after paying for your child’s things) then he is right, if not then you may be.

If he wants to go down this route though, all money should be shared into one pot, then each of you takes a fixed amount from that pot as your monthly spend, and it is equal. But I suspect he won’t like that though

Child maintenance is to cover part of the cost of a child. That includes lots of things like clothes, childcare, after-school activities, toys, school uniform, trips, etc. it's expensive

How much do you both earn?

Unless he only earns a small amount more than you, it is unlikely he will be better off by you putting CB and the £180 pm child maintenance into the joint account and then paying DS costs so food, clothing, shoes, school uniforms, Christmas and birthday presents, hobbies, outings, gifts for friends when he goes to a party, bedding etc all from the joint account.

If your joint account is short, you both probably need to up your contribution. Also make sure any non financial contributions you both make are accounted for, eg how is cooking, cleaning, laundry and household admin divided up? What cars do you have and who pays for those?

Have you asked how you’re meant to pay for kids clothes, shoes and lunches without the child benefit?

Or the OP is grabby?

This sort of attitude he is exhibiting is precisely the reason Child Benefit came into being.

It started in 1946 and was called Family Allowance. Before that there was a tax break which, in a society consisting of breadwinners and housewives, meant that the money went straight into the fathers' pockets, and largely did not alleviate child poverty. Family Allowance was paid directly to the mother, because it was recognised then that the mother was far more likely to actually spend the money on the child's needs.

Sometimes, I think some men are exactly the same as those 1946 men, believing that all household money should be under their control, and yes, that their wants are more important than the child's needs.

"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."
That is the purpose of Child Benefit.

"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."
The heating etc. would have to be paid for whether a child was in the household or not, so that's a shit argument. He grudges feeding a 7 year old without taking money for it? What a prince!

"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."
No, you are keeping it separate to ensure it benefits the child it is for, rather than disappearing into the black hole of finances he controls. His 'you don't see us as a proper family' is emotional blackmail.

Your partner has a shit attitude. I'd be considering whether or not to live this way, with a man who wants all the money under his control. He's the type of man the 1946 Government recognised as needing to be bypassed, giving the money to the mother so that the Benefit benefitted the child.

If the money you both pay into the shared pot isn’t covering all the bills, you both need to pay more in. That could be from your wages, CB or maintenance, it doesn’t really matter.

Did you move into his property or he into
yours or was it an entirely new place chosen together
it feels to me as if he is trying to make it so that you have no money left over for yourself or to do stuff with your son

In these situations if OP does that, her child could end up not getting what they need. There are plenty of mothers in relationships where income distribution is so unequal that they are their children would be better off financially living apart from a partner, who is benefitting financially at their expense.
Children cost more than adults for clothes and childcare. I buy one or two new clothes a year. My children grow quickly and need lots of new clothes and shoes every year. They also need childcare, after-school activities and clubs paid for.

Cross posted on incomes. So you have about £1700 coming in and him £2200.

So he already has more money than you and yet he wants you to be even worse off. That's not what proper families do.

Suggest you pay the child benefit and maintenance into the joint account and then everything for DS comes out of the joint account too.

I think a lot depends on what you are using the joint account for. If the school uniforms, school trips, pocket money school lunches etc are coming out of the joint account then I think he has a point that it’s not fair that the child benefit and probably the maintenance payment aren’t being paid into it. However, if the benefit and maintenance are going into your account and you are solely paying for the above items then I do agree with you that it should be kept separate. Unless he is willing for you to start using the joint account for those things. He can’t have it both ways and have the extra money in the account but not use it for the things it is intended for.

also - this is the agreement that the two of you made before moving in together. What’s changed? Did he not know about the child benefit and maintenance at that time?

OP isn’t the one demanding access to a small amount of child benefit.

Based on those figures you should pay 725 to his 925 if you are splitting it based on income. But that doesn’t factor in that your child uses things, or anything you have to spend on your child outside of that budget.

There is really no way to be able to work this out. When there is a child who isn’t both of yours, and a difference in wages it’s always going to be tough

He doesn't care about that. He is fine if OP has way less money than he has to pay for things for her and her son.

In a partnership where you consider yourself a family you put the child's needs first, not the adults mans.

So your household contributions are based on your earnings, not your income?

CB and CM are surely to cover all the costs of having a child, including housing, heating, food. Because you have a child there is another bedroom to heat, lots of extra washing etc.

I think it would be fair to pay some of your CB / Cm into the household account.

When me and DH moved in together with my DD, both our salaries went into a joint account and we both took out the same amount for personal spending. I have earned significantly more than him throughout our marriage.
I received half the CB and no maintenance (my choice).
In the OPs scenario, her and her DP have chosen not to combine incomes, so they are treating each others income as totally separate. She appears not to be including CB and maintenance within her income for some strange reason. So her DP is, by default, subsidising both her and her DC. I can understand why he’s annoyed.

You both probably do need to pay more into the joint account if it’s short, you both have £1k+ left after your contributions.

Do you need more than £1650 in the shared pot to cover all your expenses? Is that the issue?

Currently you pay a pretty fair and proportional amount into the pot based on your earnings. However, I think you should add in CM and CB and do the calculations again. All costs for the child should then come out of the shared pot, not your personal funds. If one or both of you aren’t prepared to do this then you are not acting as a family and you are going to have to come up with some much more complicated maths to figure out who pays for what in what is essentially a house share set up.