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?

And this is why the 'if the boot was on the other foot' arguments generally don't stand up; it would be unusual for the man to be doing most of the unpaid work in the household.
Ultimately I think it's difficult to make a situation like this feel fair to all parties, and it's a bad idea to get into a situation where a man has this much leverage over you.

Fundamentally who is responsible for the costs of raising the child, including basics like food, shelter and heating? Is it the partner, the mother or the father? Two out of those three are 100% responsible for the costs. The third is funding the cost of raising their child. They should both acknowledge that. They should both either try to put in more and or reduce what they spend on their child.

But he’s already subsidising the child by the fact that he’s contributing more to the household bills. Expenses for the child don’t stop at clothes, food, activities etc, they include energy costs and housing too.

I think you do have to count in the housework because your labour does have value.

My guess is you're doing about 90% and he's doing about 10%. This is where some men are completely taking the piss with their 50/50 financial split and then their wife or partner is doing 90% of the household chores

So no I think you're already overpaying. your portion should be about 500 a month to account for the labour you contribute to the household

So making the whole thing completely transactional.

Yes…that’s my point. She should be paying more because of COL and so should he. Hence why if he was worried then they should have sat and discussed it together rather than him demanding CB (see second paragraph).

Is he really funding the cost of the child though if he’s paying no more in rent/power etc than he would if they lived just as a couple?

(Plus maybe an extra £50 per month as his share of the food bill for the extra few potatoes/slices of bread/chicken breasts that may be bought to feed a 7 year old).

I’m amazed you can run a household of three in a three bedroom house on £1650 a month!

And he isn't?

It’s a three bedroom house. They wouldn’t need that as a couple

1650 between you isnt loads!

You are putting in less than half but you plus DS is more bedrooms in the house, more food/gas/elec/water. More petrol if you're driving ds places.

What underpins this is probably that he doesnt want to be subsidising your son.

I think that’s a bit harsh. I’d say he doesn’t want to support the SS more than his own parents do.

Its unreasonable of you to expect him to pay for your child. You need to add more to the pot.

@LemonTT the state says the parents AND partner are responsible for the costs of raising a child living with the partner. In fact often the state makes the partner more financially responsible by cutting more in benefits that the partner is supposed to replace, than the amount CSA require a father to pay.

The state takes a different view and does expect him to pay towards the child.

So don’t move in with a woman who has a child 🤷🏼‍♀️. That’s a choice. A two bed would have sufficed, and there’s not necessarily a huge cost difference between a 2 bed and a 3 bed anyway. Plus he’ll enjoy the benefits which tend to come with a 3-bed house, such as bigger downstairs living space and garden.

He’s probably still paying less monthly overall than if he lived by himself because so many costs are shared with op - rent/council tax/internet etc etc.

I don’t think he should be getting your child benefit but I also don’t think it’s fair that he pays significant more for you when you are more than half the household.
it should be at least 50:50, and yes, that will mean you have significantly less left over at the end of each month…but that’s the reality of working in a lower paid (comparatively) job, being a single parent and having split finances. I would not be subsiding a partner and his child in this manner, I can see why your partner isn’t happy either.

Presumably the child needs his own bedroom so that’s likely an extra couple of hundred in rent. Child benefit and maintenance payments are meant partly to cover the child’s living expenses so it’s not unreasonable for the OP to pay some of that money into the family pot.

If the man had moved in with his child and expected his childless partner to cover more than half the household costs he’d be immediately labelled a cocklodger.

Do you know what your ex earns, and is he self employed?

If not self employed, and if you know he is at least working full time or close to it, then £180 per month is way underpaying. Easiest thing to do is restart the conversation about maintenance and if he’s not willing to pay more goes through CMS.

Then you can afford to pay more into the joint account without any change to your personal finances.

@Constantrunner No - the state doesn't expect stepparents to pay for the child at all.

Nope, Dh and I are married and our two children are both our biological children.

The child benefit comes to me, not our joint account.

Because even though we have a very equitable financial arrangement, I’m still the primary parent and I’m the only one who went PT to care for children when they were young. I have incidental small expenses as the primary parent, like fishing around for change in the car for the cake sale or more wear and tear on my car as I do more driving around to school runs and activities, that add up to greater costs for me. My child benefit accounts for that and I keep it for my own use, which ultimately is for benefit of the family as a whole.

You’re talking about circumstances in which the single mother is living with the biological father of the child. The state absolutely does not expect a new partner who is not the biological or adoptive parent to financially support the other partners children. All household income is assessed for UC.

So you pay about 40% of the bills to cover two people and your partner pays 60% to pay his share, and when the bills are higher he's expected to pay more? I don't think he's outrageous to suggest you support your own son. But it doesn't seem to be a relationship that either of you are happy in.

They definitely do - it will have an impact on universal credit, child benefit, and university maintenance loan. If the step parent lives with the resident parent their income is taken into account for all these things.

I would pay the same as your DP then he’s got nothing to complain about. When you don’t have enough money for holidays or nice birthday and Christmas presents for him you can explain that’s what “being a family” costs you. You can also point out to him that being a family means he has to do 50% of all housework, cooking and shopping. After all, it’s only fair.

You should also ask your ex for a proper level of maintenance for his son, he doesn’t have to house, feed or clothe him and only sees him a couple of days a month.
T to save whatever you can because at some point this penny pinching misery is going to be too hard to live with.