Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cactuslove

What is Fair

Recommended Posts

We were happy getting her dla and giving her money as she needed it and buying things for her. She was 1 told dla she could not cope with money herself so I became her appointee. Her friend then decided to tell her she gets all her money. Tried explaining different circumstances but she started social skills group today and first thing out of her mouth was they all get their money. I have no problem giving her her money but just wish people no matter how helpful they are trying to be would realise they are talking to a girl who does not always tell the whole story. She does not get her money in her hand but she is still given it, she just says we steal her money. We finally got fed up and told her when it comes through in 2 weeks we will take some 4 board and she can have rest. We also said she can buy everything she needs herself, more to give her a taste of big bad world. Whatever happened to people saying listen to your parents, life was much easier with that.

Anyways just some input on what people would deem fair for a 16 year old to pay for board. She gets middle care and low mobility so about 270/month and has also applied for ema which will be about 120/month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i used to pay £40 a month. That covered rent, bills and food. i then invested in a computer programme

called 'Microsoft Money'. It allows you to create a main account, then automatically transfer money

into various sections for budgeting. i was a compulsive spender at your daughters age so i needed

help with money management.

 

http://www.managingmoney.org.uk/Money-Coming-In.aspx is a new website that is free which your

daughter could use to experiment with her knowledge of money management.

 

Good luck and you are doing the right thing by not allowing her to get into debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cactus love -

I'm a bit confused, because you've said you are going to take money for her board but then that she can buy everything she needs for herself(?) I think, just to remove any additional confusion, it will be best to go for one or the other...

I haven't had to cross this bridge yet, but I do think it is an important one. In my head I'd like it to be that while my son's in education I just handle it for him, but in real terms I guess there is going to be a point between 16 and whenever he does leave formal education where that won't seem fair to him however much I try to reassure him that I have his best interests at heart. When that day comes I suspect I will take the minimum I need to keep him in the standard to which he's become accustomed, but I will also urge him to save as much as he can and to live as far as possible to a weekly 'budget'. I'm lucky, because he has, on a small scale, always had his own money to manage and does so very effectively, so he knows that money spent today won't be there tomorrow, and is always willing to wait a while if he wants 'A&B' but can only afford one or the other immediately.

It is difficult, but i think giving her some autonomy and control over her money now will prepare her for wider self-management further along the road. If you think she will just 'blow' whatever she gets in her hand then I would suggest charging a 'rent' and then adding a 'savings account surcharge' with which you can open an account on her behalf for a rainy day, but in effect the only way she is going to learn not to blow her money is to blow it and then have to face the reality of being 'skint' for the rest of the week/month/however you decide to do it.

 

HTH

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I think its a very good idea for her to have the responsibility to manage her own finances,actually I would say 16 is a perfect age to do so really.

 

Personally I would not expect any of my children to pay board at the age of 16, especially if they are still studying and not earning any wages.But thats just me. I would, in this instance,still keep a portion of the money for safe keeping.Save the money for her to put towards something big later on.

As to how much, that would depend on how much she needs for things like transport,going out,clothes etc. Maybe you can sit down and discuss it with her. I would say for you to keep 15-20% is not that unreasonable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a generous average statistic is approx 1/3 of income should go towards rent.

 

At 16 yrs old tho, I assume you are still feeding her? Doing her washing? Buying household goods (toilet roll etc)?

 

In reality, is there ANY way the money she recieves will cover what is spent on her - taking into account clothes, socialising, transport etc? Perhaps sitting down and doing a budget on paper would help her understand what money is needed for? I expect she thinks you are "stealing" her money because she just doesn't realise what it all gets spent on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks would not normally want money really only going to try for this month prob just to show her what has been done for her as I said before really down hearting when she meets people n basically tells them her parents dont let her have anything n steal her money. I am starting to feel people staring at me like I am some kind of monster. She is not very good with money also and we were waiting to give her lower amounts of money at a time increasing as she showed improvement but with recent actions it has just came to a take it and cope attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AM also confuddled lol

 

My oldest is almost 17 and gets EMA around £90 / month and has a parttime job which gives her another £200/month this is her money as she is still in fulltime education (hence receiving EMA)

 

I have told her once she leaves fulltime education she will need to pay me 25% of her income to cover food and board and I hope that will also cover the drop in TC at the same time, but all the time she is educated the money is hers!

 

Personally I feel your DD needs to experience managing her income and unless she is likely to hand it out to passing strangers she will get there.

 

BTW My DD spends hers like water and as she will be learning to drive soon she seems to think we are buying her a car and paying for the lessons, I think turning 17 is gonna be a huge shock to her as we have told her time over time we are NOT buying her a car like her mates parents and we will pay HALF her driving lessons as her birthday and christmas present this year she needs to fund the rest herself...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At 16 (Now days ) parent are expected to support their children, financially that is. Obviously if a child have an income then the amount in relation to that of their parents income would determine how much, if any, they contribute to the family finances.

 

As we were claiming child tax credit until both our older children, left home/started full time work that situation never was an issue.

 

My stepdaughter aged 21, how has just moved back in with us is presently unemployed, I have told her that I expect £20 a week at the moment. I will expect £200 a month when she gets a job.

 

I have no guilt in taking money off her as I know that whatever she has left will get spent with no regard for what tomorrow may bring.

 

When my stepson was first given control of his savings at 18, he got through over £2000 in 2 month with nothing to show for it. That was many money that his granny had spent the previous 18 years saving for him.

 

I dont really think there is a right or wrong, but I do think it is important for young people to realise that Money does not grow on trees, that it has to be worked for and that they should pay their way.

Edited by chris54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When my son was 16 we were in exactly the same situation - DLA came to me as his appointee and he received £30 a month in EMA. As the DLA was a lot more money, I kept it for him. It covered his living costs - board, food, clothes and shoes, laundry and travel to college,

He got the EMA paid into his own bank account for his spending money. I kept a close eye on how much he spent out of the account. It helped him to learn the value of money, when it was gone it was gone, and also he learned that if he lost it by being late for classes, there was no bailing him out. So he has gradually learned to become more responsible for himself.

Now he has no income at all apart from the DLA. I still keep it all and pay him a weekly allowance out of it. We are both happy with this arrangement - he trusts me to do what is best for him and in his heart of hearts he knows that he is not yet able to manage that amount of income.

Edited by lizj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave back control of my daughter's money when she was about 17 I think. She then paid me £40 a month out of it, but she also bought some of her own food as well.

 

A few months ago she found herself overdrawn - a huge shock to her, and a wake up call, she had been treating it like pocket money and not budgeting or checking her balance. She is now much more careful - in fact she is in danger of being too hard on herself and spending too little. I have waived the £40 temporarily to give her a chance to restore things a little. She still buys a lot of her own food.

 

If I'd kept control, she would still have the money in her account. But she would never have learned the value of it, and may one day have got herself into deeper trouble as a fully independent adult. I'm confident that she'll never get into the same situation again - a hard lesson learnt.

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting aside the 'how much is fair' discussion, I'm a bit confused as to why this is related to a proportion of DLA to be given up as board/lodging. Isn't the purpose of DLA to pay for the individual's additional needs, not the costs that anyone of that age would incur? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting aside the 'how much is fair' discussion, I'm a bit confused as to why this is related to a proportion of DLA to be given up as board/lodging. Isn't the purpose of DLA to pay for the individual's additional needs, not the costs that anyone of that age would incur? :unsure:

Yes, DLA is to pay for additional needs, but in the case of ASD it is very hard to quantify what those needs are. For example, a "normal" teenager might go out on the bus. Cost: one bus fare. But an ASD teenager may need to be taken on that journey. Cost: two bus fares.

A "normal" teenager generates a certain amount of dirty laundry. A teen with ASD may struggle with clumsiness and dirty clothes more quickly, may have problems with hygiene and so be smellier etc.

Some people with ASD have sensory issues with food, or allergies, and may have particularly expensive dietary requirements.

And because they usually struggle with socialising, it costs a lot more to keep them occupied and supported, as activities and outings cost a fortune. Especially when they have to pay adult rates for everything.

What I am trying to say is that it's the everyday costs that increase with ASD, and this is why some parents find it helpful to use the DLA as part of their regular income rather than handing it over to the young person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, DLA is to pay for additional needs, but in the case of ASD it is very hard to quantify what those needs are. For example, a "normal" teenager might go out on the bus. Cost: one bus fare. But an ASD teenager may need to be taken on that journey. Cost: two bus fares.

A "normal" teenager generates a certain amount of dirty laundry. A teen with ASD may struggle with clumsiness and dirty clothes more quickly, may have problems with hygiene and so be smellier etc.

Some people with ASD have sensory issues with food, or allergies, and may have particularly expensive dietary requirements.

And because they usually struggle with socialising, it costs a lot more to keep them occupied and supported, as activities and outings cost a fortune. Especially when they have to pay adult rates for everything.

What I am trying to say is that it's the everyday costs that increase with ASD, and this is why some parents find it helpful to use the DLA as part of their regular income rather than handing it over to the young person.

I don't disagree with any of that - in fact part of my DLA covers some of these issues. I don't disagree with a parent using DLA to pay those additional costs. What I'm querying is the use of DLA to pay board and lodging, which any person, regardless of disability, would have to pay. If they were using it to pay the additional costs of board and lodging - e.g. more laundry, specialised food, extra heating - fine, but basic board/lodging everyone has to pay.

 

If the OP's daughter did not have ASD and did not get DLA, only getting EMA, would the parents be asking for board/lodging and if so, how would they expect it to be paid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DLA is intended to cover additional costs due to disability. Since it is the parents who are probably incurring those costs at the moment, it does make sense for the parents to retain control of this money while the child is still in school.

 

EMA is intended to help cover the costs of education, things like bus fares, lunch money, uniform and stationery. You might decide as parents that you want to pay for these things yourself and allow her some of her EMA to spend as she wishes. If you think your daughter can manage this money and still have enough left over for the essentials, then maybe giving her control of the EMA money would be a good place to start giving her some independence.

 

When I was in the 6th form my parents did not want me to get a Saturday job, and gave me monthly pocket money instead. This money was to cover my bus fare to school, lunch money, clothes and going out. My friends' families had different set ups, but I don't remember anyone paying their own board and lodging at that age. One of my friends did not get any help from her parents other than free accommodation and food. Other than this she had to pay for everything herself including bus fares. You could not get EMA then, this would really have helped her I think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a parent my ability to work is completely 100% affected by my son being disabled and the total absence of suitable care for him during school holidays, so I think it's completely fair that ALL his DLA goes into the household pot to compensate for that. It goes to pay higher heating bills, specialised shoes, having two babysitters instead of one on the rare ocassions we go out, a new shower, a new tumble drier and repairs to the washing machine, all of which have taken a hammering because of him (bedding washed every day, shower three times a day). He also empties any shower gel, conditioner or shampoo down the drain if you're careless enough to leave it lying around and my younger children are always forgetting so I buy those EVERY week, pyjama pants for when we're going somewhere strange (NHS only supplies nappies). Also taxis when you would normally walk with your other children, a hire care on the airport when we go away is essential (not so with the others), valet parking made it that little bit less stressful (use local transport with the others), ohh and an extra seat on the plane so that no-one sat next to us. That's easily £5,000 in additional costs in the past year. Factor in my loss of earnings, well the difference between what I used to earn and what I do now is gettng on for £50,000 a year (and that's based on my salary 10 years ago). So, no, I don't have any qualms about 'taking' his DLA from him.

 

His GFCF diet isn't that expensive as it's a case of cooking from scratch (the cheapest way!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd add to my previous post... This discussion prompted me to talk to my own son. As I said, he's always had his own money and learned to 'manage' it very well (he kept Christmas , money when he couldn't make up his mind between an Xbox360 or a ps3 for two years! Plumped for the new 'slim xbox' when it came out and he saw the kinect on the gadget show, btw) but as far as full self-management goes I thought it easier to wait until 16+

Anyhoo, had the chat and he agrees, but I've also been thinking I want to start that process a little sooner, and i'll maybe start giving him a monthly 'income' and budget soon, so he can start paying for his own golf lessons etc. The only real difference is it's him handing the money over rather than me, but it's all good practical experience.

Oh - one other thought... For the past few years we have taken his BFF on holiday with us each summer. His parents give me his money which I keep and use as necessary, topping up his 'pocket money' from it whenever he runs out. He's the same age as Ben and NT and hasn't got a clue as far as money management goes. Slightly different I know, because he doesn't have any money 'coming in', but I wonder how he will get on budgeting 'from scratch' when he suddenly leaves school and goes from having no money responsibilities to having them all, and potentially as many credit cards as he wants to apply for at his disposal? :unsure:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a parent my ability to work is completely 100% affected by my son being disabled and the total absence of suitable care for him during school holidays, so I think it's completely fair that ALL his DLA goes into the household pot to compensate for that. It goes to pay higher heating bills, specialised shoes, having two babysitters instead of one on the rare ocassions we go out, a new shower, a new tumble drier and repairs to the washing machine, all of which have taken a hammering because of him (bedding washed every day, shower three times a day). He also empties any shower gel, conditioner or shampoo down the drain if you're careless enough to leave it lying around and my younger children are always forgetting so I buy those EVERY week, pyjama pants for when we're going somewhere strange (NHS only supplies nappies). Also taxis when you would normally walk with your other children, a hire care on the airport when we go away is essential (not so with the others), valet parking made it that little bit less stressful (use local transport with the others), ohh and an extra seat on the plane so that no-one sat next to us. That's easily £5,000 in additional costs in the past year. Factor in my loss of earnings, well the difference between what I used to earn and what I do now is gettng on for £50,000 a year (and that's based on my salary 10 years ago). So, no, I don't have any qualms about 'taking' his DLA from him.

 

His GFCF diet isn't that expensive as it's a case of cooking from scratch (the cheapest way!).

 

 

The fact that I couldn't work for 12 years because I was my son's primary carer was a direct result of his disability, and had a catastrophic affect on our finances to the extent that we ended up in a housing association house. Carers Allowance in no way covered what I would have earned if I had been able to continue with my professional career. So until he was 16 my son's DLA went into the general household budget, and like Jaded I never felt we were 'taking' it from him.

 

Once he went to residential special school I was able to go back to work part-time during the term-times. And when he was 16 his DLA was paid into his bank account, although I was still his appointee. He promptly spent all his savings on CDs and unusual items of clothing!!!

 

Once he left special college, he got a part-time job, and paid me housekeeping, which he increased when he started to work full-time. Despite his mad frittering away of his savings he was actually perfectly able to save up for really expensive items he coveted, culminating this summer in saving up over a £1000 so that he could move out and rent his own little flat. He very sensibly, with no prompting from us, opted to rent somewhere with all bills inclusive as he felt this would be easier to manage to begin with.

 

He now lives independently and works full-time, and the last time I spoke to him he gravely informed me how much he was budgeting for food per week ;)

 

I personally think all young people should pay housekeeping once they have left school if they are working or at college/working part-time, and if all or part of their income is made up of DLA and/or other benefits I don't see anything wrong with this. Otherwise they get a very unrealistic view of adult life, and in a way it's stopping them from growing up and making those first steps towards independence, even if they may not have the ability to ever lead completely independent lives.

 

Further to Mumble's points...when a child is at residential school they don't get the care element of DLA for term-times (unless they come home each weekend) as it is considered, quite rightly, that they are being cared for other than at home. So my interpretation of this is that the government apparently view the care element of DLA as covering the practical elements of care too, in other words board, etc.

 

Bid :)

 

ETA: forgot the question of 'how much'...he paid around £100 a month when he worked part-time, rising to £200 when he worked full-time. This was about a quarter to a third or so of his wages, but we were flexible :lol:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the long-term negative financial impact on families of having a child with a disability is almost completely unrecognised in our society as a whole. You only have to look at the level of Carers Allowance to see their perceived 'value' :(:angry:

 

Sorry, a bit off topic Cactuslove.

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Bid, and I think it was you who pointed out to me a long time ago that a typical teenager might well be doing a Saturday or holiday job to boost their allowance and get their first taste of independence - whereas many young people who qualify for DLA are not able to manage a casual job, for reasons related to their disability. So DLA enables them to have a bit of financial independence from Mum and Dad, and to be on a similar footing to their peers who are able to earn.

 

K x

Edited by Kathryn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Bid, and I think it was you who pointed out to me a long time ago that a typical teenager might well be doing a Saturday or holiday job to boost their allowance and get their first taste of independence - whereas many young people who qualify for DLA are not able to manage a casual job, for reasons related to their disability. So DLA enables them to have a bit of financial independence from Mum and Dad, and to be on a similar footing to their peers who are able to earn.

 

K x

 

Oooh, did I?? :lol: Definitely a good point ;)

 

I also think things like blowing all their savings on strange clothes and music, or running up an overdraft are actually very 'normal' behaviours in young adulthood :shame::lol:

 

Bid

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think things like blowing all their savings on strange clothes and music, or running up an overdraft are actually very 'normal' behaviours in young adulthood :shame::lol:

 

Or books. :ph34r:

 

Rumour has it that Amazon is in danger of folding now that L has cut back on her spending. :lol:;)

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must be very,very soft :lol: I have said my kids can live with me rent free until the have finished higher education and have worked for at least a year. I have will encourage them to get a part time job(I too worked from age 16)to pay for things like going out or buying their girlfriend a present( ;) ) But I think things are just so expensive and would never want my kids to be in debt by age 25.

 

I used to get an allowance but I had to put it an account(which my mum opened when I was 10) then I could only take out the cash with my mum for something BIG or Xmas.It didnt get much interest,but it was nice to see my money "grow"

My brother who also started working part time age 16 did give my mum some cash for rent,she didnt ask him he just gave it to her,my mum saved it for him to come to the UK.He also paid for his own driving lessons,parties etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a parent my ability to work is completely 100% affected by my son being disabled and the total absence of suitable care for him during school holidays, so I think it's completely fair that ALL his DLA goes into the household pot to compensate for that. It goes to pay higher heating bills, specialised shoes, having two babysitters instead of one on the rare ocassions we go out, a new shower, a new tumble drier and repairs to the washing machine, all of which have taken a hammering because of him (bedding washed every day, shower three times a day). He also empties any shower gel, conditioner or shampoo down the drain if you're careless enough to leave it lying around and my younger children are always forgetting so I buy those EVERY week, pyjama pants for when we're going somewhere strange (NHS only supplies nappies). Also taxis when you would normally walk with your other children, a hire care on the airport when we go away is essential (not so with the others), valet parking made it that little bit less stressful (use local transport with the others), ohh and an extra seat on the plane so that no-one sat next to us. That's easily £5,000 in additional costs in the past year. Factor in my loss of earnings, well the difference between what I used to earn and what I do now is gettng on for £50,000 a year (and that's based on my salary 10 years ago). So, no, I don't have any qualms about 'taking' his DLA from him.

 

So until he was 16 my son's DLA went into the general household budget, and like Jaded I never felt we were 'taking' it from him.

 

Sorry Bid and CMJ, I appear to have touched a bit of a raw nerve with you both. This was never intended, and I think I didn't explain myself clearly. I wasn't accusing you of taking DLA from your children. In fact, CMJ's post highlight's exactly how the DLA pays for the additional costs related to the disability. But underlying that are the 'normal' costs, which are being met in the way any household would be expected to meet them. The DLA in these cases is not funding expenses that everyone has. Otherwise everyone should be getting DLA to fund their everyday expenses which would, of course, be nonsense.

 

I personally don't believe that a child (and I mean up to 18) who is still in fulltime education should be paying board and lodging. Do parents not still get child benefit if the child is in fulltime education 16 - 18? Of course, if the young person, 16+ is working fulltime instead of remaining in education, that is different.

 

As to the point about DLA as the only income and therefore using it:

 

I personally think all young people should pay housekeeping once they have left school if they are working or at college/working part-time, and if all or part of their income is made up of DLA and/or other benefits I don't see anything wrong with this.

But DLA is for the costs of additional care/mobility needs. If they don't need it for this, maybe their DLA award should be reviewed. If they are not able to work or only able to work parttime, there are other benefits, I'm not very sure of these, but I think the ESA, housing benefit etc. which are specifically related to that loss of/low income and inability to afford rent - these are what should be used because that it their purpose.

 

Further to Mumble's points...when a child is at residential school they don't get the care element of DLA for term-times (unless they come home each weekend) as it is considered, quite rightly, that they are being cared for other than at home. So my interpretation of this is that the government apparently view the care element of DLA as covering the practical elements of care too, in other words board, etc.

But the 'care' they get in residential school far exceeds the normal care that would be provided by an average parent to a non-disabled child. That's, in part, why residential school fees are so high. They have staff available / awake at night for instance. This is the additional care cost that the DLA pays for. It does not pay for the underlying basic board.

 

I must be very,very soft :lol: I have said my kids can live with me rent free until the have finished higher education and have worked for at least a year.

Do you want any more kids? I'm available for adoption. :whistle::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a raw nerve, Mumble. I think we are just viewing from completely different perspectives.

 

DLA is about care needs and additional living expenses. Awards are made for children who need watching over and supervising more than other children of the same age. I don't think any child (under 18) should have control of it whilst there is someone retaining that intense level of parental responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DLA is about care needs and additional living expenses. Awards are made for children who need watching over and supervising more than other children of the same age. I don't think any child (under 18) should have control of it whilst there is someone retaining that intense level of parental responsibility.

Agreed. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...