Child Benefit

[Amanda]

I've just heard on the radio that someone is trying to get the goverment to increase child benefit so that you get the same for all children. And it got me thinking why it isn't already like this? Does your second, third, etc child cost less to bring up than your first???? I think not.

I can see that this would be the case if you have 2 same-sex children close in age, but it would only save you money on clothes and toys, not food, nappies, etc. In my case, I've had to start from scratch because of the age difference, but when LO is born, I'll get £17.45 a week for Kayleigh, and only £11.70 a week for the baby. Why????????????

 

[chezzabell]

very good question oftern wondered myself i have no idea why they do that!!!

 

[BubbleB]

i no? stupid lol i think it shud b the same 2 cz like sera gets way more than bayley n bayleys probs more expensive lol it dont make sens
lv b x

 

I think it would be a good idea. As a kiddies grow up, they cost more in different ways surely? I know I get extra money for Damo because he is 'ill' and whatnot, but the CB I get for him, is just for him, and the CB I get for another bubba is for that baby, so why should it be £17.45 a week for Damo now, then next baby less from the start? It's rubbish! Government are screwed up big time, they don't even care what they are doing to our finances because they are all well off!

 

[Amanda]

Since Kayleigh was about 10, whenever I get my monthly child benefit, I take her clothes shopping. Now almost £70 a month on clothes may sound a lot to some people, but wait until you have a teenager!! This month was a trip to Peacocks for jeans, t-shirts, etc. Last month was 2 pairs of trainers, the month before she asked for her hair to be highlighted, then bought some make-up with the rest. You get the picture. Does this now mean that LO will only get £40 per month on clothes? Not at all as we all know how quick they grow. It's not fair to take money from Kayleigh, but in the same way, it's not fair for the new baby, any subsequent kids to have less than her. Aaarrghh!!!

 

[Jo]

Since Kayleigh was about 10, whenever I get my monthly child benefit, I take her clothes shopping. Now almost £70 a month on clothes may sound a lot to some people, but wait until you have a teenager!! This month was a trip to Peacocks for jeans, t-shirts, etc. Last month was 2 pairs of trainers, the month before she asked for her hair to be highlighted, then bought some make-up with the rest. You get the picture. Does this now mean that LO will only get £40 per month on clothes? Not at all as we all know how quick they grow. It's not fair to take money from Kayleigh, but in the same way, it's not fair for the new baby, any subsequent kids to have less than her. Aaarrghh!!!

I know exactley what you mean, Emily is 5 yrs younger but it is still the same and she is growing so much, i want her to be'trendy' to some extent, luckily she's not into make up and stuff yet but it won't be long, so when Jack gets older and he is in to footuie and stuff does that mean it will cost less to buy him a footie kit than Emily a swimming cossie and towel+ lessons? I don't bloody think so!!!!!!

 

[kellie80]

I think it's really stupid, Aimee is costing a lot more than Jess at the minute but i get £6 a week less. Maybe they should change it so if you earn over a certain amount you don't get it. For some people i'm sure they don't even notice the money.

 

[budge]

my friend had a daughter and she split with the father some years later. She formed a new relationship and had a son some years later.
What she did was to get the new husband to apply for the child benefit and becasue it was HIS first child he got the same amount as she got for HER first child.

I thought she was VERY clever doing this and i think you should do it too tanket. All it means is that the child benefit forms will come in your other halves name but the money will still go to the baby and into a joint account in both your names.

 

[lauramumof2]

What she did was to get the new husband to apply for the child benefit and becasue it was HIS first child he got the same amount as she got for HER first child.

Thats sneaky, i like it .

 

[jenna]

i cant believe that child benefit is so low! I thought it was much more than that

 

[budge]

What she did was to get the new husband to apply for the child benefit and becasue it was HIS first child he got the same amount as she got for HER first child.

Thats sneaky, i like it .

i did too!

 

[Amanda]

I had never thought of that!!! How sneaky, but I love it!!!!!!!

We have a joint bank account, and I look after all the money anyway, it just means there'll be an extra £24 per month coming in! Every little bit helps!

Thanks Budge!

 

[budge]

you're very welcome. We wish we had tried it with Bethany but mt friend hadn't told me about it then. Im going to get hubby to apply for this baby.

 

[Minime]

Now THATS clever! Will try that one as its OH's first child.

 

[Kim]

Good idea but it never worked for me. OH gets the higher rate for HIS son and I get Rubie's in just MY name but we still get less for Rubie.....????

 

[Jo]

There is abig thing about in the Daily Mirror this morning and this is the link to a petition if you want to sign it
http://makechildbenefitcount.org/

 

Signed and sent! Hopefully the chancellor will sit up and listen! xxx

 

[lozzi]

its stupid isnt it,

its an anti poverty movement that is tryin to do it,

its a ridiculous rule, just coz one child is older than teh others why does it mean they need more money?!

Its one of the stupid governments ways of trying to save money!