This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Eligibiliry/residence rule
- Myth of Cambridge admissions being just merit based - Mainly international students
- maintenance loan issue
- Tuition/Maintenance loan cancelled
- EU migrant worker
- Student loan calculation unfair?
- Employer Background Checks, Will employer know I am a First year Undergrad?
- step parents and student finance
- Partners income withheld
- SFE won't process my application without student halls contract BEFORE I START Uni
- Student Finance Form for Parents doesn't make sense for pensions
- Household income issue
- What do I do?
- ESA while studying at university?
- Change of residency for a migrant worker after the 1st uni year (presettled to settl)
- Student finance for Graduate dentistry
- transfer to open university- student finance
- I have not applied for maintenance loan but now i have changed my mind.
- Student Loan
- Student finance 2023 for transfers
Students Loans Are Unfair and Need Changing
Scroll to see replies
Original post by wildrover
Parents should be legally forced to support their children, even if it means running one car instead of two or buying a ford instead of a porche; anyone earning over 50 000 can afford to make up the difference.
That's not really fair imo. The financial constraits, on people earning, that much differs, so their disposable cash, at the end of the month may be limited.
Original post by Junaid16
That's not really fair imo. The financial constraits, on people earning, that much differs, so their disposable cash, at the end of the month may be limited.
It's about priorities though, do you look after your child's future or upgrade to that new Mercedes you've been eyeing up for the past few months?
Original post by zzzsleep
Yes the system is completely stupid. Why do they assume that a parent is going to give money to their adult children regardless of how much they earn??
The other annoying thing is that they don't take into account how many siblings you have who are also at university. Parents with lots of children at uni at the same time, even if they are fairly well off, clearly won't be able to give the extra 3k to each of their children every year.
The other annoying thing is that they don't take into account how many siblings you have who are also at university. Parents with lots of children at uni at the same time, even if they are fairly well off, clearly won't be able to give the extra 3k to each of their children every year.
If it doesn't affect anything, why is there a question asking this on the form?
Original post by ilickbatteries
Here's why.
My mother doesn't work. As a result of this, I will get a lot of money from the SLC. Now, I'm not complaining. The money is nice. However, I can't help but think that this is very unfair.
My best friends are all fairly well-off people. As a result of this, their children get little in comparison to the amount I get from the SLC. One of my best friends is studying Law at Huddersfield. His household income is above 50k, and as a result he gets around £4,700 and no grant.
On the other hand, I'll be getting around £6,400 in a loan and a grant from the SLC. On top of this, I'll be getting over £1,000 from the University of York just because my household income is under £25,000.
While my friend's parents do help him out, I still can't help but think this is unfair. Why should I get nearly £3,000 more than he does? It's not like he's done anything to deserve getting less than me, or that I've done anything to deserve getting more.
Not everyone is as lucky as my friend in terms of the parental support they receive. While I struggle to work out how some wealthy parents struggle to provide for their children who are at university, I accept that some do struggle. Some even choose not to. Why should these students be deprived of a decent amount of money to live on, just because of their parents income? It'll only force them into work, giving them less time to study.
It seems to me like a lot of it is based around enticing people from backgrounds like mine into HE. Now, that's a fair enough concept, but people shouldn't enticed into HE. It's great trying to get more working-class people into higher education but it should be done differently. People shouldn't have to be enticed.
It seems that the government are putting pressure on universities to increase their intake of students from low-income backgrounds, leading to universities offering bursaries to students from low-income backgrounds to bring them in.
I don't even need the £1000+ that York will give me. If anyone needs it, it's the kids who come from middle-class backgrounds who are offered a pittance from the SLC and who's parents already have enough financial pressures (mortgages etc).
tl;dr
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
My mother doesn't work. As a result of this, I will get a lot of money from the SLC. Now, I'm not complaining. The money is nice. However, I can't help but think that this is very unfair.
My best friends are all fairly well-off people. As a result of this, their children get little in comparison to the amount I get from the SLC. One of my best friends is studying Law at Huddersfield. His household income is above 50k, and as a result he gets around £4,700 and no grant.
On the other hand, I'll be getting around £6,400 in a loan and a grant from the SLC. On top of this, I'll be getting over £1,000 from the University of York just because my household income is under £25,000.
While my friend's parents do help him out, I still can't help but think this is unfair. Why should I get nearly £3,000 more than he does? It's not like he's done anything to deserve getting less than me, or that I've done anything to deserve getting more.
Not everyone is as lucky as my friend in terms of the parental support they receive. While I struggle to work out how some wealthy parents struggle to provide for their children who are at university, I accept that some do struggle. Some even choose not to. Why should these students be deprived of a decent amount of money to live on, just because of their parents income? It'll only force them into work, giving them less time to study.
It seems to me like a lot of it is based around enticing people from backgrounds like mine into HE. Now, that's a fair enough concept, but people shouldn't enticed into HE. It's great trying to get more working-class people into higher education but it should be done differently. People shouldn't have to be enticed.
It seems that the government are putting pressure on universities to increase their intake of students from low-income backgrounds, leading to universities offering bursaries to students from low-income backgrounds to bring them in.
I don't even need the £1000+ that York will give me. If anyone needs it, it's the kids who come from middle-class backgrounds who are offered a pittance from the SLC and who's parents already have enough financial pressures (mortgages etc).
tl;dr
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
I think its unfair in quite a few cases, however if you judged it across the board, whilst a middle class child may never receive financial aid from their parents, if they wound up in serious financial difficulties, theres no way their parents would just stand by and watch. So they've always got that backup there.
Whilst someone from a poorer background wouldnt have as much backup, if any at all, and that could cost them their education. The law is always going to be unfair on some people, but at the end of the day it's got to serve the majority.
Yup it sucks. It's even worse if your family owns their own business, when i first applied to uni i recieved minimal financial support because my parents business made a profit >50k a year. Unfortunately it didn't take into account that a lot of that was reinvested back into the business, and as a consequence a lot of kids from families with more disposable income than mine actually got more financial support than me.
(edited 12 years ago)
I get as much money as i can from the SLC, which is around the £3500 mark...not enough to pay for accommodation at the vast majority of universities before I eat a single meal all year. My parents have to help me, there is no option about it and they're not the richest people, they're just over the border. If they hadn't had the money spare I just couldn't have gone to university, system needs changing.
Original post by ilickbatteries
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
I don't think anybody gets enough from the current system; even the maximum loan allowance with grant does not always cover costs.
Although it would mean larger student debts, I believe the system should provide a loan that every student can actually live off without the need for parental support or University hardship funds. Those with lower incomes should continue to get a large % given as a grant instead of a loan, but those students with richer parents should also not be penalised for paying off the loan early.
The system we have now is unfair, especially on those from larger familes on middle incomes (they get little SFE help but parents are probably over stretched with 2/3 kids to look after) and older students (who are still expected to get family support up to age 24!).
(edited 12 years ago)
I still need to hear back from SL 
Original post by Misnomer
It has really helped me. My family has really struggled and I have needed to the money to help out with rent, to pay for travel, to buy books and to pay for food. As a child, I didn't get to go on holiday, I didn't ski, surf, go horse riding...my family could not afford anything. My family are so poor that they cannot ever financially support me.
Not being able to ski/surf/horse ride/have holidays isn't exactly the definition of poverty though is it? My family couldn't afford any of those things either, but that doesn't make me deprived or anything.
Besides, the OP isn't saying those from low income families should get less, as far as I understand; he's saying middle incomes should get more, which I agree with. In a large family with various financial commitments, parents earning 50k might be unable to subsidise the loan. Everyone should ideally be given at least a loan big enough to live off, as plenty of people, for whatever reason, cannot count on their parents' support. The standard loan doesn't even cover the cost of accommodation at a lot of universities. In fact, even a loan and a (smaller) grant won't cover the only choice of accommodation where I'm going.
Original post by ilickbatteries
Here's why.
My mother doesn't work. As a result of this, I will get a lot of money from the SLC. Now, I'm not complaining. The money is nice. However, I can't help but think that this is very unfair.
My best friends are all fairly well-off people. As a result of this, their children get little in comparison to the amount I get from the SLC. One of my best friends is studying Law at Huddersfield. His household income is above 50k, and as a result he gets around £4,700 and no grant.
On the other hand, I'll be getting around £6,400 in a loan and a grant from the SLC. On top of this, I'll be getting over £1,000 from the University of York just because my household income is under £25,000.
While my friend's parents do help him out, I still can't help but think this is unfair. Why should I get nearly £3,000 more than he does? It's not like he's done anything to deserve getting less than me, or that I've done anything to deserve getting more.
Not everyone is as lucky as my friend in terms of the parental support they receive. While I struggle to work out how some wealthy parents struggle to provide for their children who are at university, I accept that some do struggle. Some even choose not to. Why should these students be deprived of a decent amount of money to live on, just because of their parents income? It'll only force them into work, giving them less time to study.
It seems to me like a lot of it is based around enticing people from backgrounds like mine into HE. Now, that's a fair enough concept, but people shouldn't enticed into HE. It's great trying to get more working-class people into higher education but it should be done differently. People shouldn't have to be enticed.
It seems that the government are putting pressure on universities to increase their intake of students from low-income backgrounds, leading to universities offering bursaries to students from low-income backgrounds to bring them in.
I don't even need the £1000+ that York will give me. If anyone needs it, it's the kids who come from middle-class backgrounds who are offered a pittance from the SLC and who's parents already have enough financial pressures (mortgages etc).
tl;dr
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
My mother doesn't work. As a result of this, I will get a lot of money from the SLC. Now, I'm not complaining. The money is nice. However, I can't help but think that this is very unfair.
My best friends are all fairly well-off people. As a result of this, their children get little in comparison to the amount I get from the SLC. One of my best friends is studying Law at Huddersfield. His household income is above 50k, and as a result he gets around £4,700 and no grant.
On the other hand, I'll be getting around £6,400 in a loan and a grant from the SLC. On top of this, I'll be getting over £1,000 from the University of York just because my household income is under £25,000.
While my friend's parents do help him out, I still can't help but think this is unfair. Why should I get nearly £3,000 more than he does? It's not like he's done anything to deserve getting less than me, or that I've done anything to deserve getting more.
Not everyone is as lucky as my friend in terms of the parental support they receive. While I struggle to work out how some wealthy parents struggle to provide for their children who are at university, I accept that some do struggle. Some even choose not to. Why should these students be deprived of a decent amount of money to live on, just because of their parents income? It'll only force them into work, giving them less time to study.
It seems to me like a lot of it is based around enticing people from backgrounds like mine into HE. Now, that's a fair enough concept, but people shouldn't enticed into HE. It's great trying to get more working-class people into higher education but it should be done differently. People shouldn't have to be enticed.
It seems that the government are putting pressure on universities to increase their intake of students from low-income backgrounds, leading to universities offering bursaries to students from low-income backgrounds to bring them in.
I don't even need the £1000+ that York will give me. If anyone needs it, it's the kids who come from middle-class backgrounds who are offered a pittance from the SLC and who's parents already have enough financial pressures (mortgages etc).
tl;dr
Working-class kids get too much from the SLC. Middle-class kids don't get enough. Needs to change.
I have to remind you that there is no such thing called fair in the World , you just have to live with that i m afraid . The system tries to balance major factors and ofcourse there are some people who are bound to gain and lose , thats life .
the student loan system is unfair. just because someone earns more the people on £25,000 does not mean that they can afford to support there child.
i am one of the middle class students that wont b getting the full amount and because i have no job and no chance of my parents supporting me as they cant afford it. because of this moving to the campus at uni is not option for me.
what makes me different from the working class family? surely its judging us by what our parents do with there life which is not fair.
however i pay back less then those people who r on low incomes cux i will get less.
i am one of the middle class students that wont b getting the full amount and because i have no job and no chance of my parents supporting me as they cant afford it. because of this moving to the campus at uni is not option for me.
what makes me different from the working class family? surely its judging us by what our parents do with there life which is not fair.
however i pay back less then those people who r on low incomes cux i will get less.
For those saying parents earning 50k can afford to subsidise their children. They need to take into account the parents outgoings. 50k in Hull (where I'm originally from) will get you a big house and plenty of disposable income. 50k in the south east will get you a small house with little disposable income. It also doesn't take into account other siblings either.
Original post by TheSownRose
I don't think it's fair that my middle-class friends always had three meals a day, or they could afford to take a bus to school when it was raining (or even had a raincoat when it was raining.) I don't think it's fair that I can remember not having the money to celebrate Christmas or my birthday.
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
What isn't fair is that you didn't have these things, not that middle class children did. I'm not having a go, but it seems like you're saying that middle class students not having enough to live on at university is fair because some working class children didn't have enough to live in in their childhood, which is a strange kind of logic.
Original post by ajp100688
It's about priorities though, do you look after your child's future or upgrade to that new Mercedes you've been eyeing up for the past few months?
I'll be amazed if you can point to someone on a 45-55k gross income who has children and a mortgage and can afford to buy a £30,000 car after only a few months of deliberation.
My family wouldn't even contemplate buying a Mercedes because it's completely unaffordable for us. The thread is dealing with people with parents who have a gross income of around 45-55k. There are so many assumptions about what families on this income can afford readily and most of them are wrong. If you need evidence then my family is a perfect example. We live in a reasonably small three bedroom bungalow that my Dad built himself as it was cheaper than buying a house 19 years ago. We have a Vauxhall Zafira, not quite a Mercedes I'm sure you'll agree. My brother has a car that he has paid for from his own income (also a Vauxhall funnily enough). We have never been abroad on holiday.
However, I recognise that we are privileged to have many things that other people do not and I am grateful that my Dad is able to afford them. I also know that owning a car is not even a possibility for some people and that housing is whatever they can get.
Yes, my parents can afford to help me through university and I am glad of that because I certainly wouldn't be there without them. However, I want to be financially independent and know that my life choices are not having a significant effect on my parents.
The choice they had was not between supporting me through university or buying a new Mercedes: their choice was to either give me financial support or tell me that I would not be able to attend university at all. That is what I find unfair about the system.
Original post by BigV
Although it would mean larger student debts, I believe the system should provide a loan that every student can actually live off without the need for parental support. Those with lower incomes should continue to get a large % given as a grant instead of a loan, but those students with richer parents should also not be penalised for paying off the loan early.
The system we have now is unfair, especially on those from larger familes on middle incomes (they get little SFE help but parents are probably over stretched with 2/3 kids to look after) and older students (who are still expected to get family support up to age 24!).
The system we have now is unfair, especially on those from larger familes on middle incomes (they get little SFE help but parents are probably over stretched with 2/3 kids to look after) and older students (who are still expected to get family support up to age 24!).
I agree with this.
The terms of paying back the loan are nothing to do with your parents so why should their income have any bearing on the loan in the first place? If everyone is given enough to live on then the issue of extra support is non-existent. Of course this is the ideal. To make it affordable paying off loans would have to be more efficient.
Original post by TheSownRose
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
That chip on your shoulder and sense of entitlement go hand in hand don't they
Original post by wactm
if your parents earned £50k+ they would be willing to help support you.
The household income is in excess of 100k yet I receive nothing, I payed my accommodation, living plus other expenses (books, clothes, phone etc) and even travel home during holidays myself - having come from little himself my Father doesn't see the need to provide for me when I am perfectly capable of doing so myself. I don't understand why those from less well off backgrounds need extra finance when you can survive with a part time job and the basic 3.5K p.a loan. This summer I'm working full time in a factory to save and pay off my overdraft, this is how things are in the real world. The sooner people realise this harsh reality is the sooner they'll adjust their expectations and succeed.
To OP; I agree that the current system is flawed. A single across-the-board loan should be provided to everyone as this also means people from lower income families wont be given a massive loan which they will only have to pay off anyway
Original post by TheSownRose
Original post by TheSownRose
I don't think it's fair that my middle-class friends always had three meals a day, or they could afford to take a bus to school when it was raining (or even had a raincoat when it was raining.) I don't think it's fair that I can remember not having the money to celebrate Christmas or my birthday.
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
I know that it's quite harsh, but in some ways I view my higher amount of student finance as a 'reward' to having a ****ty childhood.
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that, and it must have been tough for you. However, having experienced it, surely you shouldn't wish it on others later in life? It's great that you'll have plenty of money for uni but it's not so great that other people may struggle.
I realise that it's unrealistic to expect the SLC to evaluate everyone's application in detail to know exactly how much they should get which is why the system is the way it is. As a general thread response, after SLC I still need £4000 a year from my mum, a single parent on part-time work. It's quite a big financial burden on her.
I have friends who have got maximum EMA, and will receive about £6500 from the SLC for maintenance, yet are always on holidays to places as far as New Zealand, buying expensive clothes, getting the latest gadgets, spending lots of money going out, even travelling up and down the country on a whim.
I literally don't know what my family's doing that we can't afford any of those things. I'm not well off enough to spend money on these things nor worse off enough to get any advantages like EMA. There's only two of us, so it's not like we even need a big income. Baffles me.
I have friends who have got maximum EMA, and will receive about £6500 from the SLC for maintenance, yet are always on holidays to places as far as New Zealand, buying expensive clothes, getting the latest gadgets, spending lots of money going out, even travelling up and down the country on a whim.
I literally don't know what my family's doing that we can't afford any of those things. I'm not well off enough to spend money on these things nor worse off enough to get any advantages like EMA. There's only two of us, so it's not like we even need a big income. Baffles me.
The system isn't ideal, I'll give you that. However, to give everyone as much money as they need (say £6k per person) whether as a loan or grant is unaffordable for the economy, therefore there has to be a way of splitting the money more "fairly". The problem is people whose families earn just over £50k/60k and get minimum loan (£3500), but genuinely can't afford to support their kids - as someone else pointed out, £50k in the North if you only have 1 child is quite a reasonable salary - however if you've got 3 kids and live in London, it's really not that much. My partner and I used to earn about £45k between us, and paying the rent on a 1 bed flat (£675pm) was quite hard. We weren't on the poverty line by any means but having children on that wage would have been a nightmare. The system needs to take in to account where people's parents live, and also acknowledge the cost of having other children - at the moment I think they deduct £1k per child per year off your family's income when assessing you - so a family earning £50k with 3 kids, 1 at uni, would be assessed on £48k. It costs way more than 1000 per year to bring up a child!!!
The people that really surprise me are the people I would really classify as rich (ie sent their children to private school, go skiing every year, perhaps have more than one house) who refuse to support their children out of principle. My housemate at uni went to one of the most expensive private schools in the UK, costing around £20k per year, then his parents refused to give him a penny at uni. WTF? They cared enough about his education to spend all that money on it, yet when he turned 18 basically cut him off? I'd far rather have gone to the local comp, and then had a couple of extra grand to live off at uni each each year.
The people that really surprise me are the people I would really classify as rich (ie sent their children to private school, go skiing every year, perhaps have more than one house) who refuse to support their children out of principle. My housemate at uni went to one of the most expensive private schools in the UK, costing around £20k per year, then his parents refused to give him a penny at uni. WTF? They cared enough about his education to spend all that money on it, yet when he turned 18 basically cut him off? I'd far rather have gone to the local comp, and then had a couple of extra grand to live off at uni each each year.
Original post by T.Reid
That chip on your shoulder and sense of entitlement go hand in hand don't they
The household income is in excess of 100k yet I receive nothing, I payed my accommodation, living plus other expenses (books, clothes, phone etc) and even travel home during holidays myself - having come from little himself my Father doesn't see the need to provide for me when I am perfectly capable of doing so myself. I don't understand why those from less well off backgrounds need extra finance when you can survive with a part time job and the basic 3.5K p.a loan. This summer I'm working full time in a factory to save and pay off my overdraft, this is how things are in the real world. The sooner people realise this harsh reality is the sooner they'll adjust their expectations and succeed.
To OP; I agree that the current system is flawed. A single across-the-board loan should be provided to everyone as this also means people from lower income families wont be given a massive loan which they will only have to pay off anyway
The household income is in excess of 100k yet I receive nothing, I payed my accommodation, living plus other expenses (books, clothes, phone etc) and even travel home during holidays myself - having come from little himself my Father doesn't see the need to provide for me when I am perfectly capable of doing so myself. I don't understand why those from less well off backgrounds need extra finance when you can survive with a part time job and the basic 3.5K p.a loan. This summer I'm working full time in a factory to save and pay off my overdraft, this is how things are in the real world. The sooner people realise this harsh reality is the sooner they'll adjust their expectations and succeed.
To OP; I agree that the current system is flawed. A single across-the-board loan should be provided to everyone as this also means people from lower income families wont be given a massive loan which they will only have to pay off anyway
Your dad just seems like a bit of a **** if he wont lend you 3% of his wage. I know if my mum had that kinda of money she would have no problem giving me it.
Also you go on about the real world. The real world is easy mate. I'm 18 and run a small online business (less than a day of work per week) and make more than you would working full time in that factory.
it is fair.. if your middle or upper class and your parents dont want to contribute thats not the student finances problem tbh. You just need to man up and ask them to help you out. People who get the maximum loans dont get this opportunity, so no, the system is fair
the point of student finance, is that if you dont get as much, its because your parents CAN help you out.. if they dont want to.. well... you expect student finance to cut a poor guys loans cause its not fair? i fail to see this logic
the point of student finance, is that if you dont get as much, its because your parents CAN help you out.. if they dont want to.. well... you expect student finance to cut a poor guys loans cause its not fair? i fail to see this logic
(edited 12 years ago)
Related discussions
- Eligibiliry/residence rule
- Myth of Cambridge admissions being just merit based - Mainly international students
- maintenance loan issue
- Tuition/Maintenance loan cancelled
- EU migrant worker
- Student loan calculation unfair?
- Employer Background Checks, Will employer know I am a First year Undergrad?
- step parents and student finance
- Partners income withheld
- SFE won't process my application without student halls contract BEFORE I START Uni
- Student Finance Form for Parents doesn't make sense for pensions
- Household income issue
- What do I do?
- ESA while studying at university?
- Change of residency for a migrant worker after the 1st uni year (presettled to settl)
- Student finance for Graduate dentistry
- transfer to open university- student finance
- I have not applied for maintenance loan but now i have changed my mind.
- Student Loan
- Student finance 2023 for transfers
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
I think I have a Cifas Marker on my name , can I still open any banks ?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Has anyone had their student finance paid into their partners or parents bank?Last reply 1 month ago
Introduction to UK Financial regulations and professional integrity SCAMTrending
Last reply 1 week ago
I think I have a Cifas Marker on my name , can I still open any banks ?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Has anyone had their student finance paid into their partners or parents bank?Last reply 1 month ago
Introduction to UK Financial regulations and professional integrity SCAM
