We all know that charities are constantly appealing to everyone to donate money and items that can raise money so that they can continue to support the poor in the UK and abroad. In recent years cash donations have reduced but donations such as clothes have increased. As many people shop at low budget retailers such as George (Asda), Primark and other supermarket clothing brands they are more likely to give away their ‘throwaway fashion’ clothing in the hope of staying up to date with all the latest fashion trends.

This has been a very good way of raising money for charities up until now, teenage criminals have now found clothes banks as a new target to fund their lifestyle and ‘steal from the poor’. Although many areas have a regular appeal for clothes through charities supplying a big bag for people to fill up and leave on the doorstep there is a higher risk of stealing by donating this way. This is why clothes banks were set up as a secure way for people to donate clothes by pushing it through a big letterbox in a container that is secured by a padlock and emptied regularly.

Younger criminals have now found that if they have a friend that is slim enough they can fit through the small opening and steal the clothes by pushing it out the slot. Of course they are not making huge sums of money as most of the clothes are sold on eBay, car boot sales and even the market stalls but charities are losing millions by this every year.

There are thousands of clothes banks all over the UK with most of the items being re-sold in charity shops or given away to the homeless both here and sent to Third World countries. A small percentage is also recycled and turned into other wearable items. Those who are targeting clothes banks are also risking their life as there have been a few deaths by people falling in and suffocating; others have also gotten stuck as the opening is very small and hard to get out of without any help from the inside.

Thieves who are targeting clothes are also very brazen as one group were caught during daylight hours in a council owned car park that had cameras to capture all. Once a gang find a good clothes bank they are most likely to keep returning again and again. The best thing to do is to bag up the clothes you want to donate and personally hand it over to a charity shop, don’t leave it outside but go in and donate it properly. At least then you know you have handed it in personally to a shop assistant who will then sort it and put them out for re-selling.

Once again half term is upon us and families who have been struggling the past year have once again had to sacrifice going on holiday due to holiday companies putting up their rates during half term. Going on holiday should not be reserved for the rich; everyone should be able to afford going abroad for a short break to experience different cultures and traditions. We all work and pay taxes so having time off where you can truly do nothing god send.

We face this problem year after year but this year has seen holidays soar by up to 269% in some places. Spain has always been a favourite for families because it’s cheap, sunny, cheerful and flying times are minimal. A family of four can go to Spain for as little as £1000 but during half term the same holidays has been found to cost over £6000.

It is a myth when people assume that the majority of people who go on holiday are the rich or benefit scroungers, there are many hard working families that plan their holidays in advance and save beforehand just to be able to afford one holiday a year abroad. Most take advantage of early booking offers and no deposit holidays, they then have to pay off the balance up to 8 weeks before they travel.

Why should people avoid going away during half term when prices are higher? It’s not fair that travelling a week or even a few days earlier means the holiday is cheaper. Some families have even resorted to taking children out of school to save money on half term breaks. You do risk a fine if you don’t have a valid reason to take a child out of school but in some cases fines are only £50-£100 and the savings outweigh the consequences.

Sadly there is no such thing as a cheap holiday getaway during the half term season anymore as the UK also puts up their prices for holidaying within the country. Going to Cornwall, Blackpool, Wales, Scotland and the coast were all very popular but nowadays families opt for caravan holidays instead to save on accommodation costs.

Childless couples are happy that prices are going up because they say children ruin holidays for those that don’t have any but if you do not have children you can fly whenever you want, you aren’t restricted because of school term. There are also many hotels that offer accommodation only to adults so if you require a family friendly hotel you’ll need to find just that.

The bottom line is if people are prepared to pay these silly prices during half term then holiday companies will continue to quote them just that, refuse point blank and book early, there are many deals that can be made where you save tons. Booking as early as a year in advance can see savings of up to 800%.

As you cannot predict if you will get cancer sometime in the future not many people seek out health insurance but even then health insurance does not currently cover out of pocket expenses such as parking. In most places around the country concessions are available so those who are sick and need to attend on a regular basis can purchase a week or month parking ticket at a reduced cost. There are not many places where you can get free parking because of regular treatments for example cancer sufferers.

Asking sick patients such as those battling cancer to pay for parking is also branded as ‘tax on the sick’ you cannot prevent cancer as it is one of those illnesses that simply do not have a cure so people who get cancer did not ask for it nor can they do much to make themselves better without the help of doctors. As insurance companies continue to compete for customers a radical new policy will allow the policyholder to receive as much as £300 a year to put towards parking should they fall ill and require regular hospital visits.

It is estimated that the average cancer sufferer requires 50 visits to a hospital to receive treatment at an average annual cost of £325, those that are ill for a long time will need to take a break for a while whilst they recover whilst others will have to quit working altogether. Cancer patients and their family do not have the means to meet this annual fee for parking as cancer patients will usually require someone to take them to and from the hospital for treatment that means in some cases they need to survive on one wage.

Its madness that insurance companies can see the financial troubles faced by families who need cancer treatment when NHS trusts cannot. We understand that parking cannot always be free but it seems unfair that those that must come in regularly to receive life saving treatment are made to pay at least £6 in parking fees every time they visit.

Another blow to ‘tax on the sick’ is that parking fees vary a lot over the UK, Wales and Scotland do not make their patients pay as much on parking fees with some hospitals abolishing parking fees altogether. The new coalition government is adamant that no new plans will be brought in to reduce or abolish parking fees for the sick. Macmillan Cancer Support says they will continue to campaign for the abolishment of parking fees for the sick.

A few years ago as part of Labours campaign new fathers were allowed up to two weeks paid paternity leave to spend time with their newborn child, mothers are currently entitled up to one year depending on the organisation but a minimum of 6 months is what most new mothers take when they go on maternity leave.

Nick Clegg announced earlier this year that he hopes to increase paternity leave for fathers to up to 10 months! In the new reform to paternity leave parents will be able to share the parental responsibility and share leave between the two of them. It may even be possible to split time off into small breaks such as a few weeks off at a time.

Although it is illegal to not hire a women of child bearing age because of the chance that she might fall pregnant experts believe that if the new plans for men go through employers will shun taking on men who have not yet had children or who fall into that category.

In April new changes will be brought in allowing parents to share up to six months paid leave following the birth of a child. If the new proposal goes through it will not be introduced until at least 2015 so those who were looking forward to this unusual proposal will have to wait or put off starting a family.

Many employers have branded this proposal absurd as it would cause major disruption and chaos across the country. Some mothers also disagree as they find the thought of dealing with a newborn and also a partner at the same time to be overwhelming. Also in the first few weeks of a child being born there isn’t much for a man to do other than burping, changing nappies and putting baby to sleep. Unless a mother chooses not to breastfeed everything is usually done by the mother.

Some men also find that it is not their place to stay home and raise their kids they would much rather be working and earning money to secure the future of their families. Men who are most likely to agree to these proposals are those that have good jobs and could afford to take a pay cut for a few months, most families will not be able to financially survive on just one pay cheque as most women do not go back to work until after a year or in 30% of cases not at all.

Currently there is a boom in IVF where those seeking egg donors have to travel abroad in search of a donation. In the UK the current rate for egg donors is just £250, as the process to retrieve the eggs are so gruelling and require time off work and discipline not many women step forward to donate their eggs to couples who are not able to conceive naturally.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority are unveiling new plans that will allow donors to receive thousands of pounds in compensation for their time and inconvenience caused. This move would mean that IVF couples will no longer need to travel great distances in order to achieve the dream of having their own family.

The HFEA are calling for a review to be made with many welcoming this plan as a breakthrough in IVF in the UK. In America women are paid up to £5,000 for donating their eggs to infertile couples, other countries such as India, Croatia, Spain and Bulgaria are also known for their abundance in donated eggs as many young women do it as a solution to money problems.

There are some organisations that argue however that many women will use this as a way to make money without knowing the full risks and complications that can arise when ‘harvesting’ eggs. Powerful and dangerous drugs are inject to stimulate egg release, women can be prone to gaining weight and retaining fluid as well as being left scarred if the eggs are retrieved incorrectly.

A few years ago a young woman decided to donate her eggs to a couple who sought help through the local newspaper, as she had already had a child she decided to go through the gruelling process of harvesting her eggs. When the eggs were retrieved it left scarring in her fallopian tube, this meant she was unable to conceive naturally without help. After much investigation it was found that the harvested eggs were not taken out correctly leaving the poor woman unable to bear children naturally.

Many believe that those who are conceived using donor eggs may not know their real families and may end up with a ‘brother or sister’ as their partner unaware that they share the same mother. Cases like this are rare but have happened across the world. Another problem that this is likely to create is that those who do not earn that much will be forced out of the IVF market and will be forced to buy eggs illegally.

Last month the government announced that they would scrap the Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) as the new coalition government tries to save and recover money from the faltering economy. EMA was introduced in 2004 as financial support for families who were on low income. If parents of 16-18 year olds earned less than £30,800 they would be eligible to receive a weekly EMA payment of £10 to £30, an additional £30 – £50 was also awarded if students arrived on time for a whole term as an incentive to stay in education.

When EMA was introduced it provided a lifeline for students who needed to find money to fund transport as many who choose to go to college have to travel a fair distance to study the course they desire. As many families were under financial hardship EMA meant that 16 – 18 year olds no longer needed pocket money from their parents and could get the basics for school such as transport, books, food and other educational expenses. Money is the biggest issue when it comes to staying in education as many cannot find or fit in a part time job as well as studying full time.

The government is still adamant that they plan to stop EMA for good with applications being suspended and no longer accepted. As much as 70% of students will not be able to continue studying as a result of this because the cost of transport and educational material such as textbooks cost too much, as the recession continues to bite the chances of getting a part time job is also bleak.

Of course like everything there are also many who have abused EMA and turn up just so they can receive the money to spend on themselves, this is unfair to those who want to learn as they cause disruption to lessons and those who want to learn are affected. EMA benefits many working families and with it now being scrapped the government should be braced with an influx of teenagers who will just go on to claim job seekers allowance.

EMA should be stricter as I have seen so many families who earn above the £30,800 thresh hold still able to claim the maximum £30 a week for their children. If you have the means to pay for transport and other expenses then it should not be abused. It is unlikely that EMA will be resumed any time soon so I will be keeping an eye on what happens next and how many more students are going to be penalised for the minority who do not deserve or need EMA.

Have you ever wondered why some things are less than half price in a sale? Well it’s usually because they want to get in new stock so the older stuff is no longer ‘in season’ or fashionable anymore. When people see sales they jump at the chance to save even 10% but there are some retailers that slash prices by up 70%. Everyone loves a good bargain but what happens if you buy something cheap then find that the price has gone up slightly?

Well you would be the lucky few who cashed in on time but is it right to put up prices in a sale when an item was previously sold at a cheaper price? This is exactly what happened to me. I recently bought a whole new wardrobe from ASOS as the sale items were very tempting and not available in the shops. Here is how I saved money:
Party dress £14 down from £46
Cardigan £14 down from £48
Winter coat £40 down from £80
Dress £13 down from £28
Maxi dress £14 down from £40
Total cost: £95

If I had bought the same items before the sale the total cost would’ve been: £242 so by getting the items I needed not wanted I saved a whopping £147! Now it has only been two weeks since these purchases and I went back to look for something on the website, funny enough some of the items that I bought have gone up in price! The difference I would pay now is an increase of £30 so how can sale items go up after the peak time of a sale has ended?

I haven’t bought anything from other retailers so I am unable to compare if others are also doing this but I feel that all of them are the same. They lure people with cheap sale prices then eventually put them up a little but unless you know the original sale price you won’t know if you have truly saved money.

Some items are very overpriced anyway and just by doing a little research you can see how much some items vary. I saw a travel cot ranging from £80-£120 but can’t understand the huge price difference when it’s the same item? If consumers were a little wiser when it comes to shopping then maybe retailers wouldn’t be able to get away with such huge price differences and unworthy price tags. I have found that going to the source or even ordering from abroad can save you money, the new Nintendo DS is retailing for $250 or £152 but here in the UK it will be put on the shelves with a £220 price tag!

Have you noticed a price increase in your weekly shop?
If you have then you are part of a large majority of consumers who have found that supermarkets and other stores have hiked up their prices by more than the 2.5% VAT increase. Stores are expected to inflate their prices by up to 8% as unsuspecting customers go about their weekly shop. By law retailers do not have to change their in store label prices until February 1st the latest, so they are taking advantage of this and hiking up their prices more than they should.

Unfortunately you cannot do anything about this as many store do have notices up stating that their in store label prices may not yet reflect the new VAT increase. Although the average weekly isn’t supposed to increase by that much I and many other shoppers have found that since the VAT increase some products have gone up far too much!

Some stores have decided not to increase their prices to include the new increase and will instead cover the 2.5% keeping their prices lower than other stores. But when demand gets too high they too will be forced to reflect the VAT increase but may add a little more to make a profit.

Just before the VAT increase petrol went up and then with the VAT increase it went up by a further 2.7p a litre, the average price for a litre of petrol is £1.25p a litre and with another rise indicated in fuel prices in April it’s only going to get more expensive.

At present children’s clothing, newspapers and food are not subject to VAT but many shoppers have found that many items at the supermarket have increased so is this just a coincidence? On demeaning part of the VAT increase is that all the stock that was bought under the 17.5% VAT conditions will now be re-sold at the higher rate, therefore retailers will be making a profit. Everyone knows that retailers buy in bulk therefore make a profit on goods sold anyway. So by increasing the VAT it will be the consumer that loses out whilst the retailers line their pockets.

Some experts believe that as the nation continues to grip harder on their finances retail prices will be a joke as people will not pay, instead many will boycott or buy things that ‘fell off the back of the lorry’ as a way to save money and make a stand. Most goods are overpriced anyway and the only way retailers make a sale is because people are willing to pay the silly advertised prices. The sooner everyone wises up and refuse to pay the better and cheaper products will get.

As the VAT rise continues to pinch at our purse strings many shoppers have had to start shopping wisely just to save some money. Its estimated that women shoppers spend on average £1,000 a year on clothes shopping with the new VAT rise that equates to £200 in VAT alone, for those who can afford to spend £5,000 on clothes shopping (one in ten women) it equates to a whopping £1,000 in VAT!

Clothes are an essential part of living, though where you shop and how much you spend can be debatable on if it’s a luxury item and if it’s worth the price tag. More and more people are opting to shop at charity shops for some budget buys and others are using the internet to shift their unwanted clothes and make some money to put towards purchasing new clothes.

Children’s clothes not only cost less because they require less creativity when designing and making they are also VAT free, even so parents spend more than £500 a year for kids clothes . There have been many women who have found that depending on their dress size they can also fit into children’s sizes for a fraction of the price. One such retailer is Marks and Spencer’s who sells 16 year old clothes with a 30” waist, the same as an adult size 12, there are many other retailers out there who have size charts that you can compare.

Unfortunately there are many retailers that have caught onto this idea and have changed their sizing guides for example La Redoute, age 16 clothes are a few inches less than what they used to be so depending on the adults measurements they wouldn’t be able to fit into their children sizes.

It does seem unfair that adult and children clothes are very similar in terms of latest fashion and fabric but adults have to pay VAT on them but unfortunately that just the way it is. Unless people start shopping wisely like at outlets and during the sale only the prices that are stated on clothing will continue to sell as people are prepared to buy them.

Try to shop wisely and seek out the bargains, you can save money on clothes shopping all throughout the year if you want to you just need to know how to look. There are large retailers out there that regularly sell clothes up to 70% all year round, so if you cannot wait for the quarterly sales shop at the permanently discounted stores.

For the last few years since the recession hit the country we all know how hard it is to find a good mortgage deal let alone be approved for one, if the Financial Services Authority (FSA) have their way then applications are going to be more intrusive and many more mortgages are going to be turned down.

The FSA are hoping to push through new guidelines about how to perform risk assessments on customers to make sure that they can afford the mortgage repayments. If the proposal goes through then you will be penalised for having a gym memberships, going on holidays and even for spending money on leisure and entertainment. In future mortgage lenders will ask to see bank statements for the last 6 months, these will then be analysed to see what potential mortgage customers spend their money on. Using this as evidence a lender can choose to decline lending the money for a mortgage if they could prove that the customer wouldn’t be able to afford it.

At the moment utility bills, council tax and other general bills are taken into consideration but if a lender sees that you are a shopaholic or spend too much on meals out and entertainment then you will be turned down for a mortgage.

In the FSA’s defence they say that when a customer applies for a mortgage they have to assume they will continue to spend money the same way prior to having a mortgage so they don’t take into account that most people’s spending habits change when they enter into a long term contract such as a mortgage. It’s hard enough for most people to get approval for a mortgage and it looks like it will only get harder, most people who apply for a mortgage have waited years are saving up and sacrificing holidays and or leisure spending. But there are a few that continue to live a blasé lifestyle and choose to grow up and mature only when they are forced to so.

The majority of mortgage holders find that when they have a mortgage and bills to pay things such as gym memberships, mobile phone contracts, Sky TV, holidays and even clothes shopping they sacrifice them so they afford to keep up with the repayments . In the current financial climate only 50,000 mortgages are being approved monthly compared to 135,000 a few years ago, if the FSA get their way then one in five mortgage applications will be denied under the new guidelines throwing the property market into further dismay.