'Disrespectful' woman blasted for charging her mother for a simple household task
Laura Shahu, believed to be from the UK, has 29,000 followers on Instagram where she often posts videos about tips and tricks she's learnt on how to save cash over the years.
The mother-of-two recently shared a clip in which she revealed that her mother needed assistance with setting up her household bills and wanted to get her advice on the best rate possible.
Laura said: 'Am I greedy for charging my mum £40 for setting up her own bank account for her? I know what you're thinking - what kind of person charges their own mother to help them manage their bills? Well I kind of did and kind of didn't - let me explain.'
She said her mother was 'not very tech savvy' and wasn't 'confident' in finding the best value for money when it came to sorting out her bills.
She said the pair 'came to an agreement' that led to Laura helping her mother to find the cheapest bills - if she gave her the £40 cashback she earned as a 'thank you'.
But some social media users called her a 'joker' and said that she should be willing to help her mother out for free.
The content creator explained: 'In return, if I get that deal through a cashback website for her, she would give me the cashback that she otherwise would not have got if she had done it herself.
'In essence, she gets the best rate for her household bills without having to do the work to find it and if the best deal happens to be on a cashback website, I get the cashback that my mum would have otherwise gotten if she had done the work herself.
'We see it as a win-win because she gets confidence in knowing that she is getting the best rate for her bills but doesn't have to spend any time trying to search for it and I get the little bit of cashback to say thank you.'
Laura asked for people's opinions on whether they would ask their parents for money in return for helping them with admin tasks.
One person wrote: 'That's madness. £40 is hardly anything, your mum birthed you, you joker. Just help her.'
Another penned: 'No, no, no this is so wrong after all your mum has done for you.
'Now is the time you should be helping her and showing her how to do things. If she wants to treat you for your kindness that is up to her.'
A third said: 'I personally wouldn't, I'd help her and show her and let her keep the £40.'
A fourth commented: 'I think this is wrong, I help my mother as much as I can, I would never want anything in return.
'To me, it feels somewhat sad how money-focused you are. Losing values such as respect for elders, family importance and giving back to the parent(s) who raised us.
'Who provided for us for decades. If you feel this is fair and justified - I wonder what morals you have in terms of finances.'
But others agreed with Laura and said that she was very fair in asking her mother for the £40 cashback.
One said: 'The admin I do for my mum-in-law- I should claim a salary! I just take the hugs.'
Another penned: 'No, you are not, this is essentially a referral fee and you are the one referring her. This is no different to you going to a broker and they take the referral fee.
'She doesn't have to go with your choice, but if she does, you earned that cashback, if it's a large amount you may want to split it, but if you are both happy with the deal, nothing wrong with it.
'She's getting the best rate and you get compensation for your time and effort without it costing your mum anything.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
31 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Zero-hours contracts: peers accused of ‘trying to block stronger UK workers' rights'
Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers have been accused of trying to block stronger rights for millions of workers amid a growing campaign by business leaders to water down Labour's zero-hours contract plans. In a blow for the government, the Lords last week voted to curtail the manifesto promise to give workers a right to a guaranteed hours contract and day-one protections against unfair dismissal. Setting up a showdown with the upper chamber, the Lords passed a series of amendments to the employment rights bill that will must be addressed by ministers when MPs return from their summer break. In an angry intervention on Monday, the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, Paul Nowak, said the Lords was 'doing the bidding of bad bosses' and ought to 'get out of the way' of the plans. 'The sight of hereditary peers voting to block stronger workers' rights belongs in another century. It's plain wrong,' he said. Under the Lords' amendments, a requirement for employers to offer zero-hours workers a contract covering a guaranteed number of hours would be shifted to place the onus on staff to ask for such an arrangement. Protections against unfair dismissal from the first day of employment – which the government plans to reduce from the current level of two years – would be extended to six months, and changes to free up trade unions would be curtailed. The bill will return to the Commons in September for MPs to consider the amendments. The two houses then continue to vote on the changes in a process known as 'ping-pong' until a way forward is agreed. The amendments were put forward by the Lib Dem Lord Goddard, a former leader of Stockport council, and two Tory peers: Lord Hunt, who is a shadow business minister, and Lord Sharpe, a former investment banker. Hunt did not respond to a request for comment. Sharpe said: 'Keir Starmer's unemployment bill is a disaster for employees as much as it is a threat to business. Labour politicians who have never worked in business are destroying the economy. Only the Conservatives are listening to business and making the case for growth.' Goddard said he feared Labour's 'rushed bill' would be bad for workers in small businesses and on family-owned farms. 'They were badly let down by the Conservatives, and Labour seems to have a blind spot when it comes to farms and small businesses, too. 'We support the bill as a whole and have worked constructively to try to improve it. It's a shame to see the government getting upset that we didn't simply give them a blank cheque.' Employers groups welcomed the changes, saying the Lords was responding to business concerns. Helen Dickinson, the chief executive of the British Retail Consortium, said: 'Putting forward positive, practical and pragmatic amendments to the employment rights bill [will] help to protect the availability of valuable, local, part-time and entry level jobs up and down the country.' Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Industry chiefs have stepped up lobbying against the workers' rights changes, warning that companies were already slashing jobs and putting up prices in response to tax rises in chancellor Rachel Reeves's autumn budget. Dickinson said there was 'further to go' to curb the employment rights bill. 'Even with these amendments accepted, retailers remain worried about the consequences for jobs from other areas of the bill.' Union leaders have, though, urged ministers to stand firm. A recent mega poll of 21,000 people commissioned by the TUC found a majority of UK voters – including Conservative, Lib Dem and Reform UK supporters – backed a ban on zero-hours contracts. Nowak said the government plan included 'commonsense protections' that a majority of people wanted to see become law. 'These peers are not just out of touch, they are actively defying their own voters – and the public at large. The government must stand firm in the face of cynical attacks and deliver the employment rights bill in full.'
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting
The ousted head of the Financial Ombudsman Service received a pay-off of almost £230,000, it has been disclosed in the annual report. Abby Thomas, who left abruptly on 6 February, was paid £229,869 in severance payments on top of her normal salary. The payoff included £100,000 for loss of office, £107,692 in lieu of notice and £22,177 for a period of gardening leave that began on the day she left, the FOS said. MPs on the Treasury select committee have hit out at the manner of her departure and criticised the FOS chairwoman Baroness Manzoor for refusing to answer questions on why Thomas left and whether she was forced out. The FOS, which rules on complaints by consumers about financial services firms and can set compensation orders, is under pressure to reform. Rachel Reeves has pledged to curb its powers so it no longer acts like a regulator after complaints from the industry that it has increased the cost of 'mass redress events'. It has been dealing with a significant rise in claims, mainly related to car finance loans, but also because of concerns about other consumer loans and more people complaining about banks' handling of frauds. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Treasury committee, said this month: 'The handling of this situation by the senior leadership has been deeply disappointing.' Thomas, a former Virgin Media executive, served for less than three years. She has been replaced by James Dipple-Johnstone as chief ombudsman and Jenny Simmonds as interim chief executive. Manzoor is due to retire on August 1. The FOS received 450,000 new inquiries in the year to March, up from 330,000. The motor finance industry is braced for a judgment from the Supreme Court this Friday that could determine the scale of compensation payments for failing to disclose commissions paid to dealers.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Activist investor steps up pressure on Smith & Nephew
The activist investor Cevian Capital has raised its shareholding in Smith & Nephew, increasing pressure on the FTSE 100 medical equipment maker before its half-year results. Filings show Cevian, one of Europe's biggest activist investors, has raised its stake to 8.5 per cent having first publicly emerged with a holding in July last year via a Jersey-based vehicle. Cevian, which had raised it to 7.5 per cent in February, is understood to be the largest shareholder. The stake building comes before half-year results from Smith & Nephew on August 5 where investors will look for signs of a turnaround in the performance of its orthopaedics division, the group's largest. The group remains committed to retaining the business, but following full-year results in February, John Rogers, Smith & Nephew's chief financial officer, outlined scenarios under which it could evaluate options.
