Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. Free legal advice is available from a Citizen's Advice Bureau, and the Law Society can supply a list of local solicitors.

How much does his ex really get?

(505 Posts)
WaspFactory Wed 09-Jan-13 11:11:34

How much money does a single parent get in benefits? I ask because my partner is paying his ex over the odds in maintenance because he thinks she is getting next to nothing. However, a friend of mine says his ex gets more money than him due to the amount of benefit she receives.

Can anyone tell me how much (roughly) per month it's possible to get as a single SAHM with one child? Bearing in mind that she is living in their old house with a mortgage on it?

CheeseandPickledOnion Tue 15-Jan-13 16:00:51

Just to answer those who addressed me.

Her drinking has nothing to do with maintenance. But when she's constantly bleeting about how skint she is, I'd rather see her putting her money to better uses than go out on the piss. Yes, it's her choice, her money. But don't come crying to us.... I'm afraid any decent adult who is moaning about skintness will put basics before booze.

Fortunately DSS is (to our knowledge) at his GP's when the party happens. He arrives back at her house in the am to be picked up by DH. So he isn't present for all the drunken antics, but sees the aftermath.

Believe me, if we thought there was any danger we'd be in court.

Snorbs Tue 15-Jan-13 10:38:08

You miss my point. The current system is not about ensuring fairness. It's about balancing the cost of running a means-tested benefit system that tries to take account of unreliable maintenance payments versus the cost of potentially superfluous benefits being paid if they ignore maintenance entirely. It's simply cheaper for the government to do the latter than the former.

oliandjoesmum Tue 15-Jan-13 10:19:59

I know, I am sure 95% of people get very very little, and I'm sure the current system is this way to ensure fairness for the majority who get very little or irregular payments. May be a half way ground where you only have to declare maintenance payments over a certain threashold would be better, in the same way you only have to consider worrying about CB removal over 50,000. I do understand that no benefits system is ever 100% fair, and that there will always be anomalies.

Snorbs Tue 15-Jan-13 10:00:46

They did used to include child maintenance in benefits calculations. This was part of CSAv1 I believe.

It was discovered that many payers of child maintenance were appallingly unreliable about paying. So the recipient of the maintenance would have to keep changing their benefits claims to keep track of the child maintenance as it came in in dribs and drabs.

It turned out that the administrative cost of constantly changing the benefit claims ended up costing a huge amount. In fact, it cost more more than the additional benefits that would need to be paid out by simply ignoring child maintenance in the first place.

Finally, while I don't doubt there are some instances such as your friend who receives thousands in reliable child maintenance, such arrangements are relatively rare. According to Gingerbread, the average CSA payment is £33.50 a week. Or £22.50 if you include the cases where there is an assessment of zero (such as when the NRP claims to have no income). Not many single parents are coining it in like your friend.

oliandjoesmum Tue 15-Jan-13 09:29:37

I'm sorry if people disagree but I think it should. I don't get any benefits, including child benefit from this month, but if I was getting the same amount as my husband earns im maintenance I would get CTC and CB. Why would that be fair? I actually have a friend who gets £4200 a month in maintenance but then still gets CTC of nearly £1000 a month and over £200 in child benefit on top of that. Not an urban myth, absolutely true. Why is that fair, when my husband earns less than that but we get nothing from the state even though we also have 4 children. She isn't doing anything wrong, she is claiming what she is entitled to legally, but I can't be persuaded that not taking maintenance in to consideration in benefits calculations is fair,those who got nothing/ very little/ irregular maintenance would still get the benefits, but those that got perfectly reasonable amounts would get less benfits. It happens that way if you are a single mother working for her living, why should it be different with maintenance?

holidaysarenice Mon 14-Jan-13 06:44:46

Bloody hell you took a lot of stick on here. It may already have been said but try the online benefits calculator, with very little info you can work it out more or less. Remember maintenance doesn't count as income for benefit purposes.

Snorbs Sun 13-Jan-13 10:48:26

Not under current CSA rules, no. I've got a vague recollection that CSAv1 rules did take at least some account of step-parent income among many other things. But it was so horribly complicated that it was damn-near unworkable.

That led to the simplification of CSAv2. Of course, the CSA can't even run that properly hence the upcoming CSAv3 where parents will be strongly encouraged to sort it out between themselves.

AnAirOfHope Sun 13-Jan-13 10:42:09

No because the ex has nothing to do with your finances.

It works both ways if the exwife won the lotto she would not have to give any money to her xh or new gf but the xh would still have to pay child mainance because he is finacialy responsable for his child.

InNeatCognac Sun 13-Jan-13 10:28:12

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SoWhatIfImWorkingClass Sun 13-Jan-13 10:14:11

So say I won the lottery now (all in my name) I'm not obliged to pay anything to my partner's ex? I find that hard to believe.

AmberLeaf Sun 13-Jan-13 10:08:37

The OP isn't the parent, her boyfriend is, so why would it be different?

AnAirOfHope Sun 13-Jan-13 09:49:21

No because the OP is not the parent of the child. Only the parents are responsable for their child financialy.

SoWhatIfImWorkingClass Sun 13-Jan-13 09:21:46

All this talk further up thread about if ex's new partner was a millionaire maintenance should remain the same. What about the following...

If the OP was a millionaire should maintenance go up?? I'm so looking forward to hearing of a situation like that, just so I can hear the double standards come flowing through smile

All hypothetical of course, but oh my, how different it would be.

Wallison Sat 12-Jan-13 21:16:43

No, you don't need a car seat in a cab. Some firms have them and will put one in if you ask for it, but it's not illegal not to use one or anything.

AnAirOfHope Sat 12-Jan-13 17:19:45

Do you need a car seat in a cab? I have never got a taxi with my children because i didnt want to carry the car seat with me round town or supermarket. I dont drive and always walk or go on the bus with children in pushchair.

LineRunner Sat 12-Jan-13 16:10:18

To be honest, in some circumstances (e.g. living in city or town) the quickest way of getting to most A&Es and Walk-Ins is a cab, because the carparking can be quite a long way away, in a dark place, and expensive. A cab is allowed to drop you (and poorly child of course) off at the main doors.

When I took my DD to the Walk-In last year the cab driver couldn't have been more helpful.

Reaa Fri 11-Jan-13 22:19:54

I don't actually drink, DH does which is one of the reasons I don't as I like knowing if at any point I need to go Drs or A and E I can drive, but that's just me, my friend drinks and has always said she can always get a cab if needed........

Reaa Fri 11-Jan-13 22:19:45

I don't actually drink, DH does which is one of the reasons I don't as I like knowing if at any point I need to go Drs or A and E I can drive, but that's just me, my friend drinks and has always said she can always get a cab if needed........

Wallison Fri 11-Jan-13 18:52:36

I think it's because pretty much everyone is united against the OP, AKiss.

AnAir - you would hire a babysitter to come and sit in your living-room with you while you drink wine? Ooooookay.

I don't think I've ever seen a thread go so off topic before.

AnAirOfHope Fri 11-Jan-13 12:31:57

Marcopront you dont have to live by my rules.

Its not a bad thing to not drink alcohol.

If/when im a SP i would get a babysitter and have a drink. Yes it cost more but you have the choice to have a drink or not. Thats what i would chose. It is not essencal to drink alcohol its a choice.

If you are ill you cant help it but you chose to consume alcohol.

marcopront Fri 11-Jan-13 12:09:28

AnAirOfHope

I hope when you are ill, you arrange for someone else to take care of your children because your judgement might be impaired.

As a single parent by your rules I can never drink alcohol as I am always in charge of my child. Thanks

AnAirOfHope Fri 11-Jan-13 11:05:50

I disagree. <shrug>

Live and let live brew

DioneTheDiabolist Fri 11-Jan-13 10:59:17

Airofhope, drinking drinking does not mean being drunk. And smoking around children is not the same as drinking around children. If I smoke a fag those around me are exposed to second hand smoke. If I drink a glass or three of wine, there is no second hand alcohol entering the bodies of those I am with.

I don't need to drink to relax. Just as don't need to do yoga or soduku to relax. But I do all these things as I enjoy them and they do not impair my ability to look after DS.

AnAirOfHope Fri 11-Jan-13 10:29:05

*I give the bottle of wine when we got back not before we left her in charge!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now