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.

Help, I have one child living with me, the other with dad. Dad is trying to claim maintenance from me.

(55 Posts)
Hollywallaby Wed 15-May-13 19:51:00

Dad has never paid even when children lived with me. Eldest child went to live with him a year ago. Now he wants maintenance from me. Can this happen???

ivykaty44 Wed 15-May-13 20:00:54

yes it can happen as your dc is living with their other parents and you should be supporting your dc just as he should be supporting his dc that lives with you.

What steps has he made to obtain maintenance?

Does he work?

leaderscorp Thu 16-May-13 07:16:16

I think you should give your dad some maintenance since one of your child is living with him. If you don't want to give, then get your child from him to live with you.

chickensaladagain Thu 16-May-13 07:19:47

Do you earn more than him?

chickensaladagain Thu 16-May-13 07:20:37

And do either of you get child benefit/ tax credits?

ninja Thu 16-May-13 07:21:23

But they have one child each, so maintenance would go both ways. I guess it depends how,much you each earn.

cherrybakewall Thu 16-May-13 07:32:45

Yes this happened to us. DH has 2 DCs from first marriage. Originally both lived with his ex and we paid maintenance for the two. When one came to live with us we paid for one and claimed maintenance from ex for the one living with us. She was totally shocked and said she "never expected to pay". The CSA calculated that we should pay her £150 per month and she should pay us £120 so we agreed to pay her a net figure of £30. She then spent the next 12 months telling her DC that "Daddy only pays me £30 a month for you and that's not even enough for food", a comment which he repeated to friends and family everywhere ( he was about 6 at the time). After 12 months or so she took early retirement on the grounds of ill health and claimed her civil service pension ( a fact she has told us several times). She told the CSA that she was on benefits and hasn't paid a penny since. The CSA say that we have to report her for benefit fraud before they can do anything, but we don't know that she's committing fraud. She may be perfectly entitled to claim the pension and certain benefits ( she has a disability). So we get nothing. Don't be like her OP. You have a child, you should pay and so should your ex.

Yes i pay csa to my dd2 whos lives with her dad

breaktheroutine Thu 16-May-13 11:20:48

Why on earth would you think it can't happen? Did you think only men should pay for their children?

Hollywallaby Thu 16-May-13 17:45:19

Ok i think I need to post more information.
First of all I didn't want my just 13 year old to go.
Secondly, I supported both my children throughout our separation and Dad paid nothing. Never has and has never paid anything to support the child that lives with me.
It seems we each pay for one child.
Yes I work and no - he appears not to be. He is inertly lazy and will avoid work at all costs. Has reckoned to be self employed which is a great way to dodge the CSA. (I tried for ever but got nowhere).
So he can claim from my salary and I can possibly claim from his benefits?
How the heck is that fair?

breaktheroutine Thu 16-May-13 17:51:20

Well it may not be fair, but that's the position many nrp's have been in for years, they paying towards children yet pwc not working

lougle Thu 16-May-13 18:26:50

Yes, he can do that. If he's not working he will be capped at £5 per week for CSA. Your CSA payment to him will be a percentage of your income.

kittycat68 Fri 17-May-13 10:04:17

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

SavoyCabbage Fri 17-May-13 10:06:24

Why would you not want to pay for your child?

breaktheroutine Fri 17-May-13 10:08:11

kittycat do you also give tips to male nrp's on how not to pay for their children? Or just women?

kittycat68 Fri 17-May-13 15:53:46

Breakthe routine: it comes from experience dealing with many cases like this , men are quite happy to tell each other this so why cant women do the same? or are you saying the men can do it but the women cant?

breaktheroutine Fri 17-May-13 16:22:44

I don't believe I "said" either of those. I asked you a question

EverybodysStressyEyed Fri 17-May-13 16:31:37

I think HMRC would have something to say about that plan. It's not exactly compliant with tax law

breaktheroutine Fri 17-May-13 16:36:12

"men are quite happy to tell each other this so why cant women do the same?

So kittycat for you, it's more about women getting their own back, rather than the welfare of the child hmm

cherrybakewall Sat 18-May-13 09:59:17

Advocating tax evasion on MNet which is a CRIME? Seriously?

Patosshades Sat 18-May-13 10:07:45

So the OP is getting the Mn outrage response of course you should pay for your child why wouldn't you. All the while the father of these children has never paid a penny towards either of them while the OP had both of them.

Get your self some proper advise OP, have you made a claim for maintenance from him? If not set the wheels in motion now.

breaktheroutine Sat 18-May-13 10:11:35

The father not having paid is no reason for the mother not to pay. As we always say on mn, it's about the welfare of the child not tit for tat games among adults

GoingUpInTheWorld Sat 18-May-13 10:16:32

Im surprised at this thread.

As you have sole care of one child each, i didnt think either of you had to pay maintenance for the other as it evens out sort of speak.

Wossname Sat 18-May-13 10:19:21

Your ex sounds fucking awful, really sorry you have to deal with such a low person and sorry you don't have your other child living with you anymore.

It'd be one thing if he ever contributed when you had both children but to never pay maintenance at all and then have the gall to try and then claim it off you, while still not paying for the child living with you, is just disgusting isn't it? I have to believe in karma for these people.

Arisbottle Sat 18-May-13 10:27:20

You should want both of your children to have the same standard of living , unfortunately if your ex can't or won't provide to the same standard you will have to provide the shortfall .

We had a similar scenario in which DH and I had stepson for half the week but still paid maintenance so he had the sane standard of living as our other children.

breaktheroutine Sat 18-May-13 10:43:59

Goingup I agree with you in theory. But ive never seen that view expressed on mn when it's a mother claiming from a father in the same situation. The conversation in those cases centres around the man needing to pay more cos of x, y and z

kittycat68 Sat 18-May-13 13:00:24

Actually its not tax avoidence! Beacause you are selfemployed writing a book and you CAN put through your expenses.
Whilst it may not be effical ( different story) it is not tax avoidence.

OP you can also claim your traveling costs to see your child that does not live with you, via csa.

OP just out of interst here how old are your children sepically the one thats gone to live with your partner?

EverybodysStressyEyed Sat 18-May-13 13:59:49

Kitty. You can't make up a self employed business and put through receipts

Even if you are truly self emPloyed you can only claim costs directly related to your trade which HMRC may ask you to prove. HMRC may also require proof that you spend more than ten hours a week on the endeavour and that it is your intention to derive a profit at some point

It isn't tax avoidance, it is tax evasion

cherrybakewall Sat 18-May-13 16:04:37

I worked in tax for 14 years and I can tell you that what is being advocated here is tax evasion which is illegal.

With regard to the original question whether or not it is fair is not the point. DSS lives with us and DSD with their mother. We pay maintenance of over £200 per month for DSD and don't get a penny in return for DSS because his mother is on benefits ( and an undeclared pension as per my earlier post). My DH accepts that he has two children and he is financially responsible equally for both. The fact that his ex does not choose to contribute to the financial welfare of her son is a matter for her and her conscience.

cherrybakewall Sat 18-May-13 16:09:32

And you can't claim travel costs via CSA. When both DSCs lived with their mother we paid out maintenance of £350 in addition to travel of £180 per month. CSA may reduce maintenance payments if travel is over £15 per week but how does that benefit child?

kittycat68 Mon 20-May-13 09:34:18

Csa travell expenses are paid at NRP allowances of the first £15 per week for income over £200 per week and £10 at income under £200 per week, after that you can claim so it depends on what it costs for travelling there and back. It is in place to ensure NRP can see child with cost not being an issue.

Whilst many would say it doesnt benefit the child, many NRP claim this not because of the child but purely in order to reduce thier payments to the RP.

cherry bakewell; Wilst you and me may think its tax evasion i can tell you that this happens alot an i can also tell you that HMRC are not interested in small people that reduce thier incomes in this manner they take it that they are telling the truth they are only interested in the larger companies where they can recoup large amounts of money from. If this is not the case please let me know how to redress this situation beacuse i have personally informed HMRC in several cases of this only to be told they are not interested and the NRP has continued filling these returns for at least another five years in one case!!!!
There are many loop holes in the system for the NRP and if they want to use them they will weather it is ehtical or not is another question.
As the law says children are not pay per view and whilst CSA regulations remain poor its the children that suffer. Not all NRP work in the best interests of the child .

leaderscorp Tue 21-May-13 07:34:38

I still urges you to give your dad an allowance at least.

allnewtaketwo Tue 21-May-13 12:43:14

"Not all NRP work in the best interests of the child".

And yet here you are encouraging an NRP (the OP) to follow suit

annh Tue 21-May-13 12:49:35

Leaderscorp, it's the child's dad, not the OP's dad! You keep referring to "your" dad.

kittycat68 Tue 21-May-13 15:48:50

allnewtaketwo: are you another FNF fanatic? seems to me from ACTUALLY reading the post and thread thats what the OP has done all along and now is being taken for a ride, what should she do ? say thank you?

allnewtaketwo Tue 21-May-13 16:00:43

No, she should contribute towards the upkeep of her non resident child. I don't think that's an extremist view hmm. Adult disputes between her and her ex come a very poor second to her moral and legal obligations to the child

kittycat68 Wed 22-May-13 10:25:47

she has contributed!! she was finacially supporting the child, the father wasnt!!! now the child has decided to live with dad. therfore he should step up to the plate and provide for him no? perhaps he should get a job? i am sure she would welcome him back should he wish to go back.

TigerSwallowTail Wed 22-May-13 10:44:41

It's pretty awful that he didn't financially contribute to his dc when they were living with you, and since you both have a child each you wouldn't be in the wrong to assume that neither pay maintenance. Unfortunately things aren't always fair, your ex is on benefits so your son is living in a household with much less money coming in so you should contribute maintenance to improve his standard of living.

Start a CSA claim up for the other child living with you, it may only be £5 per week just now but if ex gets a job in the future then this will increase.

allnewtaketwo Wed 22-May-13 10:47:37

"therfore he should step up to the plate and provide for him no? perhaps he should get a job?"

Do you say the same about women pwc's? It seems it's you who holds the sexist views, not me

kittycat68 Wed 22-May-13 10:54:22

its not a sexist view at all, you are just making it one.

it wouldnt bactter if the sexs were around the other way! the Op that wrote this is a WOMEN and i have therefore used that as a basis in my replies.
You are making yourself out to be a sexist here!! by your comments. I fail to see why you NEED to turn this into a bttle of the sexes? perhaps it is because you are a male of the species as its a common trait in the males!!!!

allnewtaketwo Wed 22-May-13 11:19:21

Just checked, and no, I'm definitely not male.

Here we have a child living with an unemployed parent (pwc). You are recommending that the OP (nrp) lies and cheats to avoid paying maintenance to the child. That's indefensible. And your excuse is pretty much that well plenty of nrp's do it. Getting her or your own back on the OP's ex will not feed the child. Grow up.

misspp1 Wed 22-May-13 22:24:44

I am in a situation just like yourself only I have two of our three children with me ,my thirteen year old asked to go and live with his father in oct,i reluctantly gave in,a few weeks past and the csa contacted me asking for £41 a week, my x pays £5 a week for his other two children ,he and his new partner dont work and have between them five kids living with them,my working tax and child tax are taken into account,however his and his new partners are not,can anyone tell me this is fair??? i pay cos i love my job and dont want to rely on bennafits yet they are better off!!!

kittycat68 Thu 23-May-13 09:29:34

i am NOT recommending a NRP cheats and lies allnewtakestwo. I am mearly stating the FACTS that the OP has stated here!!

She (in this case female) has finacailly supported the child by her self without any finacial support from the NRP for years!

Child has now gone to live with unemployed father (in this case).

Unemployed father wants child support ( and as you say to feed the child). !. how is this fair? 2. he should get a job 3. If he cant afford to feed the child surely he should tell the child he should go back home . 4. CSA is a joke 5. a parent that pays £5 per week child support is NOT supporting thier child. 6. There are an awful lot of NRP that cheat and scam the system ( mostly these are men) what you are saying is dont tell anyone how to do it!! too late its all over the internet, NRP have been doing it for years.

It takes two to have a child, why is it when parents separate suddenly the NRP uses every trick in the book to reduce thier finacial support of the child. As in this case the father paid nothing for years !!!

allnewtaketwo Thu 23-May-13 09:49:50

"i am NOT recommending a NRP cheats and lies allnewtakestwo"
Yes you did exactly that, except your post recommending how she should do it has been deleted

"Unemployed father wants child support ( and as you say to feed the child). !. how is this fair? 2. he should get a job"
So you're saying that nrp's should not pay child maintenance to unemployed pwc's

allnewtaketwo Thu 23-May-13 09:58:55

My DH's ex is unemployed. Should he stop paying CM? He would like his child to live with him. You're recommending pwc should send the child to us because she's unemployed and DH (nrp) shouldn't be paying CM because she should get a job.

Actually no, you're not recommending this, because in DH's case, he is a male nrp. I strongly suspect you're opinions only refer to female nrp's not having to pay a male non working pwc

kittycat68 Thu 23-May-13 10:28:08

Allnewtaketwo: THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU!! get that chip off your shoulder!!!
You quite frankley are talking S***T. YOU are playing the sexist card here!!!

If dad cant afford the upkeep of his child, can he come back and live with you?

allnewtaketwo Thu 23-May-13 11:08:52

No it's not about me, it's about your view that NRPs shouldn't pay CM to a non-working PWC, and that if the PWC doesn't like it, the PWC should send the child to go and live with the NRP. Or that the NRP should commit tax fraud to avoid paying child maintenance in cases of shared case of children.

Those are your views. They are fairly controversial views, and I think you should expect them to be challenged on a public forum (p.s. people tend to give personal examples on public forums. On this thread I have given one personal example - so hardly making it all about me).

There really is no need to swear.

kittycat68 Fri 24-May-13 08:57:09

As previously stated my view is not about committing tax fraud!! nor do i promote it!! i merely stated how some NRP reduce the amount of child support they pay by using the LEGAL tax clause. Just because you dont think its ethical is not FRAUD.

Yes this is a public forum. The Op has asked a quesyion becaUSE THEY WANT OTHERS VIEWS OR ADVICE. Yours is your personal view, some may agree with you some may not. Views are often formed by personal experiences mine comes from working with many cases involving RP and NRP.
I take the view that both parents are financailly responsible for their children, but often it is the NRP that takes little or no financial responsibility .
You have not responded to the OP question, you are just stating your own views on other peoples views which is clearly biased and uninformed.

allnewtaketwo Fri 24-May-13 12:03:19

I hardly think it's biased to suggest an nrp should pay towards a non resident child. Pretty much a mainstream view I think you'll find.

Dadthelion Fri 24-May-13 12:12:58


With your views on NRPs and Families need Fathers I really, really hope you're not in a position of power to influence children's relationships with their parents.

Dadthelion Fri 24-May-13 12:14:23

Here's the answer to the OP.

'Dad has never paid even when children lived with me. Eldest child went to live with him a year ago. Now he wants maintenance from me. Can this happen???'

Yes and will.

allnewtaketwo Fri 24-May-13 12:33:26

and kittycat, you absolutely did recommend tax fraud as a means of CSA avoidance, as several other posters upthread have pointed out to you. You are clearly someone who is happy to recommend breaking the law to avoid paying for a child, just because many nrps don't pay, so I would say it's you who is biased with the chip on your shoulder.

kittycat68 Fri 24-May-13 14:34:13

Yes a nrp should pay towards thier child and a reasonable amount too. At repeating myslef again OP clearly states that she has solely financailly paid for her child with out the NRP paying anything!!!

Clearly you seem to think thats ok, and we are not talking about mainstream question but rather the OP question

allnewtaketwo Fri 24-May-13 16:40:35

I didn't say anything of the sort. I said OP should pay for the child. You think she shouldn't, just because of what has gone on in the past. Punishing her ex is punishing the child, which is what you are recommending

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