Some questions about maintenance and what you pay for(90 Posts)
When my ex left, he would only allow CSA to assess what he lays...and he lays the bare minimum that they have told him. He works full time, and has alot of lucrative self employed work on top...which he doesn't declare to CSA...until they re assess him at end of tax year....so lots of extra income.
As well as that his partner ( who he left me for after lengthy affair) also works full time and has additional self employed work.they live ins small house, tiny mortgage..having left me with both kids and only a part time job, in a large house, big mortgage and bills.
Is it unreasonable that he should be paying towards childcare?
Or do I...as he tells me regularly the money he pays me is all I'm getting, and I should use that to cover childcare costs...( it only just covers it, leaving me next to nothing towards any other costs for the kids, ie: , clothes etc)
He doesn't buy clothes for them or shoes.
Do you or do your exs or your partners who have ex's contribute towards childcare ON TOP of maintenance?
'His court ordered time with DD is one evening a week and every other weekend (Fri-Sun).'
Does he want more contact than that? Why is it court ordered?
I think if you want to split the costs 50-50, he should do 50% of the caring.
Then it's upto him how he sorts it out.
If he doesn't want more contact he should pay half of the child care costs.
Why is his time with DD court ordered? Did he have to go to court to get access or did he want more access than you'd have liked?
He doesn't want more, he kept changing his mind about what he could commit to and it was exhausting for everyone to not know - so we took it to court, got shared residency which we both wanted, then came up with that spilt.
I think it's difficult to tell without the detail but if NRP's have had contact restricted - in other words, the RP has chosen to take on the role of primary carer, even with the support of the court - then it's unreasonable for the RP to expect the NRP to cover the costs of childcare to enable them to work full time while being primary carer.
Shared care is being ordered more often by the court - but IMO, it's only shared care if the DC experiences 'day to day life' in both homes - if one parents care is limited to weekends and time that they are off work then that's not really 'sharing care'!
It's different if the NRP is refusing to be an equal parent - but they're unlikely to contribute towards childcare in that situation, so the RP has no choice but to pay for childcare themselves if they want to maintain a full time career.
Well, in this case, I had to continue my full time career in order to be able to afford to raise our daughter. Dad didn't want more than EOW and one day in the week because he said it was too tiring on top of a full time job. So I was doing a full time job, caring for our DD 23 days a month, and paying for her to be in full time childcare. While he worked full time, with no childcare costs, and had his dd 8 days a month (all pro rated in terms of maintenance but with 4 of these being days where her care and meals were all paid for by me)
So I think the least he could do was pay for her childcare on those 4 days a month. I wasn't able to 'move on' from my financial responsibility to our daughter so I don't see why he should. My partner hasn't moved on from his in order to start a life with me. But he pays for his dds childcare on "his" days even though mum doesn't work... Figure that one out
thelionessrichie - do you get tax credits to cover most of the childcare or do you earn over the threshold?
It's about 1900 a month after tax... Take out 1k CM, 850 rent, 150 bills... Then add on my 180 maintenance and £80 child bens... Gives me £160 for everything else.
I work out that despite earning the same salary, and having the same type of house rent, without childcare he'd have £880 left. Yet I'm the one with our Dd for the vast majority of time. Isn't all that fair really. Still, at least he can move on with a new family when he wants to as he has enough money. I suppose I will just need to find a new man to support me
I can see why so many mothers don't choose to work. But I make the money stretch, and in the end I will have a fabulous career and a lovely daughter so I guess I win overall
allnew - regardless of whether or not a RP gets any tax credits to help cover the cost of childcare, there will always be a shortfall of at least 30%. The more children you have, the bigger this 30% is (assuming you get the full amount which many of us don't).
thelionness - I feel for you. I have three primary aged children and work full time. I have to maintain 3 places in afterschool and breakfast club and have the addition of the nursery fees for the youngest. It's a small fortune, even with the tax credit support. My ex benefits - he works full time as well. He is self employed and pays no maintenance at all. He had the audacity recently to tell me that I didn't need to pay for childcare on his days - same man who regularly has an appointment or his car breaks down (once a month at least) on 'his' day. He doesn't have a bloody clue.
Mumandboys I am aware of that thank you
With maintenance payments, surely a line has to be drawn somewhere? Otherwise you could go on forever saying that x/y/z should be paid for in addition to the maintenance payments.
Agreed Petal. The line is drawn under childcare costs. It's a completely different kind of cost than everything else. I accept that the 15% covers the NRPs share of "maintaining" the child. Clothes, food, trips, entertainment, etc etc. but childcare costs are totally different.
But requiring childcare is a lifestyle choice!
I realise that when you are a couple and have DCs you may come to a joint decision about careers and childcare etc, but once the marriage ends, then those decisions have to be revised!
If one parent chooses to be a NRP with EOW contact only, then the other parent is left with the choice whether to continue with their career or adjust their lifestyle in line with their new circumstances. What would happen if one parent became incapacitated and was unable to work or care for the DCs? Would the other parent continue to insist that the unwell parent somehow paid towards childcare in order to allow them to work full time?
The only way to guarantee that you can pursue a full time career without incurring what you think is an 'unfair' proportion of the childcare costs is to not have DCs in the first place!
That is THE MOST ludicrous thing I have ever read.
Needing childcare isn't a lifestyle choice. It is what is required when you need to earn money to raise your children. Of course if one parent was incapacitated then things would be different but two, healthy parents with equal ability to earn money...
Why should the NRP have the opportunity to pay in to a pension, and continue their career as if childless, with cash to spare, while the other stays at home with children forfeiting their financial independence and security. Thank goodness my ex was more reasonable in the end, I'm sorry some if you seem to feel such sole responsibility.
Mumandboys that must be so costly for you... While he swans in and out of the office as he pleases. Of course, it's not just the cost of the childcare either is it, it's the fact that you have to leave work on the dot to collect kids... While the majority of men in whatever given industry, can stay late schmoozing clients and impressing the boss.
No wonder the gender pay gap is so horrific given the mummy martyrdom that goes on
Childcare isn't a lifestyle choice, it's a necessity for many parents to hold down a job. Not even necessarily a full time career, but even those working part time minimum wage jobs often need some form of childcare. I usually like your posts NADM but that assertion is just ridiculous.
Childcare definitely isn't a lifestyle choice in the scenario we are talking about. For me it's a necessity - without it I couldn't work and if I didn't work we'd have no money. Everything that is being provided for my two girls is provided by me - their Dad refuses to support them.
The NRP ends up with all sorts of choices that just aren't available to the RP in a situation like these we are talking about. My ex has just gone back to college. He can afford to do that as he doesn't have to concern himself with keeping an income coming and keeping his children housed and fed. He can opt to do overtime because he doesn't have to worry about being at home for the children, picking them up from childcare, taking them to hobbies. He just says "no, I can't" if I ask him for any help with things like this. Or will agree and then let me down. He has agreed to have dd so I can work at a weekend, then with a few days' notice told me he wouldn't. His contribution towards the children's unbringing either financially or emotionally is completely optional to him - as he has frequently demonstrated.
There's a damn sight more to life than the amount you get paid, IMO!
Mummy martyrdom is a million miles from where I am - what a condescending phrase!
It was separation from my ex that provided me with the motivation to look at alternatives.
If its what you want to do, then that's great - but working full time and relying on expensive childcare is not the only way to feed DCs and keep a roof over their heads.
Well of course there is, but how else do you provide for your children - where does the money comes from if you aren't earning it? I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
I need childcare because I work. I wouldn't be able to house and feed my children if I didn't work. It's not a lifestyle choice, it's a necessity.
lioness - with the figures you've given would you be much better off financially dropping down to 4 days a week so your earnings fall below the tax credit threshold and you can get £140 a week tax credits just towards the childcare? You'd also get a day a week to spend with your DD and probably find your career doesn't suffer too badly.
Financial inequalities after a divorce come in all shapes and sizes, not just child care. Take the non-resident father who needs a house with sufficient extra bedrooms to house children who only use them 1 or 2 nights per week, or the father who has to drive miles and miles for access pick-ups/drop-offs because the ex refuses to help with lifts. Or to draw on my DHs experience, he has an ex who clearly never spent the maintenance payments on DSS, meaning DH not only paid maintenance but bought most of his clothes, nearly all shoes and 100% of school trips. Women dont have the monopoly on being unfairly treated.
Heard it all now.if childcare is a lifestyle choice,then i think all mums should give up workin nd if your single depend on benefits ,that way i could be at home with the kids, and not work til theyv,e left home.such a brilliant idea.
Oh my word NADM, are you joking? Lifestyle choice?
But requiring childcare is a lifestyle choice!
seriously? I can just see the posts if I said I'd prefer to sit at home on benefits for the forseeable and that's my lifestyle choice 'cos childcare costs a fortune so I won't bother working anymore.
I have NO CHOICE but to go out to work full-time in order to support my children. I would prefer a balance of part-time work or work during school hours but unfortunately that isn't going to happen as although my children have two, healthy, working age parents, only one of us is contributing to their upbringing.
Join the discussion
Please login first.