Advanced search

Division of money question

(89 Posts)
MadameLeBean Mon 23-Sep-13 15:12:27

DP does not pay anything towards my dd's childcare costs or school clubs etc, or clothes. I am fine with this, he is not her dad and her actual dad does not pay maintenance (I did start a thread about whether to go to the CSA but that's a whole issue in ideals) so why should DP have to pay anything.

So far so good. It worked because I earn about 1/3 more than my DP and I spend that "extra" on childcare clothes etc for dd. So we have a joint account for bills to which we contribute equally and about equal spending money (not very much!).

However he has got a new job offer which means he will be making the same money as me - so the huge amount of money I spend on childcare etc, he will have sloshing around "spare".

I have always been one to split things equally but I will not be able to contribute my half of anything more eg the cost of a cleaner. Wibu to ask him to pay for the cleaner as I have this huge overhead which he does not have and now we are on the same money? Should I ask him to pay a little bit towards dd's costs? I feel that would be wrong but on the other hand it feels unfair that he will have loads of spare cash while I struggle to pay my half of the cleaner, can't afford to save a pension etc

RinseAndRepeat Tue 24-Sep-13 18:08:56

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

thebighouse Tue 24-Sep-13 18:32:08

Iloveweetos: ex is self employed through his own company (sounds like op). Therefore he only has 5k earnings on 100k turnover.

He spent tens of thousands on solicitors and accountants. I gave up in the end.

We do have 50:50 childcare which he insisted on 'so I would never see a penny of his money'.

I gave up my career to raise my babies and I'm now financially shafted. That's the way the system works, it seems.

nicknamegame Tue 24-Sep-13 19:25:00

I made an enquiry to the CSA a year ago about my situation. I explained that ex takes a lot more clients than he declares, therefore his books will not highlight any 'lies' that would be obvious to them. I also told them he had just bought a holiday home but put in his wife's name- they said they could not touch that and wait for it....he had the 'right to be believed' based on the tax returns etc that he would supply.

I chose not to bother with an application after this 'chat' and believe me, my ex had no trouble spending thousands taking me to court, only to end up with essentially what he had, yet won't support our child financially.

I dont believe the CSA are as effective as you think in all honesty.

thebighouse Tue 24-Sep-13 20:54:35

I'm afraid you are right. Self-employed/company accounts and he gets off Scott free. After all, he's only got 5k a year to live on!

ChinaCupsandSaucers Tue 24-Sep-13 20:55:38

I chose not to bother with an application after this 'chat'

And if I were your partner, I would resent you for that.

Applying for CSA help and getting nothing from your ex is very different from not bothering to apply, IMO.

If your DP is happy with the situation, then great - but I couldn't live with myself in either your or your DPs position, sorry.

thebighouse Tue 24-Sep-13 21:01:05

If her husband is self employed he will be declaring an income of around 5k a year. THAT will be what the CSA will use as the figure for maintenance.

Plus he will go to court and dispute the court order.

PLUS he will be fucking furious and controlling, from the sounds of it.

If I was your partner, I'd be understanding and proud that you'd escaped a bullying fuckwit.

nicknamegame Tue 24-Sep-13 22:34:18

What Bighouse said, with bells on.

I was pretty much told there was NO POINT by the very CSA themselves.

He is abusive, he would spend thousands to see me not get a penny. He has already proved this by putting me through hell in court- and I mean hell. You're not actually listening when I say all this, preferring instead to believe I just can't be arsed. If my OP resented the £100 ex has stolen from my child, as you put it, I would frankly be questioning my relationship. I prefer to stay off the anti-depressants than face the backlash that I would get from exp. If you think that makes me a failure, I can live with that.

In fact, I would have to pay to launch the application, more insult to more injury.

ChinaCupsandSaucers Tue 24-Sep-13 23:04:25

In fact, I would have to pay to launch the application, more insult to more injury.

Nope. You wouldn't, unless you have 4 or more DCs with your ex and have never opened a claim before.

I'm refering to the current CSA system in the UK - as is the OP. Which system are you subject to?

MadameLeBean Tue 24-Sep-13 23:05:46

Ex is not self employed. I can see how that would make it harder to make a claim. My sympathies are with those of you who are having to deal with someone who can evade their responsibilities that way.

nicknamegame Wed 25-Sep-13 09:05:03

My understanding of the new legislation was that parents were required to pay a fee to the CSA if they couldn't agree it between themselves. Have I got that wrong?
Based on this thread, i asked ex last night whether he was still self employed, he informed me (in between a load of nasty agressive texts) that he had moved to being a limited company. This means I can now check company house, although having been with him for a long time and knowing his not very scrupulous business practices - he will not be providing the CSA with figures that make him look like anything other than a pauper.

ChinaCupsandSaucers Wed 25-Sep-13 09:21:53

My understanding of the new legislation was that parents were required to pay a fee to the CSA if they couldn't agree it between themselves. Have I got that wrong?

The new rules are being rolled out gradually; currently only new cases involving 4 or more DCs all with the same NRP and no additional DCs to consider are being assessed under the new rules. It'll take years for it to be rolled out to all new cases, never mind existing ones!

If you call the CSA, give them details of your ex, they will put the wheels in motion. Yes he might gloat and brag you won't get a penny, but ignore him!

With greater co-operation between the CSA and HMRC these days, and more willingness on the part of the CSA to make adjustments based on lifestyle, you've got nothing to lose, and your DCs have a great deal to gain.

I think it's the responsibility of every RP to keep up to date with systems and benefits that are designed to help them - its morally reprehensible, IMO, to rely on the state (or someone else) to support your DC because you choose not to find out about what help and support you are entitled to.

purpleroses Wed 25-Sep-13 09:22:04

I think the new system hasn't come in yet for most people. So no fees yet. Even if your ex is earning £5000 a year on the books you should still get £5 a week, which can pay for something useful (a club or something for the DC that you might not otherwise be able to afford)

basgetti Wed 25-Sep-13 09:59:56

It is morally reprehensible for NRPs to fiddle their finances and refuse to support their DCs.

It is a bit arrogant to tell a poster they have 'nothing to lose' when they have clearly stated the emotional abuse and legal battles to which they have been subjected. Sometimes people need to be able to move on for the sake of their own sanity and if this means accepting less or no money then so be it. It is rare for a lone parent to be so wealthy that they can easily write off such money so I would assume the alternative had been pretty awful and give them some sympathy.

Put the blame where it belongs.

nicknamegame Wed 25-Sep-13 11:08:30

Thanks for that basgetti- it feels to me that there is some serious misappropriation of the blame here.

China- Morally reprehensible? You cannot be serious! For one,( and I've already said this) I do not rely on my DP. I was a homeowner before I met him, have never ever claimed on benefits (but thank god the option would be there if I needed to) and the absence of my DP would not prompt me to start the CSA process. My ex pays £100. He used to pay £200. The loss of the £100 is something I've sucked up - and would continue to suck up if my DP left.

I do however stand by what I said in response to the OP, that my DP considers us a team, and because he earns more than me, we have a better standard of living because of him. I earn a decent salary however, and would still live a good enough life without him. If he considered me morally reprehensible because I don't want to go through the inevitable anguish that yet another legal battle would cause, I would actually end the relationship.

In fact, my DP paid for my 12k legal battle when my ex dragged me to court 3 times. Every single penny of it.

Is that morally reprehensible too?!

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