Child Benefit Rival Claim Ex Partner Earning Loads!!!!! part 2

Actually just went back and reread post 1, where OP states its ex that earns more than 60k and "significantly more" than her so she could, unfortunately, be in deep shit financially. What a mess

Must've missed that, ta. Good job really!

Some of us do 100% and rather than argue the toss about cb or maintenance or beg any man for any money we prefer to parent our kids instead of trying to bleed money from an ex out of bitterness. If you cared as much as you say for your kids THEY should have been your focus not fucking money.

Oh my so now he can always tell your children that you where money hungry and yet when the shoe is on the other foot didn’t pay even though cms would make you when he paid when he legally did not have too.

Wow you’ve learnt nothing.

Also it doesn’t matter what he did when they were 3/4/5/6/7/8. What matters is today and his the 100% parent and you won’t even voluntary pay for you own children. You are showing them without dad even needing to that this was always about money not them.

She has stated she earns around 60k so it is not as impactful as it would be for someone earning minimum wage.

Still obsessed by forms.

You're going to lose your children forever if you don't stop about the bloody forms.

I have 7 kids and I do not understand your obsession with forms. There ain't that many forms (and that's including 2 with SEN, and one who is in my care through kinship).

Unfortunately OP will now lose UC for both children, may well lose a chunk of any rent from Uc for under occupation and (i think) work allowance will also drop so she will be so much worse off.

Best of luck, OP, I hope you and your children can build bridges again.

YY - I was thinking back to the point that OP put in the CMS claim when they were at 50/50 (give or take one night over 6 months)

And that it actually wasn’t a true 50/50 split - he had them more (oh, and he was also solely funding private medical and dental care for them).

And that was at the point of claim. ExP now has DC1 80% and DC2 58%. He gets CB for one of the children.

so, if OP is claiming 2 CB and 2 UC child elements, and she has 50/50, she will likely lose 1 CB and 1 UC child element? Even though her ex can't claim UC?

Yes. If someone is claiming 2CB and has 50/50 then, if the other parent claims the CB they will likely lose 1.

However, in this case you should keep in mind that her ex was happily allowing the OP to claim 2 CB and paying her £300 a month and only claimed the CB when the Op went to CMS after hearing he'd had a payrise.

Same place it got the idea that taking a bath with a toaster was a fabulous way to unwind.

It collects information from across the internet without the necessary quality control. It reports misinformation and jokes as facts.

www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd11gzejgz4o

https://searchengineland.com/google-ai-overview-fails-442575

Here's the first thread, which may help (and may boggle your mind)...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5294980-child-benefit-rival-claim-ex-partner-earning-loads?reply=144269354

A very sad end, but like others I suspect your teenage children came to realize that they had a price tag attached and have moved in with their DF as a result.

I sincerely hope you can draw a line under your sense of injustice and work on re-building your relationship with them.

so, if OP is claiming 2 CB and 2 UC child elements, and she has 50/50, she will likely lose 1 CB and 1 UC child element? Even though her ex can't claim UC?

especially if the party claiming CB has other benefits attached.

Other benefits would only really come into it if it was absolutely 100% 50/50 and HMRC genuinely couldn't decide that one party deserved it more than the other, and there wasn't the chance to split - so if it was one child for example. There is no mechanism to give each parent half of the award in that situation.

That's incredibly rare though and wouldn't apply in a case where the OP earns 60k (I'm sure it was around that) and her ex a higher earner, like in this case.

Thanks, that makes sense.

What are the UK sources that point that AI is wrong on this?

I agree, it wouldn't be fair. But when I asked AI, it said even with 50/50, HMRC favours the status quo, especially if the party claiming CB has other benefits attached.

I wouldn't trust AI with anything like that. It's very American swayed with a lot of things.

A while back there was a poster convinced she should be allowed to claim PIP and Attendance allowance because AI said you could.

I wouldn't be surprised if it's conflating the family courts with HMrC.

Where would it get the idea from?

That’s why it’s a bad idea to ask AI.

I forgot about that bit.

Behold the OP, truly a victim of gravest injustice.

I agree, it wouldn't be fair. But when I asked AI, it said even with 50/50, HMRC favours the status quo, especially if the party claiming CB has other benefits attached.

Sure - if both parents have the kids 50/50, an agreement that each gets one set of the child benefit would seem both fair and logical.

Obviously parents may arrange things differently, as previously happened for OP, where she kept both CBs despite the 50/50, as XP didn't make a claim - possibly in part as his earnings meant he would have to pay the claim back, so the "family group" was better off with OP making both CB claims.