in thinking £15,000pa is a perfectly adequate salary for a single person to live on?

[undersofacushions]

Have name-changed to prevent RL 'outing'

Ex-h lives with his parents, working full-time and earning £15,000pa, he moved back in with them when me and DD (almost 2) left 18m ago. He pays no rent or bill contributions, and drives one of their cars that they tax and insure - he just pays petrol. His mum does all the housework, cooking and laundry, he contributes nothing for this.

Me and DD lived near him for a year - me working p/t, 300+ miles away from all of my family. A few months ago I gave up my job and moved to be closer to my parents as both myself and them were suffering ill health.

Ex-h used the calculator on the CSA webpage, and pays what it recommends (£150 per month), the rest he keeps for himself, and regularly boasts about buying 'Waitrose Duchy steak' and other treats for himself. Me and DD make do on IS for now until I find another job.

I asked ex-h (nicely!) whether he would consider upping his contribution for DD as he has plenty of money and no outgoings. I just want to give DD a good quality of life, and he claims to 'love her and miss her' but has only visited us once (for the record, we have no car and I cant drive).

His response was no, he has no spare money, and his salary is so low that he has no choice to live with his parents as his salary is 'not enough to live on', I mentioned to him that is is greater than what I live on per month, and also larger than both my p/t salary and several other jobs salaries that I have lived on at various times.

I did a few calculations, and after tax, NI and maintenance he has £700 left per month for himself. I come up almost £100 short every month.

AIBU in thinking that £15,000 is a perfectly adequate salary, and maybe ex-h is being tighter than a ducks arse?

For the record, I dont want his money, I just want to give DD the quality of life that she deserves, as at the moment if feels like she is being brought up on the breadline while her 'loving and devoted' father lives in luxury.

Thanks Janos, although I want to stick up for notbothered a little bit here - I was in almost identical shoes to them about 2 years ago and I understand their frustrations! Life just dealt me a bad card from then on I guess.

I'd saved too notbothered, and although DD was planned and wanted she caught us a little early lol! Buying baby kit used up all my savings, especially as after DD was born ex-h was determined that he should not have to pay for her costs as 'that was what my mat leave pay/SMP was for' (see where things stared going wrong?) so I got bled dry by the time we left (as I was still also paying half the rent/bills etc).

If my DD was younger I'd be happy living in a one bed with her - but she is nearly two, and needs her own space - I could only just squeeze a moses basket into my old one bed flat room, and I'd have no chance fitting a bed (even single) and a cot! Or a toddler bed..... Besides, my flat is so about to collapse low rent that its the same or less than a lot of the one beds on the market.

But that's the problem - while there are some fabulous NRP's who do contribute more than their "legal minimum" and take an active interest and concern in their DC's lives. A mum at school has a 50/50 split with her exH and their DC - and it's all working out really really well.

There are just as many who don't. Before exH and I split up last year he told me (and others) that he was going to have the DS's every other fortnight, and also look after them 2 Sunday evenings a month for me to play for an evening service at church. It was all very amicable our split (he even helped me move - although was a tosser on the day in some ways - he did get the van and some of his mates to do it).

Needless to say he hasn't seen the DS's once a fortnight, and I can count on one hand how many evening services he's helped me out with.

YEars back - before ther was really any indication that we would split years down the line he said that he would financially support his children no matter what...........

Well - no he doesn't.

It's all very well to expect or want them to do it - it's another thing entirely to get/make them do it. And you can waste a LOT of energy fighting a losing battle and getting angry about something which isn't going to change. Or to rely on something which may not be reliable.

The OP's exH doesn't exactly sound like the reliable type......

The CSA will only chase for the minimum amount, Apparently the courts can make orders that are "legally enforceable"........but in practice I don't know how well they can be/are enforced.

I don't think you are being unreasonable as although he is meeting the minimum requirement, it does appear that he could be making a larger contribution. Although even with him only making the minimum contribution, you shouldn't be coming up £100 short a month. All that said I don't agree that an ex has an obligation to support the ex partner, only his children.

Baroque I still understand your point but there are a lot of posters on this thread who seem to be saying the OP should be grateful for what she gets and why should the DH help support her as well, I was just pointing out why.

So basically huddspur you are saying the RP should be unpaid childcare for the NRP.

actually I agree that the RP shouldn't need matinance - why would I??

I was never "paid" for looking after my DS's as a SAHM while we were married - the money my exH earned went into the family pot to pay the bills, housing, food, kids stuff etc.

Now I'm single I should get extra money from him to support his children - but I also get CTC, IS, housing benefit and council tax benefit to help me meet the other needs.

Hopefully later this year I will be earning an income, and getting only a little housing benefit, and being topped up with WTC.

No I'm saying that the RP is responsible for supporting herself/himself not the NRP.

"Perhaps morally he should recognise that the CSA calculations are based on salary because it is assumed that 50 - 90% of anyone's salary is immediately spent just on day-to-day living costs." I thought this too. He could kindly pass along a wee bit more.

Undersofacushions, hats off to you - you're much more tolerant than me!

But the RP has the DC to look after as well so going out and finding a job to support oneself is actually not that cut and dried, plus you will find women (and men) who gave up their careers, with their partners at the time agreement, to look after the children, so no my DH doesn't "pay me" to look after the children but if I want something for myself like a new top or a lipstick then I use the joint account because I do not earn money. Whilst I would not expect an ex-DH to necessarily pay for my lipstick I would expect him to pay for some of my expenses as I am no longer earning what I could because of OUR children. Just like I would expect some of his pension, the only reason he can pay into that pension is because I am staying at home looking after the kids.

again I ask - what happened to alimony?

I want to know, OP and others, whether you would be arguing for/accepting him paying less if he had unusually high living costs? Say he had very high travel to work costs, high rent or high costs maintaining contact.

Anyone? Thought not.

"No I'm saying that the RP is responsible for supporting herself/himself not the NRP"

What happens if they can't due to childcare issues/prices?

YANBU

But, to venture off topic a little I don't understand how it is that you're struggling to pay everything if you're claiming all that you're entitled to and getting maintenance.

It might be worth going to speak to a CAB advisor.

Or, alternatively taking a look on the MSE website.

I've spent time as a lp out of work and whilst it wasn't ideal or the life of riley I always had enough for us to live on and that is all without a penny in maintenance.

Hi gaelicsheep - as I've said, if ex-h was in an ordinary situation with expenses I wouldn't ask any more.

If in the situation you state, I'd let the CSA decide, because just as, at the end of the day, its down to me to support myself and meet DD's costs, its down to him to support himself and change his situation as required. No, I wouldn't 'relieve' him of the expense associated with being a parent, because he became one (in our circumstance) by choice.

gaelicsheep - to answer your question - I did when exH and I first split up (this is the 2nd and final time to just clarify) - he was working, and took with him all the debts from a failed business that we'd tried to set up a few years before the split. It was (and still is) a LOT of debt.

CSA refused to take it into account because it wasn't debts that were "for the benefit of the family" (ie a loan for a flashy holiday to the Bahamas would have been ok). They wouldn't even take it from me that these debts WERE for our benefit - at least they would have been if the business hadn't failed. I took one look at the figure they set and immidiately told exH to pay considerably less (actually at the time I accepted nothing at all as he was seeing the DS's regularly, and was still paying the mortgage where I was living, plus had taken all the debts so I had a clean start).

Last year when exH managed his 3 fortnightly £20 payments - that was an amount I'd let him set (knowing that he'd still go lots of debts and was on a very low income).

And yes Libra - alimony still applies in some cases - though since I chose (even before DS1 came along) to be a SAHM I don't really feel that exH "owes" me anything for the choices that I made? I did work for a while when DS2 was younger/pg with DS3 - we worked opposite shifts - but again that was my decusion to do that, and also my decision to quit at the end of my maternity leave. Why should exH "pay" me anything for my choices I made??

If I had given up a fabulously well paid career to stay at home with the children so that he could advance in his - then yes - I may well like something (not to say I'd get it mind.....)

I know full well the difficulties of going out to work as a single parent - I am one - with 3 children.

There was never "his" money to use - it was "our" money. So the issue of "me" never having anything to spend on myself wasn't an issue. It was all joint.

i work i dont get benefts (thats why dont know how much you can get) i dont ask anyone for money. i earn them...and i am proud of it...but hey... plenty of support for op and good for you...mumsnet is a open discussion and i am entitle to my own opinion..

well I will be working later this year - but I will still be getting benefits - it's highly unlikely that I'll earn enough to survive without working tax credits, and at least a little housing benefit.

I hope you don't lose you job at any time in the future and find yourself having to "ask someone else" for money

Of course you are notbothered and thanks for sharing it. Benefits is a confusing world, I'd had no experience of it either until now (with the exception of child tax credit and child benefit). All the best to you and your family

My point was that in that situation the CSA would demand exactly the same amount from him. They won't give him a break if his circumstances change for the worse. He is complying with what they are asking based on his income and is doing nothing wrong.

I agree that some men would see fit to pay more if they could afford it. But I can't agree with the wider implication that all men with low/no housing costs should pay higher maintenance. Therein lies a return to the bad old days which caused so much ill feeling and hardship.

can I just point out that there's not a clear cut "on benefits" or "working" line??

100,000's of working people claim benefits too

xposted Baroque. I think you're a rarity tbh.

I'd like to think that given the situation I was in that others would be hard to find. 40k of debt when we first split in 2008, the only reason it was all in his name was because I wasn't working, and he applied for the loans, and ran up the debts with my knowledge (and in some cases blesssing >. Because they were in his name only and we'd had "joint money - seperate bank accounts" miracously after 8yrs (as it was then) of marriage our credit files weren't linked.

I was able to walk away from 40k of debt and start afresh. He took the whole lot with him and continued paying the mortgage (until the costs of running his own - shared - home became too much and repossession ended upon the cards).

We were split for 18 months. When we got back together he'd since lost his job, and although the debts had gone down - they were still there. After hours and hours of phonecalls I managed to get payments on most of them down to relatively small amounts (though given the scale of debt there was no way that most were going lower than £10-20 a month).

We split again - he was still on benefits - I took the DC's - and again walked away with minimal debt (I ran up a small amount on my own while single first time round ). He was left with £280 a month (ESA) to pay about £500 of debts alone (That was without ulities, food, water etc).

I'm not sure how any reasonable woman (or human) could expect someone with that scale of debt (which you had both been involved in incurring - the business was most definitely something I was on board with and worked quite hard on at home) to be making the sort of payments that the CSA expected him to.

I suppose I could have demanded the money and gone through the courts - but I'm not THAT much of a bitch that I'd see the father of my children ending up on the streets.

(though he is an absolute fuckwit of the highest order, and an absolute bastard wit his attitude towards his children I still don't actually want to think of him on the streets/totally destitue.

Not when I was able to make a fresh start - he may have kept the house - but he let me take the entire contents too!!!

"wouldn't" be hard to find - ie I'd hope there were more woman out there who can see the wood for the trees so to speak and use a bit of fairness and common sense.

or - to put it this way - my children are going to grow up to an age where I can leave them during the day for work/find childcare more easily a hell of a lot quicker than the noose is going to be hanging round exH's head.

I also work and get some benefits, in the form of tax credits. There are lots of people in the same boat; single parents and also in your more traditional set up.

Before DS was born I had a great salary and so did XP.

However a lot has happened since then...there but for the grace of god etc.

sorry for the little rant in my last post - generally try not to think about it (and succeed) but DS's had just asked me if they were seeing there dad this weekend........and I've had to tell them that I presume the answer is no given he's not got back to