Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think DH's ex wife is taking the piss regarding maintenance?

183 replies

StickyBlisteredShitHole · 15/09/2011 17:02

DH gives his ex wife £150 a month maintanance for their 2 DCs. Just lately she's been asking for him to contribute to this, that and everything else despite the fact that she's got the maintanance. Last night she got her DS to text DH asking him to contribute towards a school trip abroad and now today she's sending him a message asking him to contribute towards a school trip for their other son. Despite this she's booked a holiday abroad for next summer hols and no doubt we'll be expected to contribute towards that too despite the fact that we, as a family can't afford to go anywhere!
AIBU to think she's taking the piss?

OP posts:
squeakytoy · 15/09/2011 17:35

Did it not occur to your husband that as his children got older they would need more financial assistance, or was he assuming some other bloke would step in and provide it for them?

slavetofilofax · 15/09/2011 17:38

The CSA is a joke, the fact that there are two children living in your house has no effect on how much it costs to bring up his previous children.

It sounds like one of your kids isn't his, so that child should be supported by you and his/her own Father. And if he isn't paying, that's all the more reason why you shouldn't have had another!

unpa1dcar3r · 15/09/2011 17:41

What you need to be reminded of SB is that if he was still living in the family home with his children i dare say he would be paying a lot more than £150 per month towards their needs.

He would also be paying towards the rent/mortgage, electricity and general household bills, anything the kids need such as clothing/pocket money/trips/holidays, council tax, water rates, Tv licence, internet and so on...
If he is only payng £150 then I think it fair for her to ask for some towards school trips/holidays etc for the children.

Of course it does depend on his income but he must be on very low wages if he's only paying that.

On the face of it by what you've said yes you are being a little unreasonable and are not thinking of the moeny he is saving by not funding his familys general life.

RedOnion · 15/09/2011 17:42

This is a wind up.

MJHASLEFTTHEBUILDING · 15/09/2011 17:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

usualsuspect · 15/09/2011 17:43

I hope its a wind up,with that awful username [prude]

TheCrackFox · 15/09/2011 17:44

He couldn't afford 4 children on his wage.

maypole1 · 15/09/2011 17:44

He is getting a bargain if they were to come and live with you it would cost £150 in school dinners alone £10 a week each so he is making a saving

You are disgusting lady and I hope they never have to live with you I am sure you and your oh deserve each other

MrsSleepy · 15/09/2011 17:45

His full time wage and your part time wage wont be all you live off will it? You must get tax credits and such so you can't be that hard done by

beatrixkitto · 15/09/2011 17:46

Maypole. Couldn't have said it better myself!

sue52 · 15/09/2011 17:47

This can't be real.

MrsSleepy · 15/09/2011 17:49

Great big pile of steaming bullshit this is

Chipsycheese · 15/09/2011 17:49

I thought (I am not sure and correct me if I am wrong) that the amount he would pay to his first 2 children would be slightly less as the CSA would take into account the fact he has another child (with his new partner, the op) that he financially supports?
Also the op said there are 2 children in the household, one is her partners child - this must mean she has one already when she met him? Who financially supports this child?
Hope this situation works out in the end with no arguing for the kids sake!

RogerMelly · 15/09/2011 17:51

you know I think the original poster is being unreasonable too but I don't think it is anyone else business as the why they chose to have a child together themselves. Presumably his ex wife has moved on, is it really that unpalatable that he would too?

HerRoyalNotness · 15/09/2011 17:51

I agree MJ.

By everyone's reckoning, my 2 lovely DC shouldn't exist, but it's fine for the xW to have 3 more kids and not work, and expect us to pick up the financial slack, because her DH is "tight"

sleepevader · 15/09/2011 17:53

Everything MJ said

StewieGriffinsMom · 15/09/2011 17:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

missmogwi · 15/09/2011 17:56

Bullshit

Original poster
StickyBlisteredShitHole · 15/09/2011 17:56

I am the ex wife. I posted the alternative view because I'm trying to see it from their point of view too and didn't want everyone to just "agree" with me.

We split up when DS2 was 2 years old. He's 10 now. Maintenance has not changed since it was arranged when he first left. He pays nothing towards anything other than this measily amount (it's actually £140 he pays, not £150). I have asked him to contribute towards DSs school trip and apparantly "begging" and should "get off my arse" and support my own kids - according to his lovely wife.

OP posts:
JenaiMarrHePlaysGuitar · 15/09/2011 17:56

2003? 2003?!?!?

It is rare that my jaw literally drops (albeit not to the floor) on reading a post, so well done OP.

porca you tight wad - it's half our weekly food bill.

Wink Grin
Voidka · 15/09/2011 17:57

YABU - £150 wont go very far for 2 children.

JenaiMarrHePlaysGuitar · 15/09/2011 17:57

x-post.

I bloody knew it.

sue52 · 15/09/2011 17:59

Oh sticky that's awful. Can't you have a review by the CSA ?

SansaLannister · 15/09/2011 17:59

'Suggesting the ops children had no right to be born is appalling'

This OP's husband goes around procreating kids he can't afford. He can either increase his income or he should stop having kids.

FabbyChic · 15/09/2011 18:00

Oh come on. What about the mother of the childrens contribution? It should be more than half the absent parents as they have the opprtunity to enjoy the children more.

It does not cost £40 a week to feed a child that is young not even £20.

The absent parent should be paying half the costs of clothing and feeding a child, plus half the cost of what other expenses occur.

They however should not be paying anything over and above that.

The mother does have to have her own roof anyway I don't see why an absent parent should have to pay anything for that.

If the CSA have said £150 is enough they have worked it out that it is fair, and the absent father needs to say I cannot afford anymore and I am paying a fair wack.