Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
maypole1 · 15/09/2011 19:25

Really I am not in up roar of you cannot afford the children you already have whatever your situation then keep you fricken legs shut

Absent fathers pull this shit all the time try every way they can to reduce or stop their payments then they get their new victim pregnant and they finally have a solid exuse oh they weep and wail I have another family to support
Well you should think about that before you have more i say

To be honest I aways wonder what the new victim wil
Say when she is the ex and the newer model will be telling her she can only have 50p for two kids

And it will happen only no marks won't pay for tier children and think holidays are a luxury while they sip beers in Spain with their new family

MJHASLEFTTHEBUILDING · 15/09/2011 19:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

glitterkitten · 15/09/2011 19:31

MJ sorry! I didn't notice. Didn't mean to steal your thunder!!

There is a huge amount of hypocrisy on this site! HUGE!!

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:31

Maypole.... so men impregnating women... Willing women....
How are they a victim? Women have just as much responsibility for protection as men IMO

SoupDragon · 15/09/2011 19:32

"So is the MN consensus that if your on benefits, or poorly paid, you shouldn't be having kids?"

You should not have more children than you can afford to look after.

breatheslowly · 15/09/2011 19:33

Do you think that he really does only earn £16k or is there an element of cash in hand work to avoid having to pay you more maintenance?

CardyMow · 15/09/2011 19:35

No, it's not that they shouldn't have more dc - just that the amount of maintenance to their first child/ren should NOT be lowered because their father has decided to have more children. It should still be 15% of pre-tax earnings for one dc from the first relationship, 20% for two, and 25% for 3 or more. If that makes it difficult for the father to afford to have dc with his NEW partner, that's tough - that's his and his new partner's decision to make if they can afford more dc based on their outgoings WHICH SHOULD INCLUDE THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT OF MAINTENANCE.

The father's decision to have more dc with a new partner should NOT IMO financially affect the dc from his old relationship.

kelly2000 · 15/09/2011 19:37

YABU,
His children his responsibility to pay for 50% of their costs. What would he do if you had full custody, not feed them, make them wear binbags? I really do not get how parents can split up and one can more or less walk away, and claim they cannot pay for their children as it is too expensive as if paying for thier own children is a favour to the other parents, not a duty to the child. Surely the automatic ruling should be each parent has 50% responsibility both with care, and costs?
£150 a month for two children is way too little, he should be paying a lot more. I am fairly certain the mother will be paying a lot more than £150 to feed them, and pay all the extra costs. School dinners, and transport to school can easily end up being £4 per day (if they are nto within walking distance), which in a four week month would be £160 for both of them in total. That is £140 left over to pay for their other food, clothes, the extra rent or mortgage it costs to give them a bedroom, the electricity/water etc that is used for them. It mounts up to be hell of a lot.
Are you telling me it costs £150 a month to feed, clothe, pay for heating/electricity, pay the extra rent to get a seperate bedroom for the DC living with you?
The father of the children is taking the piss, and even on a minimum wage job he should be paying a lot more for his children. My advice for the ex-wife would be to go to the csa and get a recalculation.

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:38

Why does everyone sound suspicious of his earning, ESP in the current economic climate?! 16.8k sounds alright to me in the north lol

Bit harsh on any new partner to not be allowed to have kids is her DP already has them with another wife.. ESP if she can afford it? No?

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:42

Kelly2000 on a min wage job the calculation for approx £150 a
Month is probably right. Of course it costs
More to feed/ clothe/ transport a child/ house etc, but if he doesn't earn it he pays what CSA tell him...

£150 does not cover costs for the kids, but it doesn't have to, it should cover HALF the costs of te kids, anther £150 coming from the mother

glitterkitten · 15/09/2011 19:43

soup I agree. Whether male or female

CardyMow · 15/09/2011 19:43

It wasn't OP whose Ex was earning 16.8k, it's mine. Apparently OP's ex is earning 13k. The 16.8k is in V.V. expensive part of SE though...If the OP went through the CSA, the OP's Ex would have to fill in forms, which, I suspect, would mean the OP would be getting more, as she would be getting a bit of her Ex's Tax Credits as well, as they are also counted as part of his income. So OP SHOULD be getting more than she is.

OP - my advice? Go through the CSA.

TheRealTillyMinto · 15/09/2011 19:49

soup and glitkit - i agree - You should not have more children than you can look after, including affording them

MJHASLEFTTHEBUILDING · 15/09/2011 19:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

kelly2000 · 15/09/2011 19:51

sticky,
just read the whole thread and saw that you are the ex-wife. Well it could be worse, you could still be married to the git.
Can i just ask are their entire incomes inc. her maintainence not included in calculating how much he owes. I was told that both incomes were taken into account? Anyone know how it is calculated, a sobviously he is not paying for her child if she gets maintainence.And the 19 year old is an adult so should not be in his assessments.
Go to csa, get a recalculation, tell them that there are three adults living there, and only one under 18, and that they get maintainence from her ex to help run their household.

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:53

No both incomes are NOT taken into account, nor should they ever be. The children are the responsibility of the exh and op and the new wife's income is not taken into account when calculating maintenence

MJHASLEFTTHEBUILDING · 15/09/2011 19:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

kelly2000 · 15/09/2011 19:54

kayano,
I realise the father shoudl pay 50% not 100%, but it costs more than £300 a month to raise two children. The OP should not contact them about it, but go straight to CSA and let them deal with it.

glitterkitten · 15/09/2011 19:57

Ooooooo we have another OP posting in guise of the "ex"

This will be an interesting thread. I wonder if this OP will get the same grief bt got for doing the same

I'm sitting back waiting for her to be called unreasonable, manipulative, deceitful etc.

I won't hold my breath. OP is a woman afterall Hmm

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:58

Kelly man get a clue bedew
You post. What the new partner gets
Off HER ex for THEIR kids is non of OPs business, nor should 19 years olds income be taken into account just cos she
Is living there. It does not matter if there are 3 adults in the house, all that matters is xh income. Not new partners, not new partners ex's maintenance and NOT new partners adult child! Jesus Christ!!!

Kayano · 15/09/2011 19:59

Glitter a few of us have told Op off for this and it annoys me sooooo much!

MJHASLEFTTHEBUILDING · 15/09/2011 20:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Kayano · 15/09/2011 20:04

Yes MJ, very good points actually

PublicHair · 15/09/2011 20:17

hang on a minute OP, you are (i assume) getting tax credits for your children. maintenance is not included in that, so, you get 'what is deemed an acceptable amount to raise your kids, plus £150...pay for it yourself.

CardyMow · 15/09/2011 20:31

I will admit, MJ, that I agree with you on that point - The DWP don't recognise shared care agreements. They should. But then, if my Ex-H was able to claim x% of the TC's I get at the moment for DS1 (Different dad to DS2&3) - I'd still be paying for ALL of DS1's clothes, school trips, shoes, after-school clubs AND school swimming lessons, as I am at the moment - just becaus ehe got some of the TC's, doesn't mean his new partner would 'let' him spend it on DS1. I would have to pay ALL the costs out of less than all the TC's.

I USED to give DS1's dad the TC's for DS1 for every day he was there, and before Ex-H got with his new partner, he paid half for all the costs mentioned. As soon as he got with new partner - that stopped. Until Ex-H is willing to pay half the additional costs for DS1, I'M not willing to give Ex-H any of the TC's. So Ex-H's new partner shot herself in the foot there, as I was giving them the money. Also if they stopped keeping clothes that I paid for, and want to hand down to MY DS2, and giving them to Ex-H's new partner's son when I'VE paid for them, I would be more likely to split the tc's again.

So, the problem is, the DWP's computer systems aren't set up to recognise shared care, AND the DWP are worried about making some PWC harder up if their ex-partner refuses to spend the split tc's on essentials like clothing, which the PWC would still have to pay for. I can see both sides of that one!