Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to not want dh to give ex more money

158 replies

Bebo1980 · 27/09/2011 20:14

My dh has a daughter with an ex, they currently have an amicable relationship although it hasn't always been so. We have his daughter frequently, take her on family holidays, she has her own bedroom/clothes at our house etc etc. My dh used to give his ex money informally until several years ago she involved CSA and actually ended up receiving less money than she was originally. Since then my dh has been very conscientious in sending pay checks in voluntarily and making sure he is making the correct payments. What I am trying to say is that he wants to support his daughter and is in no way a 'deadbeat dad'.
When he dropped his daughter off yesterday his ex mentioned that she had started taking her to ballet classes and 'is he going to contribute to half?'. The money is not a massive amount (although I've recently gone back to work full time after having a baby and we are in no way loaded!). The problem is the principle. Is CSA meant to just cover basic living amounts or does it include extras?is she going to continue to ask for more contributions? In my view she took him to csa to ensure she received an adequate amount of money a month and now she wants more.Don't get me wrong I believe that she is entitled to the money she receives but how far should this go and is it worth rocking the boat by saying no?

OP posts:
splashymcsplash · 27/09/2011 23:09

Constance the reason I asked if Fabby has children is that I find it hard to believe that anyone who has children really believes it cost 30 a week to raise then.

I think it is best not to engage with you though as anyone who posts anything as disgusting as you do can only be doing it for attention.

Just fuck off why don't you.

ConstanceNoring · 27/09/2011 23:11

What have I posted that disgusts you ? Confused

SheCutOffTheirTails · 27/09/2011 23:11

"before the disagreement over contact I assume the child was having clothes/holodays provided etc plus the higher amount of maintenance being paid."

Before the disagreement over contact the OP's husband only got to see his daughter for 3 hours a week at his ex's house. So presumably she didn't get holidays and clothes provided.

The child's mother sought a legal agreement for the amount of money that needed to be given to her to be spent on the child.

That's what she gets.

It may be that the OP and her DH now spend more on the child than they did previously, but that her mother receives less.

They have also had to meet expensive legal bills.

I can't see the basis on which you can possibly claim that a child who sees more of her father, whose father pays for her to have things, and whose father pays her mother an agreed sum for child maintenance is being "punished".

If I had an agreement with someone based on goodwill and they took me to court to get more and ended up getting less, you'd better believe I'd give them less.

In a case like the one described I would still provide for the child as I always had, just not through her mother.

CardyMow · 27/09/2011 23:11

My Ex-P is a twunt, and even HE can see that he has to do that stuff!

edam · 27/09/2011 23:12

Dione - that's a brilliant insult to Daily Mail journalists. Whatever you think of their politics and approach, there is some craft to their writing!

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:13

I have been on both sides of this Lunar, and tbh its only fair way to be. I get very cross when the second wife with the new family gets stroppy about her husband paying his ex for their children (been on the crappy end of that deal!) whilst making sure her own kids get the best of everything.

That taught me an important lesson so that when I became I stepmother I could see it from his ex's pov.

And as for £30 a week.....oh I wish! I really really do :o

SexualHarrassmentPandaPop · 27/09/2011 23:14
ConstanceNoring · 27/09/2011 23:15

fwiwi I am not reponsible for fabby opinions, yes i defended her earlier up thread because someone told her to fuck off when she posted her own opinion on something. I've already said I don't necessarily agree with her, but I don't see why anyone's opinion or own experience should be disregarded with a 'fuck off' just because it doesn't reflect their own.

SexualHarrassmentPandaPop · 27/09/2011 23:18

"If I had an agreement with someone based on goodwill and they took me to court to get more and ended up getting less, you'd better believe I'd give them less."

That is exactly the point I'm addressing. The dh isn't giving the ex anything. It's for his daughter - who wasn't the one who took him to court.

ConstanceNoring · 27/09/2011 23:19

and yes I am a stepmother and a mother. I have two strapping teenage boys I have known for 12 years.

And yes my natural children go without so that we can provide for them, yes i can say that without hesitation.

We share the same bath water so they can have 30 minute showers Grin

and many more anecdotes Grin

splashymcsplash · 27/09/2011 23:20

The disgusting views are those expressed by Fabby, I see how re reading that post that I didn't make that clear. Still not sure why you are defending her though..

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:20

I have to agree that the "fuck off" wasnt appropriate at all. I personally think that Fabby talks utter tripe alot of the time, but that was unnecessary

ConstanceNoring · 27/09/2011 23:21

**

It didn't happen Panda unless my MN clone is up to it's shenanigans again Hmm

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:23

But SHPP he is probably still paying out the same but is spending it directly on the dd as she is spending more time there. I suspect that it was the mothers greed that sent her to the CSA and it bit her on the arse, but the dd doesnt appear to be losing out as he buys her clothes etc when he sees her as they have a better arrangement in place for access now.

DioneTheDiabolist · 27/09/2011 23:23

Constance, I don't think that it's Fabby's opinions or experience that rub people up the wrong way, it's her insults and holier than thou attitude. She does not give support, she is simply nasty to single mothers. The fact that she was one, doesn't make it any better.

LineRunner · 27/09/2011 23:25

the mothers greed that sent her to the CSA

Title for a book, perhaps?

SexualHarrassmentPandaPop · 27/09/2011 23:26

He may have bought clothes and things for her before we don't know.

I still stand by the fact that cutting maintenance to spite the rp only ends up affecting the child. Unless you subscribe to Fabby's view that resident parents just use maintenance money to go out for meals and get pissed Grin

ConstanceNoring · 27/09/2011 23:28

Dione I know, I know, many a time I have often thought "wtf" to what fabby has posted, and I'm sure she knows it, but earlier up ^ I just thought the fuck off was uncalled for.

I don't know why I bothered, I'm sure she doesn't need anyone jumping to her defence Wink

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:28

Why not Line, would be a best seller!

The OPs DH was paying generously, without a murmur and paying regularly, so why else go if not in the hopes she would get more? I went because I wasnt getting a penny and it was the only way to get him to pay (had to take it out of his wages in the end, he is a deadbeat). Her greed came back to bite her and thankfully the DD hasnt lost out, but I think that he should fund half the lessons if they can afford it.

LunarRose · 27/09/2011 23:29

Constance -

Before a divorce probably about 80-90% of a man's (or woman in some cases) net salary will be spent on supporting the family,
After divorce that will drop to 20-25% (roughly).
Leaving man and second family with 75-80%, a figure that will increase should the NRP have children

Unless an ex contributes significantly the first family, the second family will always be in a better position.

agree the fuck off was totally unnecessary

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:29

But SHPP, HE didnt cut the maintenance, she did!

SheCutOffTheirTails · 27/09/2011 23:30

"The dh isn't giving the ex anything."

Wow, you really have to be seeing this through ideological goggles to make a statement like that.

He is paying the money to his ex. The money is for his daughter, but it is paid via her mother, who is his ex.

He has other ways of providing for his daughter. He can do it directly.

So he can reduce the money he gives to his ex and not reduce the money his daughter gets.

He can refuse to pay for ballet lessons his ex signed their daughter up for without discussion but still pay for her to do nice extra things of her choosing.

The ex squandered the goodwill between them by taking him to court and denying him access to their child. So now he has found other ways to provide for his daughter that suit him better.

She has less money to spend on her daughter, but that doesn't mean that less money is being spent on her daughter.

LineRunner · 27/09/2011 23:32

God this whole topic is a frigging nightmare because none of us know the actual details of each others lives.

I even get depressed when posters talk of 'maintenance' as if it goes to the exP, as opposed to the 'child support' that goes to the children.

Bogeyface · 27/09/2011 23:32

Apart from the point about the lessons, which I think they should contribute to if they would want their own child to have such things, I would say that Shecutofftheirtails has said what I am trying to say but much better than I did!

AmberLeaf · 27/09/2011 23:33

I have to say single parents have it made financially

HA HAHAHA HAHAHA HA.

Wow!

What a joke. NOT.

You do realise that not all single parents get maintenance from their childrens father dont you?

Not all single parents can work either for varying reasons.

So that would knock a substantial amount off that 'have it made'' total.

What a monumentally stupid thing to say.

Is Fabbychic real? or just some sort of DM charicature?

Swipe left for the next trending thread