Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 18 19

AIBU?

To think I shouldn't be paying maintenance as well as DH?

468 replies

Mumoftwo88 · 26/04/2013 21:31

My DH has a daughter with his exW aged 8 and we have two children together aged 2 and 4. His exW claims maintenance from him and he pays it every month without fail at £250.00. She has recently just become unemployed and whilst I sympathise with her I cannot understand why she is now claiming that he should be paying more and if needs be it should be paid through my earnings. (Her words)

She seems to think that because our household has two incomes coming in then we are wadded. We're not. From my earnings I have the mortgage to pay, bills to pay for this household, a food shop to pay for, a car to run, and 3 children to provide for, including DSD when she stays here.

And I have a family holiday to pay for. I'd like to think we can have some luxuries without some woman trying to screw money out of me just because I happen to be the partner of her exH.

Now don't get me wrong I know it is important that DSD is provided for, but that is where my DH's maintenance payments come in and I make sure she is ok when she is here. At the end of the day I'm not some meal ticket to this woman.

Aibu?

OP posts:

Report

Bridgetbidet · 27/04/2013 00:03

BruthasTortoise, if the OPs ex was made redundant and the OP was really suffering financially I would certainly hope that she would try and ease the financial pressure on him by lessening the maintenance payments for her DC if she was in a position to be buying holidays and luxuries.

If that was me and I was in a situation where I could afford that sort of thing and my ex and his new family were really suffering I would refuse to take a penny off him till he was sorted out, even if that did involve forgoing a holiday myself.

I wouldn't want to go on holiday paid for with my exes money if his kids were struggling for new shoes, that would be disgusting.

Mumoftwo88 · 27/04/2013 00:03

Karma

Like I said, any direct spending I make, I hope would help alleviate a bit of the pressure so that she can maintain her home for DSD without having to worry about the other bits like clothes. At least I'm doing something. The money she does receive can go towards her bills surely?

OP posts:

zippy539 · 27/04/2013 00:04

Arg - sorry Op - I know I seem down on your Dh but you do seem to be paying for absolutely everything. So taking that further - just wondered whether the demand for extra money came directly from her to you, or via your DH. If it came from your Dh - do you know whether she has actually asked for the money or whether he is using it an excuse to service his debts. Sorry if over dramatic but good to be certain. (Off to plot latest novel....)

WhatTheWaterGaveMe · 27/04/2013 00:05

Not sure why people are scoffing about "is £250 really enough anyway?"
It's not just £250 is it - the child's mother provides for her too. It's two parents contributions that are bringing her up so we can rightly assume the child is allocated more than £250 a month.

I think the right thing to do would be provide things DSD needs - school stuff, shoes etc but I don't see why the CSA payments should go up.
We assume(?) the mum will be looking for another job so hopefully this won't be a permanent situation for her, so just help out as and when needed in the meantime.

I don't think YABU.
I do think it was unreasonable to call her 'that woman' though.

olgaga · 27/04/2013 00:06

His ex receives £250.00 a month from DH, that is a lot compared to some.

It's not about whether it's a lot or a little compared to some. It's what he is required to pay as a proportion of his earnings.

Presumably he is on around £40k to be paying maintenance of £250pm with two resident children.

OTTMummA · 27/04/2013 00:06

Maintenance is for the child, not to sub the ex's cost of living.
She made choices of where to live based on the current maintenance she recieves as well as her own salary, the ops DH is not responsible for the ex's shortfall.

BruthasTortoise · 27/04/2013 00:08

Olgaga that's a fair point but if the ex has outgoings which dramatically exceed that figure then she is going to have to make rapid adjustments. If £580 wont cover the child's share of expenses then there's no way that the £240 she will get from JSA will cover her share.

AmberLeaf · 27/04/2013 00:08

the ops DH is not responsible for the ex's shortfall

But if the ops DH didn't work, the EX would be responsible for his shortfall.

BruthasTortoise · 27/04/2013 00:11

Arisbottle you are suggesting that the children of separated parents should be shielded from the realities of life in a way which no other children are. It is sad and unfortunate but when one parent is made redundant there are very few children who won't find that their lifestyle changes to a certain extent.

olgaga · 27/04/2013 00:13

Bruthas we don't know anything about the ex's situation, other than she has just lost her job and was reliant on one income and maintenance of £250pm.

If she is no longer able to contribute what she previously did because her income is severely reduced, then quite obviously that will have an impact on her child's quality of life.

The question is, is the child's father happy to sit back and allow that to happen?

Does the child's father think he should give some extra help to the ex at this time in order to protect the DD's standard of living?

It's not actually about the OP handing over cash to the ex, despite the fact that's how OP feels about it.

FreudiansSlipper · 27/04/2013 00:14

well she needed to be near her family as they helped with child care, should they live in the poorest area just because they are now a single parent family or maybe move town/city to the otherside of the country up root their daughter

I get more than £250 a month, still all my earning go on our living costs it is it a lot if your rent/mortgage is high

fedupofnamechanging · 27/04/2013 00:16

The reality here though is that someone has to meet the full costs of raising this child and if the mum is unemployed and the dad has over committed himself by having more kids he cannot afford, then it is likely to be the state. Personally I think he should be doing more.

Mumoftwo88 · 27/04/2013 00:17

Another point is that if she is now unemployed she will receive housing benefits for her rent costs? That should help her in the mean time shouldn't it?

OP posts:

OTTMummA · 27/04/2013 00:18

Amber, what the ex gets is enough for a child to live on.
If the DH stopped working and couldn't pay maintenance she would have to cut back on things, that is a reality when being a main carer.
Same is happening now when she is out of work but still getting the maintenance for the DD.
she just doesn't want to scrimp.
If they were to increase Maintenance now and reduce it when the ex found work they wouldn't get a back payment such as what happens when the NRP starts working again.
They also get cb and CTC if applicable.
If she really wanted to she could go for 50/50 care if he stopped working, things a bit fairer then.

Mumoftwo88 · 27/04/2013 00:20

But the point is though Karma, we CAN afford our children

Just because his exW is now unemployed doesn't mean we can't afford the children we have together. Should we just have not had them just in case exW loses her job in the future and demands more money?

Ridiculous.

OP posts:

olgaga · 27/04/2013 00:22

If the DH stopped working and couldn't pay maintenance she would have to cut back on things

Yes but that's not the case!

If she really wanted to she could go for 50/50 care if he stopped working, things a bit fairer then

Are you quite mad? How on earth would that help the OP!

BruthasTortoise · 27/04/2013 00:24

karma surely the same applies to the ex then? Maybe she shouldn't have had a child she couldn't afford?
At the time the ex's child and the OP's children were born they could afford them as all the parents were working.

imour · 27/04/2013 00:26

i expect when she was working she was claiming working tax credits or child tax credits unless she was a very high earner , as well as child benefit and getting the 250 a month , so im assuming she will now go and claim income support , she wont have council tax to pay if claiming or rent if renting , will still get child credit and benefit , if you make life too comfortable for her then she might not bother going back to work ,lots of dads dont pay a bean so its good he always has .

FreudiansSlipper · 27/04/2013 00:28

It is not good that he has always paid it is what he should do he ia a parent it is shit that some nrp choose to pay nothing or very very little

olgaga · 27/04/2013 00:34

Oh yes it's really marvellous that he has paid what he should as a parent.

As does his ex.

OTTMummA · 27/04/2013 00:36

Olgaga I think you are reading out of context.

DH is responsible for the DD, so he pays a fair amount required of him. This together with cb is enough to keep a child.
This is the only money that is in question, he is not responsible for the ex's living expenses for herself.
If he lost his job she would have to cut back through no choice wouldn't she?
Well what's the difference now? She has less money, she needs to get appropriate help for HER living expenses like HB.
She would have to apply for JSA or whatever it's called now to help pay HER share of bills and food.
IMO she gets enough maintenance to feed and clothe a child.
If she wasnt happy with no maintenance if the DH lost his job then to share costs equally 50/50 custody could be requested, I don't see a problem with that so long as distance isn't a problem.

Mumoftwo88 · 27/04/2013 00:36

Well then she shouldn't be expecting me to foot the bill for her then should she?

OP posts:

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Mumoftwo88 · 27/04/2013 00:38

^^ above post was in response to Olgaga saying the ex pays what she should as a parent as well as my DH.

OP posts:

FreudiansSlipper · 27/04/2013 00:42

Maintenance is paid to maintain costs of not just clothing but providing a home/food for a child and all the other expenses travel, school trips and so on

olgaga · 27/04/2013 00:42

I think both of you are missing the point.

If the ex's income is severely reduced then the standard of living for her and the DD will be affected.

You are both looking at this as though it's only the ex. It's not. The DD is the main consideration here.

I find it intriguing, Mum, that you haven't mentioned what your DH thinks about this situation and what he plans to do about it.

Or is it all down to you?

Flip

1 2 ··· 5 6 7 ··· 18 19

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.