Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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 that I am not 'lucky' or being 'ungrateful'

215 replies

BuskersCat · 04/09/2013 14:14

Basically I asked DDs father to buy her some SHOES for pre-school, proper full shoes (colour doesn't matter at pre-school) XP bought Dd a pair of trainers, I thanked him for them, closed the front door and moaned at DP that he had bought trainers and that I'd have to swap them for shoes and make up the shortfall in price.

DP thinks I am being ungrateful and that I am lucky. I disagree, we get £61 a month from the CSA for dd, I thought the least he could do is buy her a pair of shoes for school, bearing in mind in 3 and a half years this will be the second pair of shoes he has bought her.

I don't think a father buying shoes is lucky I think it should be expected, especially since the maintenance we receive is so low. DP thinks this was nice of him. I also think that changing them from shoes isn't me being ungrateful, I said thank-you for them!

OP posts:
ChinaCupsandSaucers · 04/09/2013 16:52

SirRaymond The CSA disagree. The advice they give - written and verbal, is that once the NRP has paid the calculated maintenance, then the RP becomes financially responsible for the DCs.

They should 'cut their cloth' accordingly as they say, and not demand more because they can't afford the standard of living they wish for their DCs.

HappyMummyOfOne · 04/09/2013 16:54

YABU, if Clarks then they will be pretty much the same price as a pair of shoes anyway so not much difference. He should have a say in what he buys rather than be told.

£61 from him, £61 from you (am presuming you work as you are slating him for providing this amount so assume you contribute too) pllus £80 child benefits ane likely tax credits is more than enough to pay for clothes and food for one child. If paying childcare then it may not cover everything. Never understand why rent and bills are included as adults pay those with or without children anyway.

Original poster
BuskersCat · 04/09/2013 16:58

No I do not work, DP works f/t and provides everything else

OP posts:
SleepyFish · 04/09/2013 17:06

I would assume rent is included because having children live with you generally means you need more bedrooms.
Where I live a 2 bed property costs at least £150 pm more than a 1 bed.
Do you understand now happymummy?

SirRaymondClench · 04/09/2013 17:06

China Should we all just abandon human decency and responsibility and do what do the CSA say? If it takes two people to create a life then it takes two people to both be responsible for that childs upkeep.
Out of interest why did you involve the CSA?

NightScentedStock · 04/09/2013 17:09

The CSA was set up because so many non resident parents refused to pay a penny towards their children's upbringing, despite being very well able to. Just because your ex is not like that it doesn't mean many thousands of other nrps are similar. I went to the csa in desperation when xp decided one day he no longer felt he should pay a penny for his ds who he had supported willingly for 7 years previous. He is exceedingly wealthy so the maintenance was nothing to him, and yes I have to squeeze every penny out of him because he is a twat, like so many other nrp twats out there.

HappyMummyOfOne · 04/09/2013 17:11

Then YABVU, if you dont work then everybody bar you is financially providing for your child so you can hardly complain that the amount or purchases dont meet your standards!

Presuambly though sleepy, most NRP also needs extra rooms for the children so both parents pay the same house wise i would imagine.

NightScentedStock · 04/09/2013 17:11

Last post was to china

squoosh · 04/09/2013 17:13

Happy(miserable)Mummyof One that's a pretty offensive thing to say. She's 'providing' for her child by looking after her day in, day out.

AmberLeaf · 04/09/2013 17:14

I'm sticking to the shoe issue;

I don't see how a pair of clarkes shoes differs that much from a pair of clarkes trainers TBH.

When it comes to wet weather, you use wellies.

I don't think you should be grateful that he is doing what any parent should do, but then I don't think you should be criticising his shoe choice either.

Sirzy · 04/09/2013 17:16

I agree Amber.

SleepyFish · 04/09/2013 17:23

Not necessarily happymummy. In this case the NRP lives with his parents. Not all NRP have overnight access, many live in shared accommodation sharing a room when the child visits, fine 1 night a week not so fine as a permanant home.

5madthings · 04/09/2013 17:25

Yanbu he is her father ffs.

And trainers aren't recomnded as all the time/everyday shoes for children as they are not supportive enough. It wouldn't have hurt him to listen and get what was appropriate.

JoinYourPlayfellows · 04/09/2013 17:35

"When it comes to wet weather, you use wellies."

I don't.

Wellies are not good or supportive footwear.

They are for muddy walks and splashing in puddles.

Walking to and from nursery on the pavement in autumn/winter weather should be done in a sturdy pair of leather winter shoes or boots.

Definitely not a pair of canvas runners.

IneedAsockamnesty · 04/09/2013 18:26

No parent should feel lucky or grateful that the other parent provides for the child they jointly created.

to the posters who are stunned by the £61 pm csa assessment according to the gingerbread the most frequent amount assessed to be paid to a pwc is £20 pm and that usually has to be obtained via direct deduction as the csa predominantly deals with refusers job hoppers and self employed liars.

The csa assessed amount is the minimum a nrp should pay but the maximum they can be forced to pay,there is nothing stopping them buying extras or paying more you just can't make them.

Fwiw if I was seeing someone who had kids and I found out they had to be hassled to pay for there children or refused the odd pair of school shoes i would lose all respect for them and and ditch them pretty sharpish, how they treat there existing children is exactly how they will treat any future children.

But its entirely possible that he just didn't think about the suitability rather than being a git on this one occasion.

SirRaymondClench · 04/09/2013 18:33

Any NRP that pays £20 pm under duress towards the upkeep of their DC is scum.

BeCool · 04/09/2013 18:34

Even if he had brought the correct shoes I don't think you should feel grateful or lucky about it. He's a dad buying a pair of shoes for his child. As he should if he is able to.

ChinaCupsandSaucers · 04/09/2013 18:50

Fwiw if I was seeing someone who had kids and I found out they had to be hassled to pay for there children or refused the odd pair of school shoes i would lose all respect for them and and ditch them pretty sharpish, how they treat there existing children is exactly how they will treat any future children.

What does that say about the OP, who isn't financially supporting her DCs at all - she's relying on her DP and her DDs dad, and while her DP appreciates Dads contribution, the OP seems to think it 1) isn't enough and 2) doesn't meet her specifications.

Oblomov · 04/09/2013 18:57

I think you should have spelled it out- she needs pre-school shoes - either theses or these.
Men like that. A or B. Uncomplicated.

BellaTheGooseIsDead · 04/09/2013 19:02

I like the term, "jobhopper" Sock.

XH had a job in June and despite several promising letters involving ever-decreasing sums of money (financial hardship living with Mummy?) he is back on benefits and it's back to £1.66 per week.

I wonder if he has been sanctioned for giving his job up but it wouldn't make any difference to him, would it? Doesn't pay for his food or housing anyway.

YANBU OP.

Jengnr · 04/09/2013 19:03

So someone pays less than £20 a month for the upkeep of their child, can't even get right an essential item for their child and someone daring to suggest that this isn't ok is getting flamed for not being 'grateful'?

This is why we need feminism folks.

squoosh · 04/09/2013 19:07

'What does that say about the OP, who isn't financially supporting her DCs at all - she's relying on her DP and her DDs dad, and while her DP appreciates Dads contribution, the OP seems to think it 1) isn't enough and 2) doesn't meet her specifications.'

Oh for God's sake, she's a SAHP. Do you think parents who work in the home don't 'support' their children and that a parent who pays £61 per month towards their child's upkeep trumps this? Seriously??

You seem determined to make petty digs at the OP for some reason.

imnotmymum · 04/09/2013 19:08

Was he being thick or just winding you up? Seriously OP how hard would it be to buy a pair of shoes. Canvas? You are not at all ungrateful just a Mum who knows the ongoings of everyday life and what is practical asking for some decent shoes for her DD.

Sirzy · 04/09/2013 19:10

I didn't realise that they did canvas shoes with lights in at clarks? I am a bit confused by that.

If they are canvas shoes I can understand your frustration, if they are just normal trainers I still cant see a problem.

TwasBrillig · 04/09/2013 19:11

I don't think they do? Doodles don't, but the trainers (solid, good for pre school I'd have thought?) do. Might have got wrong end of stick.

Swipe left for the next trending thread