Ex is stopping maintenance payments when DD2 leaves junior school

[Carrie370]

I have 2 DDs, 13 and 11. Both have been to private schools since reception, and my younger DD starts senior school in September. Their father and I separated 5 years ago (never married, and he has no parental rights in law as they were both born after Dec 2003) and have had a private financial arrangement up until now. He now maintains that the £400 a month he has been paying me was his contribution to DD2's fees until she left junior school, and that since he didn't agree to sending them to private senior school, these payments will stop in July. We have always had shared care 50/50, although on top of paying the school fees, I have paid for everything else too (music lessons, school trips, uniform, holiday childcare, etc, etc).

My DD2 has organisational issues, and is on the learning support radar; both current and future schools have suggested that this is not helped by the constant change of house during the week, and so I have decided to have them with me on 4 school nights. My ex does not accept that this means he will be liable for maintenance, thinks I am doing this just to try to get more money out of him (he has never read DD's ed psych report or been to any parent's meetings) and still states that he owes me nothing. He earns a good salary (as do I), but he and his new wife appear to have saddled themselves with a massive mortgage, such that he says he cannot afford to pay towards any of the girls' 'extras' (never mind the fees, which I have long-accepted I will have to pay).

I am bristling with fury (and before anyone calls me a privileged rich bitch, yes I am aware that my question may seem trivial to those really struggling). Does anyone know if I can pursue him via a solicitor, or do I have to go via the CSA (or whatever it is called now)?

Sorry for the long, ranting post!

[DaddyBeer]

No offense to anyone here, but you really need to find out the facts from someone qualified to give them, if facts are what you are after.

Plenty of free initial advice out there and I could recommend Purple Legal as a starting point.

[JohnnyBarthes]

I'm guessing the statement about PR in the op must be a typo and should have read "they were both born before Dec 2003". If the eldest is 13 she'd have been born in 2000 or 2001.

[Carrie370]

When I said they were both born after Dec 2003, I meant BEFORE Dec 2003 Confused posting (because angry

He does not have automatic parental rights. But he does have responsibilities.

[JohnnyBarthes]

Given you chose to pay two sets of school fees and that he has almost 50:50 residency, I'm also guessing that a lot of people (myself included, sorry) are going to question your right to any maintenance at all.

Sorry, op.

[OwlCapone]

The parental responsibility is a red herring. If he went to court he would get it.

[JohnnyBarthes]

Btw I'm not denying that he sounds tight and I understand your anger.

[Carrie370]

I will get the facts. Either I am entitled to maintenance or I am not. I am doing what I think is in my DDs best interests, both from an educational perspective (although I appreciate others may not agree) and a welfare standpoint (most definitely). I have feckless, irresponsible ex who is quite happy to boast about his children's achievements but not willing to pay towards them (FORGET the school fees!)

[gobbynorthernbird]

But he has been paying, and has had them 50% of the time.

[MrsTerryPratchett]

What gobby said.

[ballinacup]

I see where you're coming from OP.

If he has them 50% of the time, he should still be responsible for 50% of their living costs (clothing, shoes, dance lessons). OP seems to be suggesting he wants to pay for nothing but the food they eat when at his house and nothing more.

Is that right, OP?

[HarveySchlumpfenburger]

If he hadn't been paying £400 that he didn't need to you might have a point, ballinacup but I suspect that £400 would cover at least half of the living costs for clothes, shoes, dance lessons etc.

[ballinacup]

But he wants to stop paying that Rafa. So, aside from the food they eat at his home, his contribution will be 0.

I'm amazed so many on this thread think that's okay. What if OP did the same?

[Itsfab]

Forget all the legal stuff for a minute. Why doesn't a father WANT to pay as much is necessary for their child?

If you were still together would you have joint money so he would be paying for the things he is refusing too now or is it just a way of controlling you?

[gobbynorthernbird]

And maybe he has a plan to take the girls shopping (or whatever) on a regular basis once he's not paying support for children who reside with him 505 of the time.

[gobbynorthernbird]

505? 50%, obviously.

[fifi669]

If OP chooses to give her children dance lessons, music tuition etc, that doesn't mean ex should have to pay half, it wasn't his choice.

Wrt to clothing costs could you not suggest he takes them shopping a few times a year spending £x on each?

Birthday presents for friends should be dependant in whichever parent has them that day, or out of their pocket money if in secondary school...

[MrsTerryPratchett]

ItsFab he doesn't think private school and piano lessons are necessary. Clothes are and he should be buying half of those. He should also be doing half the shitwork like doctor's and teachers' meeting. However 50% time and 400 quid a month sounds great to me. Certainly not a deadbeat.

[Carrie370]

YES! ballinacup. Exactly. Take the private fees out of the equation, those I have agreed to pay for. It is all the extras, which anyone will know add up to a lot. He pays for food, and any extra heating/lighting they may use when with him. That is all. He is living in a dual-income household, with no other dependent kids. He maintains 2 motor bikes and has a penchant for live music events and trips abroad. He is most definitely NOT on the breadline. He seems to think I have a bottomless bank balance, which, by the time I have paid for everything, I do not.

[gobbynorthernbird]

So do you know (as in he's told you) that he will not buy any clothes, shoes, etc, once he isn't tied into paying the £400?

[TwinkleTwinkleStarlight]

His wife's money has nothing to do with it I'm afraid.

[MrsTerryPratchett]

If you, and I'm not suggesting you do, sent them in the clothes they were standing up in, what would happen?

[fifi669]

If you think that 50% of the time has been costing him £400, if OP is paying in the same for extras, (both pay living costs for when they're there), that's a hell of a lot of money to spend on the kids!

£100 pw each on extras! Hells bells!

[TwinkleTwinkleStarlight]

Exactly Fifi. I would say he certainly has been contributing to the 'extras'

[ballinacup]

The whole point of child maintenance is to maintain the child at, I would assume, the level at which they are accustomed, prior to their parents split. This is why parents who earn 100k per annum pay more CM than those that are on JSA.

In a dual income household where their dad earns in excess of 60k and their mum earns enough to pay for two lots of private school fees, I am assuming that 'standard' is pretty damn high.

He does not get to decide now, when his DDs are 11 and 13, that their standard is to drop. You're right OP, I'd be livid.