Child maintaince with a greedy ex

[EveOnline2016]

My brother has his daughter a lot.

This is how it breaks down. 1/2 the school holidays. EOW plus every Monday Tuesday and Thursday after school. Also 1/2 the cost of school uniform.

EOW is Friday after school till bedtime Sunday.

Still ex wants CMO payments.

While he has his daughter he feeds and clothes her and washes and irons the school uniform to send back.

My brother has now stopped the £100 per week maintence or he can't afford to have his dd.

Is this fair.

Petal please research figures from cms which show a NRP is compliant at paying child support even if they are paying £1 a week when they have been calculated to pay a much higher amount.
So the cms saying look how successful we are getting NRP to pay includes these people paying just £1 and are classed as compliant!

Most single parents receive nothing but the average amount single parents receive is £34 a week.
I guarantee no single parent receiving £34 a week is using that as a meal ticket

So if my calculations are right, this father has almost 30,000 pounds a year left over after paying maintenance, doesn't sound that broke, actually

That calculation is based on the assumption he's paying the minimum. The op hasn't said that.

For all we know, he could have been paying a lot more than the minimum.

Total agree with Ego's last post (at 13.54) - couldn't have put it better myself.

It's not 33% any more. Current "basic" CMS levels (which applies to gross weekly income of between £200 and £800) are:

-12% for 1 child
-16% for 2
-19% for 3 or more children.

Then he should cut his cloth. If the calculation shows that as the legal minimum then he needs to make appropriate sacrifices to ensure that his child does not go without.

It will be woefully unequal to what the RP does and pays anyway.

statistically

And look at how much that drops even for 1 over night.

All NRPs should pay appropriately, but they're not a meal ticket for their exes

I read your comments and didn't have too much of a problem with them, until this.
This is why people here are so annoyed. We have all had these arguments made against us and seen them made against our friends.

16% for 2 children.

It's an absolute disgrace.

seems your brother is doing quite a lot. It is tricky. mum might be able to do drop offs in the morning while he can't, therefore has the child overnight. cms works on nights had. nrp could have child from bedtime til breakfast on the sofa in the lounge and do sod all else and get a reduction, or do a lot of the day to day stuff, have a fully equipped bedroom and only have one night, but still get assessed as doing the same from cms point of view .

Then he should cut his cloth. If the calculation shows that as the legal minimum then he needs to make appropriate sacrifices to ensure that his child does not go without.

OP hasn't said if the £100 per week is over CMS amount or not. He also pays for 1/2 school stuff and has clothes etc at his.

Cloths will only cut so many ways.

16% for 2 children

I agree - and that's also based on pay -so someone on low pay can pay very little - and not what it costs to raise a child.

Not quite sure how to rephrase it - but I mean that NRPs should pay to support their children. The word '-appropriate' could be replaced with 'reasonable' but it doesn't change the meaning much.

I agree - and that's also based on pay -so someone on low pay can pay very little - and not what it costs to raise a child.

Not everyone can be in high paying jobs.

That small amount may in reality be a large amount to the payer iyswim.

A meal ticket? Seriously? Unless the NRP is earning mega money, the amount of maintenance awarded will barely cover half the day to day costs of raising a child. Meal ticket? What a vile description of parental responsibility.

He only has 2 nights out of 14

He is paying nothing

But the RP is expected to cut her cloth to pick up his slack?

cloth will only cut so many ways indeed, and therein lies the problem.

I know Aye. It beggars belief doesn't it?

That small amount may in reality be a large amount to the payer iyswim

And that's why it's so complicated. A child needs to be supported. A child needs to have a relationship with both parents. That is expensive for a family who are together.

How can it be done when separated?

Meal ticket?

I think that deserves an ODFOD.

cloth will only cut so many ways indeed, and therein lies the problem.

Yes, but what happens if the RP doesn't cut their cloth accordingly? "Sorry DD/DS no dinner for you tonight, I'm skint." Nope.

He only has 2 nights out of 14

NO - he doesn't. He has EOW, holidays as well. That's a lot.

Plus there's the whole discussion people have debated about the after school issue - twice a week.

As someone said:

nrp could have child from bedtime til breakfast on the sofa in the lounge and do sod all else and get a reduction, or do a lot of the day to day stuff, have a fully equipped bedroom and only have one night, but still get assessed as doing the same from cms point of view

That's why it's not as simple as saying 'he has her 2 /14 nights'

Careforadrink it's pathetic that RPs are being castigated for trying to ensure NRPs fulfil responsibilities, yet apparently NRPs can just say "no I've decided I'm not going to be a parent this week." It enrages me!

What happens when both parents are skint?

But the RP is expected to cut her cloth to pick up his slack?

Errrrr no. He has stopped yes. He only has a set amount of money. It is both the parents cloth that will only cut so many ways.

Until he stopped he was paying £100 per week plus half of school costs holidays etc.

We have no way of knowing unless OP says, if that is above CMS amount or not.

It maybe that it is and it can not longer be sustained.

People are jumping to conclusions when we don't have all the facts.

Petal, RPs don't have that option. They are forced to "cut their cloth" in order to make sure their kids are fed/clothed/warm. They have no other choice, even if it means not eating themselves!