Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Child maintaince with a greedy ex

484 replies

EveOnline2016 · 17/09/2016 00:02

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.

OP posts:
abbsismyhero · 17/09/2016 08:14

Is he having her in the evening so mum can work?

The set up seems odd

CandODad · 17/09/2016 08:15

OP, Sorry to say but pretty much all you will get here is projection and nothing less expected of you brother than providing everything and not being able to provide for himself. "He, can afford to drink water! He should be giving that up for his daughter"

RitchyBestingFace · 17/09/2016 08:15

Assuming she's not at an independent uniform is about £50-£100 a year. Big whoop

Xmaslover · 17/09/2016 08:22

Whirlygirly you wouldn't think groups like that exist and it's scary the language they use to describe women and they have women agreeing with them.
I'm a member of a RP child maintenance support group and they regularly join just to stir trouble and their words 'educate us'.
Some of their quotes include and I've taken out the swearing

Greedy b should have their c sewn up
Ex wife needs a kick in the f*

These are fathers and it's opened my eyes to the lengths some people will go to not supporting their child .

DoItTooJulia · 17/09/2016 08:22

Your brother does know that the money is to make sure his daughter has her needs met?

I just don't get why parents don't want to pay enough money to make sure their kids are cared for.

Does your brother want his daughter to be financial cared for or not?

CeCeBloomer · 17/09/2016 08:24

This is one of those where the op is clearly unreasonable but unwilling to accept it

PovertyPain · 17/09/2016 08:34

Is this a reverse? I really hope it is the mother posting, or that child hasn't a chance with a selfish fucker of a father and enabling aunt/uncle like this.

Xmaslover · 17/09/2016 08:37

It wouldn't surprise me if op isn't the sister but 2nd wife who resents him paying child support

SandyY2K · 17/09/2016 08:38

Why doesn't he go for joint custody. Proper 50/50, where his DD is spending equal amount of time with both parents.

I don't understand why posters can't make their point without resorting to personal insults TBH. Even if you disagree with someone, there are ways to articulate that without being rude.

AyeAmarok · 17/09/2016 08:45

Oh dear Xmas. I suppose MN is ripe picking for people like that to come on and spread their nonsense.

I feel like I've spent this week on child maintenance threads, trying to argue the case for why children deserve to be financially supported by their fathers. Sometimes I can't believe I'm having to type such simple and obvious things, but women still argue that their partner's ex is just "greedy" because the CMS say he wasn't even paying the legal minimum.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 08:46

Lots of projecting here:

The facts seem to be:

The NRP does need to provide a room for his DD as he has them 50% of the holidays. That is a LOT of time.

He has them EOW - so again needs a room for his DD

He has them after school 2 x a week and feeds them.

He pays half the uniform costs and clothes are at his house as well.

So he needs to provide a room and is definitely not in the 104 days a year as people seem to have forgotten the weekends and the holidays a bit.

The fact the CSA use overnights is strange as it does not take into account these situations.

So what would be fair? What would be reasonable?

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 08:51

I feel like I've spent this week on child maintenance threads, trying to argue the case for why children deserve to be financially supported by their fathers

Do you think this father is not financially supporting his DD?

He has her EWO, half the holidays, 2x a week after school - so that might well allow the ex to work etc. He does seem to be taking a lot of the pressure of 'time' off the ex so she can work as well - to help support her DD.

It's not just financial support - it's time support as well. Is it better to give money to the ex or to give 'time' so the ex can support her DD as well?

AyeAmarok · 17/09/2016 09:10

Do you think this father is not financially supporting his DD?

No.

I came to this conclusion when the OP said:

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

If he wants to give "time support" instead, he could have her more overnights and be responsible for having to get her to bed and then up and washed, fed, dressed and organised for school and paying for school dinners, clubs and activities etc, and taking her to school a few times a week (or pap the child off on his parents for free childcare).

Plus, as always, I'm sure there's a fair bit of embellishment going on with what the father says he does, and what he actually does. A few dinners and runs of the washing machine a week doesn't add up to £100 a week which he now "can't afford".

Trifleorbust · 17/09/2016 09:10

"is it better to give money to the ex or to give 'time' so the ex can support her DD as well?"

These are completely different issues. He isn't providing childcare for his ex, he is caring for his kids. He still needs to support them financially and the law says that, if he isn't doing that with equal numbers of overnight stays (for whatever reason and whoever prefers what) he needs to contribute to the cost of raising them incurred by the other parent. It is very simple.

ghostyslovesheep · 17/09/2016 09:19

he can't afford to pay £100 a week because he has to feed her a few times a month? what is he feeding her - swans and diamonds?

He sounds like a real charmer - I feel sorry for the child caught up in it all

ThatStewie · 17/09/2016 09:27

The number of nights should be irrelevant when men get paid significantly more than women for equal work. This is without factoring in the fact women are less likely to have opportunities to progress in their careers due to childcare, are frequently forced to work part time or are a SAHM until the ex walks out. The parent with more money should be ensuring that his children have the same financial resources as if they were living with them full time.

If the NRP is making £65000 and the RP £ 25000 and they have 50/50 care, the NRP should still be paying maintenance.

notausernumber · 17/09/2016 09:32

I've come back to this since last night and strongly believe it's a reverse.

Can you clarify please op?

Joan0fArc · 17/09/2016 09:32

My x never has the children (not really, not in any formal way) but to have two parents from two households buying the clothes is not practical.

I know exactly what my DC need so if my x sent them back to me with hollister hoodies and deducted that sum from the maintenance it would be frustrating because I'd think, right,but they still need hockey skirts, blazers, hockeys sticks, swimming stuff. You know, all the things that I would have to go out and buy anyway.

Also, as I said to the judge, I wanted the financial sacrifices to be equalised. I don't think it's right that just because I'm not stony broke he could appeal to give me less. I'm entitled to have some small amount of disposal income too!

imnotreally · 17/09/2016 09:37

I get £25 a week for THREE children and now the CSA is changing everything and if I want them to collect the money off him I have to pay them a percentage.

Apparently he's on a really low income yet has a newer car than me and has just gone to America for two weeks.

I don't think anyone is being greedy. But the ops statement about the dad having her full time to claim all the benefits was ill advised.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 09:39

he can't afford to pay £100 a week because he has to feed her a few times a month? what is he feeding her - swans and diamonds

Maybe he has to pay the mortgage, pay the housing bills, run a car etc.

That's £400 a month. Houses don't run themselves. For a parent who has a child and a child who also has a child EOW, after school and half the holidays.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 09:40

if he isn't doing that with equal numbers of overnight stays (for whatever reason and whoever prefers what) he needs to contribute to the cost of raising them incurred by the other parent

What are the extra costs incurred?

Are they £400 a month EXTRA?

Careforadrink · 17/09/2016 09:45

The NRPS never pays anywhere near the cost of the RP or what it actually costs to raise a child.

£400 per month is slightly under £50 per week per child. He's getting off lightly tbh.

Gazelda · 17/09/2016 09:46

I think the fairest way to solve this is for the DM to go through CSA.
I also think that it sounds as though your DB is angling to get FT residency of his daughter for the tax credits and out of spite.
I think the daughter is being used by her DF to point score.

ghostyslovesheep · 17/09/2016 09:48

a child who stays over night 4 nights a month - I'd guess the mum needs to fund a house for the other 26+ nights and needs an actual bedroom for the child

4 nights a month is nothing really - half the holidays means nothing - it doesn't say she's living with him for that time - maybe he just pays for holiday club or his parents have her (as the OP has mentioned)

however it's split it not 50/50 equal care thus he needs to pay to support his child

He's threatening to go for custody just to avoid paying which seems a little ott!

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 09:53

£400 per month is slightly under £50 per week per child. He's getting off lightly tbh

He has 1 child. So that's £100 a week.

He provides a house, has her 2x a week during the week, EOW plus half the holidays.