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

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:
Petal02 · 17/09/2016 11:24

Even with goodwill all round, I've never thought it was possible to find a way around shared care that really works ........

AyeAmarok · 17/09/2016 11:28

And so what should a NRP do to be a decent parent?

I can't be arsed to engage with you on this any longer, as it seems like nothing anyone says is going in. I'll give it one last go.

1 - PAY THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF CHILD SUPPORT LEGALLY REQUIRED.
2 - be involved, in the hard stuff as well as the fun stuff. Be equally responsible for the days the child is off sick, doctor appointments, homework, etc.
3 - not remove the child from their main carer purely so you can avoid maintenance and then palm them off on grandparents because they're inconvenient to your life.

That would be a start.

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 17/09/2016 11:28

PigletWasPoohsFriend it doesn't matter why he's a NRP, and the behaviour of either X doesn't matter either. It's the upbringing of the wee girl in the middle of all this that matters. DPs XW cheated relentlessly, as did my XH, none of that has ever been relevant to how we parent.

I agree but these sort of threads usually go RP = good and is child centred NRP = bad and isn't . Along with all sorts of projections.

If only life were that simple....

ayeokthen · 17/09/2016 11:32

AyeAmarok everything you said in your last post sums it up perfectly.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 11:32

1 - PAY THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF CHILD SUPPORT LEGALLY REQUIRED

And then you seemed to dismiss that by saying that he could 'sit back and being a good parent'

And if an NRP is doing the other stuff you mentioned, is that enough?

Petal02 · 17/09/2016 11:34

Ego - it seems the NRP can't win ......

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 11:34

I agree but these sort of threads usually go RP = good and is child centred NRP = bad and isn't . Along with all sorts of projections

This. No one except the people involved know enough about the reality of the situation, the financial situation, what happens during holidays, what happens when a child is sick etc.

MN is probably not the place to 'solve' this.

Petal02 · 17/09/2016 11:36

I agree with you, Ego.

ArcheryAnnie · 17/09/2016 11:42

And yet, Petal and Ego, what we know is that the NRP has unilaterally decided he is going to pay NOTHING.

What is good about that?

StatisticallyChallenged · 17/09/2016 11:42

There are laws in place around child maintenance for a reason. You don't get to just decide they don't apply to you because you're a special daddy and you think you do enough.

Withdrawing cash from your child's main home without discussion or agreement is not good parenting.

ayeokthen · 17/09/2016 11:43

Petal Ego I can't be arsed any more, have a Biscuit

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 11:46

And yet, Petal and Ego, what we know is that the NRP has unilaterally decided he is going to pay NOTHING

What is good about that

Nothing - that's not right. There is obviously a massive difference between £400 a month and nothing.

I hope they are able to communicate, to put their DD's needs first and to try and see each others POV - both money, expenses, work pressure etc. It's a difficult conversation and made more difficult as it's about money. That's hard enough when you live together but when separated, it's harder.

Careforadrink · 17/09/2016 11:48

Personally I think the legal minimum is only the starting point.

Everyone knows that unless you are a higher earner the legal minimum won't go anywhere near the actual day to day costs of raising a child.

Being a disney dad at macdonalds once a fortnight and plastering it all over facebook but not bothering with appts, medical stuff, schooling, homework, hobbies etc.......equals a deadbeat in my book.

ayeokthen · 17/09/2016 11:50

Careforadrink spot on!

mixety · 17/09/2016 11:51

There isn't nearly enough information to be making moral judgements here, I don't think. We don't know if one parent earns way more than the other or is significantly more financially comfortable than the other, to what extent each parent's earning power is affected by the childcare they do, if £100 per week was the CSA recommended amount or much more or much less...

But legally the brother should definitely be paying something.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 11:52

Being a disney dad at macdonalds once a fortnight and plastering it all over facebook but not bothering with appts, medical stuff, schooling, homework, hobbies etc.......equals a deadbeat in my book

Yes - if that's what an NRP is doing.

But we don't know what this NRP is doing, do we?

ayeokthen · 17/09/2016 11:53

Given that his sister has pretty quickly disappeared and hasn't contested any of what has been said, I'd say we do actually.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 11:54

Given that his sister has pretty quickly disappeared and hasn't contested any of what has been said, I'd say we do actually

Umm, it's Saturday morning. Maybe she's not on here this morning?

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 17/09/2016 12:04

Given that his sister has pretty quickly disappeared and hasn't contested any of what has been said, I'd say we do actually.

Some people aren't glued to their phone/computers 24/7

ayeokthen · 17/09/2016 12:05

Well then I await her confirmation that I'm wrong, and if I am, I will apologise.

Petal02 · 17/09/2016 12:06

The OP may simply be busy this morning - you can't construe anything by her lack of response. I'm still unsure if the father in question has 50/50 care (or not) and in light of all sorts of details that aren't clear, I don't think we can make any sensible comment.

AyeAmarok · 17/09/2016 12:06

And then you seemed to dismiss that by saying that he could 'sit back and being a good parent

Nope, if you read my post Ego I'll even put it here for you to have another read, I responded to your post saying "what if the CMS said he had to pay less than £100 a week" by saying:

If it's less than £100 a week then he can pay whatever that is (plus the arrears, since he's stopped paying) and then sit there smugly in the knowledge that he's superdad by paying the minimum legal amount towards his daughter.

Most people who aren't desperate to defend a NRP father not paying ANY maintenance towards his child could probably tell that was sarcasm. I'm sorry you couldn't, but that does say a lot about the position you're coming at this from.

JellyBelli · 17/09/2016 12:08

The father has the child every other weekend and some evenings. Thats not 50/50. Now he has stopped paying anything.

Ego147 · 17/09/2016 12:09

Well then I await her confirmation that I'm wrong, and if I am, I will apologise

There's going to be a lot of posts on here to read. She might not well read your post. So no reply to your comment does not necessarily mean your comment was true. Or untrue.

Somerville · 17/09/2016 12:09

Yes, some posters not picking up on that sarcasm was very telling, AyeAmarok. It made me laugh a bit, actually.

Swipe left for the next trending thread