To encourage BF to take ex to court? benefits advice if possible!!

[toddlermom]

Hi all,

I don't really know anything about benefits but please do help if you know anything about this. My best friend finally left loser ex (they were engaged, never married) and has ended up a single mum living in a bedsit hand to mouth with her DC (loser ex's child). Ex earns £200K a year not in london (so seems like more than £200k as no London cost of living), owns a £400K house, small mortgage.

Anyway, when they split up the benefits people/calculator told her that the most she gets is £900 a month. For rent, bills, nursery, food, car costs, etc. And the rent is really high in the area where they live. I paid for her to go and see a lawyer as I thought it was unfair that the ex shouldn't at least help get her somewhere to live or give more considering he's on £200k a year. The lawyer said it was highly probable that the court should make him give her a deposit or help more with the rent (as he wants them to stay in same area to make it easier for him to see DC). But she didn't want to create bad blood so never took him to court. And also the lawyer couldn't guarantee that this would happen.

Just asking for advice, could she really get more from him? She's also getting the usual benefits too but is really struggling. I feel really strongly that he should help more as he's living the life of riley and she's having a really hard time in a bedsit which now she has to move out of as the landlord selling it so she has to find moving costs, new place etc and really stressful. Am I expecting too much or is this just normal and how it is if you split up and not married?

£900 + £900?! That's not bad if she has one small child and works part time. I would have thought she could easily survive on that. Your op is a bit misleading as it suggests she was living on £900 all in.

She could get legal advice re taking him to court but as they were not married and assuming he pays child maintenance I can't see she would get very far.

There's not much outrage because a £1000 chid support is more than enough to raise a chid each month and that's without any contribution from the child's other parent. She's still obliged to work and support the child even though she's female.

With that and the £900 in benefits plus her salary she could easily work full time if she wants more money.

She has an income that many get nowhere near working full time.

She's getting a wage plus benefits plus £900 maintenance?
Sorry you've lost me. She has a sufficient income. She needs to make it go further by reducing her outgoings or something.

"She has choices beyond the wildest dreams of many"

Yes living in a bedsit with a 2 year old is often top of people's fantasy wish list.

Well putting aside his wage for a moment.

I just can't believe that she'd be struggling on a wage, benefits, plus an extra £900 a month. Am I missing something here?

I've been a single parent, I worked part time and I received help towards rent and childcare, I wasn't rolling in it but the wage and benefits were adequate, an extra £900 and I'd have been very comfortable.

What's her income from salary and benefits? What are her outgoings?

The CMS calculator only gives her £900 as apparently there is a limit so the most she can get is that - even if he earned £500k. That's what she says.

The cms calculator says £294 per week if he has the child less than once a week. That's £1274 per month.

It would be £910 a month if he has the child 2-3 nights a week - is that the case op?

Sorry but she's getting a lot more money per month than most! She gets £900 in child maintainence, plus her part time wage, and all other benefits she's entitled to, that is actually a fair amount of money. It won't feel like it to her because she's used to living in a 400k house with a partner with a 200k salary, and she's probably not fully changed her spending habits to reflect her new financial position. If she's struggling, moving to a cheaper area is something a lot of people have had to do. The fact she has to move anyway is a good time to look further afield. It may be for the short term she's better to leave her current job, and take the child out of childcare, move someplace cheaper and then re evaluate if it is better for her financially to be a full time stay at home parent til her child is school aged, or look for childcare and either a part time or full time job. Her ex is paying as much maintainence as she can get, legally she cannot get any more from him, and unless he's willing to pay a deposit, or voluntarily pay her more money, she has to do what is best for her and the child and move somplace more manageable. It won't hurt him financially to have to travel to see his child.

YABU, he pays for his child not her.

YANBU, she's played him good & proper.

As they were never married, it's unlikely that she will be able to claim ant more money from him. Did they own a house together? If do can she prove that she contributed to mortgage / deposit? If so she may be able to claim on the house.

You need to look at Schedule 1 Children Act. Court can make a lump sum provision in the case of unmarried couples where there is a child/children to fulfill housing need but only until child is 18. It is quite rarely used so the Solicitor probably said that, as the outcome cannot be guaranteed as it is fact specific to each case.
His salary is over the threshold for normal child maintenance payments so again through schedule 1 she may get more.

I think you wouldn't be a very good friend if you encouraged her to go through a stressful and potentially damaging court case especially considering a) you don't know your arse from your elbow and b) solicitors are sharks who will reel you in to big cases that last years and cost shitloads, to benefit themselves.

I can't imagine what kind of person would want to be living a significantly better lifestyle, particularly in terms of housing, than their kids though. I bet the mother spends significantly more than 15% of her take home on her child, plus all the time she invests, so why shouldn't he?

For people moaning that surely £900 a month is enough; that barely covers full time childcare.

It's easily covers more than his half of the childcare costs and more, even if she does sent her DC full time.

I would assume on that salary there is a chance he is not PAYE. That is really important. I used to work for a company that processed pay for self employed contractors. They could off set expenses like lunch and travel, iPads etc before tax was calculated. They could also ask for a cash advance, and then tax would be calculated without the advance being taken in to account. It's the tax calculation bit, then how much that's left that goes in to the calculation for child maintenance.

I.e. Chap earns 2,000 per week after tax. Asks for cash advance 500. Offsets General expenses of £300 and tech gadgets of £900. After deductions this chap only earns £300 this week so here is your 15% child support. £45 this week instead of £300 ex chapess should be getting.

It's a little known con, but those who knew it really worked the system and exploited it every single payday. There were a lot of women in our office outraged by these actions, we kept a list of those doing this but ultimately the company was run by a man who was dodgy as fuck and a serial shagger in the office. 'It's business' was his response.