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

To be suspicious of my kids mum re: lodger?

172 replies

YetAnotherUser · 25/02/2017 13:22

Name changed as this will be horrifically identifying. I'll try not to drip feed so this may be quite long.

I have 2 kids with my ex, typically we share their care 50/50 but this is interspersed with periods where her provision for their safety has been sub-par, (having violent guys around them) and they've lived with me full time. I have a court order that gives me residence if I feel the need to enforce it.

After the latest loser abuser has finally left the scene we've recently recently gone back to shared care, but now she's told me she wants to take in a lodger to get around the bedroom tax (she has a 2 bed flat) and get a few quid. She's unemployed on JSA so the money would come in handy sure.

But, the lodger is a man and has a child... Her last abuser also moved in under the guise of being a lodger, so I'm quite suspicious of exactly what she's up to. As it's a 2 bed flat it also raises a question about where everyone will go when our kids are at hers, their Mum has her bed in the sitting room, I presume our kids will share, and the lodger and his kid will have the other room.

Gut feeling tells me she will end up sharing her bed with the lodger man, and that this is just a thinly disguised attempt to get him in through the back door and introduce him to the kids as a friend without the obviously beneficial period of figuring out if the lodger is nasty or not. She has plenty of form for introducing the kids to new boyfriends within a couple of days, including drug dealers and peados etc.

She also wants me to hand over the child benefit and tax credits as I work and she says she needs them more (latest abuser saddled her with a ton of debt).

Basically I know I can't stop her taking in the lodger if she so chooses, but WIBU to tell her that I think it's a bad idea and tell her I'm not supportive of it?

OP posts:
JustSpeakSense · 25/02/2017 15:04

Considering the reward is small for taking in a lodger. And she is prepared to sacrifice her bedroom, I'm guessing that the 'lodger' is not really going to be a lodger but another partner.

Bumblebiscuits · 25/02/2017 15:05

Ignore some of these ridiculous posts. If the courts thought these people in your EW's life were unsuitable, there must be clear evidence of that. You don't sound controlling at all OP; just trying to balance the needs of your children.

You have to put their safety first though, OP. The consequences of not doing so are horrendous. There is no reason why the children can't have plenty of day time contact with your ex but I'd definitely avoid overnight contact.

You're clearly not making your EW get a job, but she can't have it both ways and expect you to support her too. Trust your gut, OP, I think it's telling you the right course of action.

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:05

NeedsAsockamnesty: I can't agree with that. If a parent isn't fit to parent without their every move being supervised by someone who may or may not be incredibly controlling, then it is healthier for everyone for contact to be supervised but facilitated by the family courts.

It sounds like the OP has it both ways here: his ex is a good enough parent to have his kids living with her 50% of the time, but not good enough to make any of her own decisions. Very unhealthy.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 25/02/2017 15:06

And no trifle he cannot refuse to allow contact for any reason he likes, if he did it would give her grounds to have the order removed pretty sharpish and the likelihood of obtaining another one would be very very slim.
He also runs the risk of having himself considered to be causing the children significant emotional harm and could potentially have his contact with the kids restricted by the court.

Original poster
YetAnotherUser · 25/02/2017 15:07

Well I told her that if she decided to take in a lodger like this, she'd have to do without contact while he's around...

Lo and behold she says she won't be taking him in as she'd rather have contact with the kids. Which is nice.

My distrust is still quite high, but hopefully she'll stay on the straight and narrow for the kids sake.

OP posts:
Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:08

NeedsAsockamnesty:

Do I have this wrong then? I thought he said he had a residence order that means the kids 'officially' live with him, but he allows her to have them up to 50% of the time, on and off. What is stopping him deciding at any point that she is an unsuitable parent?

NeedsAsockamnesty · 25/02/2017 15:09

So you think children should be forced to have their contact restricted to one hour a month in a contact centre instead of making use of a parent who has been identified as a protective factor and has shown an active ability to do so along with being able to satisfy the court that personal feelings are put aside as the most important thing is a decent relationship with the other parent?

NeedsAsockamnesty · 25/02/2017 15:14

He did say they have 50/50 but if she takes certain actions he can enforce residency.

Unless of course what he really means is he actually does have residency but for some odd reason he's randomly changed that to 50/50 (but if that's the case she could challenge his residency very easily)

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:14

NeedsAsockamnesty: I just told you what I think. If she is a decent enough parent to have her kids on her own 1/3 of the time over the last two years, she is a decent enough parent. If the court wants to make a ruling to say she can have them as long as she doesn't move in any unsuitable new partners (which seems to be the only risk factor) I would say that would be fine. What I disagree with is her ability to see her children being at the discretion of her ex. It's weird.

Original poster
YetAnotherUser · 25/02/2017 15:14

Do I have this wrong then? I thought he said he had a residence order that means the kids 'officially' live with him, but he allows her to have them up to 50% of the time, on and off. What is stopping him deciding at any point that she is an unsuitable parent?

The risk of the court order being discharged is what stops me abusing it. Since the order has been granted I have only ever gone back to the terms in it once, and I talked to Children's Services about it before doing anything - they were supportive of my decision.

I do have a lot of power, but if I abused it I expect CS would come down on me like a ton of bricks.

OP posts:
Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:15

if that's the case she could challenge his residency very easily)

Which is what I would be doing in her shoes.

Atenco · 25/02/2017 15:16

It may sound intolerable to you, Trifle, but as parents we have to do all kinds of things we wouldn't do if we didn't have children.

The OP has to keep his children safe, even if that means never staying overnight at their mother's. Because the children's safety is paramount.

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:16

The risk of the court order being discharged is what stops me abusing it.

Is that all that stops you? Confused

Karmaisabitch · 25/02/2017 15:17

Op is being nothing but fair in regards to the mother having shared care even under previous circumstances.

I don't think it's fair to just say "keep the kids".

If it was me, I'd simply send them a little less until you know what the situation is, I.E sleeping

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:17

Atenco: The first thing I said was that he should restrict overnight contact if he thinks his children are at risk. That isn't my issue with this.

NeedsAsockamnesty · 25/02/2017 15:19

Op

It sounds like you have an order much like mine but possible not quite as prescriptive. And you are entirely correct that abusing it would be the end of it.
Is there anything stopping you given that she does have 50% care having CB for one of the kids in her name?

Original poster
YetAnotherUser · 25/02/2017 15:20

Trifleorbust

Is that all that stops you?

That and a sense of human decency. It's not in anybody's best interests for me to be fucking about with the court order. I'm not a narcissistic, doing so would gain me nothing.

OP posts:
RandomMess · 25/02/2017 15:20

OP - I wonder it actually you saying that actually has helped you Ex say "no" to someone she doesn't 100% moving in, with her being so vulnerable she can actually use you as a way of protecting herself from being taken advantage of yet again?

Presumably if she can keep on the straight and narrow she could become exempt from bedroom tax if the DC stay with her for a certain amount of nights on a regular basis? Is that something you could look into on her behalf or is it directly linked to her being in receipt of CB?

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:21

Fair enough, OP.

Bumblebiscuits · 25/02/2017 15:21

Trifle, he hasn't decided she's an unsuitable parent because of the unsavoury characters she brings home, the courts have. Rather than continually going back and forth to court, he has informally increased contact for his wife, for his children's sake. She has gone back on this arrangement by threatening to bring another (potentially unsuitable) man into the children's lives. Given her past record I wouldnt play Russian roulette with my children.

There is a difference between being controlling and just having sensible boundaries to protect your children. If the genders were reversed, I think you'd have a different view.

Original poster
YetAnotherUser · 25/02/2017 15:22

NeedsAsockamnesty

Only the likelihood of her giving it back if/when they come back to me if her protection fails again etc.

OP posts:
NeedsAsockamnesty · 25/02/2017 15:24

It's fairly easy to transfer CB even if contested and even easier if you retain any tax credits or have a court order.

Trifleorbust · 25/02/2017 15:24

Bumblebiscuits: If the courts have decided she is an unsuitable parent, she shouldn't have the kids living with her at all. If she is a suitable parent despite the court order, the OP could support her in overturning it, so her 50:50 contact is 'official' and she can claim half the CB, give the kids rooms, have security that she will see her kids. This no-man's land arrangement is open to abuse, although I will accept the OP'a word for it that he doesn't abuse it.

Jux · 25/02/2017 15:26

Definitely pay the bedroom tax if you want your children to have overnights with her; they can have their own room, decorated and furnished for them with clothes and toys etc which stay there.

Of course she can move someone into that room, without it affecting her benefits - she just doesn't declare it, and he'll pay her in cash. Easy. Illegal, but easy, until someone reports her.

I think that paying the bedroom tax for her on condition that the room is obviously the children's room, is the answer.

worridmum · 25/02/2017 15:32

but all you people saying you should pay her bedroom tax would sing a bloody different tune if the NRP was male you would all be singing he should get a job. And telling the mother to withold all contact if he porposed a lodger

Tbh if you dont trust her and by the sounds of it your right i would be withholding contact as thsi lodge is most likely a new partner.