Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3

Original poster

to not want to split the cost for the DC to see their deadbeat dad!!

63 replies

donners312 · 26/04/2017 21:12

I am flabbergasted that after going to court today the judge suggested that i may have to contribute towards the cost of my dc seeing their deadbeat dad.

He refuses to work so he doesn't have to and never has paid maintenance.

he has chosen to live 6 hours away from them despite having no job or house where he is living (presuming he is the cocklodger to his latest victim) and now the court my rule that as a single mum on minimum wage i may have to contribute towards him coming to visit them - just unbelievable, this country has gone mad!!

OP posts:

TPOD74 · 14/07/2017 15:21

So just re-read that and I need to be clear that I bring DS to France for the main holidays, just not the weekends...

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 14/07/2017 15:29

I am asking you to pass a judgement on the facts given by the OP, @TPOD74 - that her ex has not paid any maintenance towards the costs of raising his children, and the fact that he saw them only twice last year. Do you think these two things are OK?

And no, @cathf - I do not start from the standpoint that all dads are deadbeat dads - but when any parent is not making the effort to see their children or support them financially, do I judge them for that? Hell yes.

TPOD74 · 14/07/2017 16:29

No that's not okay, not legally or morally

indigox · 14/07/2017 16:35

yes I did, something better than the numeric user name... my understanding of the law is that financial responsibility is a shared matter, based on the parties joint resources.... if i might turn the question around why should one parent assume all the costs of contact?

Because the other parent pays for everything else for the child, that's barely covered by any pathetic maintenance payment by the non-resident parent, which by the looks of it you're not bothering to pay?

So, on top of feeding, clothing, entertaining, providing a warm, safe, clean home for your child without one damn bit of help from you, you want her to pay YOUR travel costs because of where YOU CHOOSE to live.

AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered · 14/07/2017 16:40

TPOD74 why don't you live in the same country as your DC, did the child's mother move away? If you were the one who moved (and particularly since you're unemployed so aren't tied to France) YABU YAY to expect any contribution to your costs whatsoever. If, OTOH, she moved then it's pretty unfair to expect you to suck up all the costs of maintaining a relationship.

AHedgehogCanNeverBeBuggered · 14/07/2017 16:40

Not sure where that stray 'YAY' came from...

TheRollingCrone · 14/07/2017 16:43

WTF
GET On Twitter. Jess Phillips Stella Creasey are great.

BlackeyedSusan · 14/07/2017 16:55

rant alert: read the fucking thread

HE IS PAYING FUCKING MAINTENENCE AND SCHOOL FEES AND HAS SOLD HIS HOME AND ALL OTHER ASSETS TO PAY THESE FFS and where the fuck did it say he had given up his job to avoid paying, loads of people have lost jobs due to the recent financial crisis.

Back to OPs ex. yep dead beat.

TPOD74 · 14/07/2017 16:56

So, I've lived here for 20 years, ex agreed to move here to have our son, changed her mind and kicked me out, so she lives in London, I live in France... we always had two houses. Up to being made unemployed I paid around 50k pa for maintenance & school fees. On top of the 20k contact costs. She has no mortgage, 600k in the bank and I'm 100k in debt and my house in on the market. I don't dispute what you are saying but in this case do you not think shared contact costs, which are affordable, is warranted? Is it not in DS's interests to have a relationship with his father??

Tazerface · 14/07/2017 23:56

Is it not in DS best interest for his mother to not have to put herself into financial difficulty because his father is an arse?!

Still has nothing to do with your situation TP so stop derailing.

TPOD74 · 15/07/2017 07:33

Is that the standard we use nowadays? Levels of 'arseiness'.... this thread is about the cost of contact, as is my point.. What's yours?

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 15/07/2017 16:21

I don't think you can liken the two situations, though, @TPOD74 - you pay maintenance, the OP's ex does not. You make plenty of effort to see your dc, the OP's ex can't even make the effort to see his children when he is in their home town. Your ex wife moved your children a long way from you, the OP's ex moved away from his children.

The two situations are so different that I don't think you can draw any parallels. The OP's ex sounds like a dead beat dad who doesn't care about his children - you sound like a dad who really wants to see his children and really cares about them - you and he couldn't be more different!

In the OP's situation, and given her specific circumstances, I cannot see that it is fair or equitable for her to have to share the costs of contact, whereas in yours, it might well be.

She is bearing all of the costs of raising the children, with no help from her ex, and it sounds as if she is just about managing to make ends meet - I don't think there is much, if any, slack in her budget. Her ex decided to move 6 hours away - it can't be any surprise to him that it is harder and more expensive to get to see his children. It doesn't sound as if he has any real financial problems - he clearly has enough money to live on, without having to claim benefits - the OP has said he isn't eligible, and has money in off shore accounts. So I can see no reason or excuse for him not to make the effort to overcome the distance HE has put between himself and his children. If he doesn't want to use his own financial reserves for this, he could get a part time job, to cover the costs. He has chosen to do neither.

To summarise - the OP's ex seems to have no major financial issues or constraints, whilst the OP has very real financial worries. It is his choice, not hers, to be so far from his children - so he should pay the costs of visitation - in my opinion.

TPOD74 · 15/07/2017 17:31

I think that's a fair assessment, I have every sympathy with OP and her situation. I've been engaged in court based warfare, pointless warfare, for nearly 5 out of 6 years of my DS' life. The more I read and litigate there seems to be such a disparity between people in these situations, with some like me desperate but unable to see they're kids and other's who seem to care not a jot for their children. Maybe it's just me but should the desire to want the best for your kids not be a central unifying theme in all these disputes. I think its totemic of people working out the unresolved hatred remaining from their relationships rather than trying to find a way forward. I wrote to my ex years ago now that lawyers would be the only winners here and so it has turned out to be. I apologise if I implied any sort of equivalence here that was not my intention, what I was interested in was specific subject of the cost of contact. I was denied this by a DJ in the family court a few weeks and I'm still smarting that the system has effectively priced me out of a relationship with my DS by prioritising school fees above contact. And the understandable outrage of OP at having the possibility of contributing to her ex's costs in this regard is the polar opposite of my experience and amply demonstrates, in my view, what a lottery the court system is. I hope OP get's some resolution and more importantly the cash she needs, in my own circumstances I can understand this only too well.....

Flip

1 2 3