AIBU to stop dropping our kids at their dad's now he's cut maintenance so much I can't afford to?

[ClaireMumtoThree]

We've been separated five years and divorced for three years. My ex-husband had a high paying job at an investment bank in the City, I gave up my career to travel and live round the world with his. The terms of our divorce settlement just three years ago were that he paid child maintenance for our three young children til they finish education and spousal maintenance for me for life (my ex agreed to this without any discussion or argument at all and a Judge signed it off). This past year my ex has managed to orchestrate such that he now pays just 36% of what he agreed in our settlement. So our income has been cut by £2400. He moved out of London to the Shires be with his new wife and her three children. Up until now, because he paid a good level of maintenance and I have not worked we have taken it in turns to pickup/ drop off the children at each other's houses during holidays (term time his mum or new wife collects the children from school on a Friday and drops back Mondays). So I have made the three hour round trip in our car. About six times a year each. Now I have no car because it failed to pass its MOT and I can't afford to fix it or run it. I can't afford the train fare to do the drop off to his house, this August it would have been £120 alone. I have said I'm really sorry but I can't pay £60+ to get the children there and me back to London each time. The children's fares are £6 total, it's mine that's the problem at £45+. I genuinely can't afford it but I also now feel that me taking the kids was a perk of the reasonable maintenance (he kept more than half his salary for himself with no dependents). He has no mortgage and his wife earns £80k. I have offered to take the children to St Pancras where his wife commutes into at any time she says and to pay the £6 for their fares (she said why should she pay and I agree. She's offered money before when the cuts impacted the kids after school clubs but I declined because it's not fair she should pay, it's their dad's responsibility not hers, she has three children of her own). But now even after I got over the money barrier and said I'd pay £6 she's saying she won't meet me, it's my responsibility to get them to Bedford. AIBU not to share the journeys now? I can't afford it so basically it would take money from food, he moved away and I'm desperately looking for a job and so will at some point be working. I'm a single mum on my own, no partner, with three young kids - 9, 11 and 13. What do other people do? AIBU?

In a perfect world, the parent who moves away facilitates travel. Well, in a perfect world he wouldn't be such an arse. However, I'm disappointed in the number of posters who have failed to recognise that it's likely the children who will suffer if they don't see their father. Does the OP want to be right (she is in the right) or does she want to look her children in the eye and say she did absolutely everything to facilitate contact? From her last post, it sounds like the latter.

OP, my dad was an obstructive arse and did everything to make life difficult for my mum e.g. refuse to collect us and reduce money. My mum put us first and believe me, we knew. We knew then and we know now. Subsequently, we hardly see our father and we have a wonderful and loving relationship with our mother. There are cheaper options for you to get them there such as; the older one being in charge. Look into those options and keep your head held high, knowing you're the bigger person.

I think you've hit the nail on the head OP. You've found your own internal motivation and that is to hold him to account. You're still locked in a power struggle with him. Letting go of that power struggle will be immensely freeing for you if you can manage it.

This is the second thread that you have posted on slagging off the ex wife.

Your nasty comments say far more about you and your issues than the people you are being nasty to,

That is to Heebie btw

Why are you so venom filled Heebie? It really is people like you that make the Internet a less pleasant space. Maybe you could find something better to do with your day than being nasty to someone who was looking for some perspective and was even receptive to it!

it isn't 'nasty' to ask some straight questions or point out the bleeding obvious.

I think it's your tone heebie your coming across as quite aggressive in your approach. There's a way of saying things that doesn't rile people up

Heebie Common sense would tell you that there was a better way to deliver your opinion especially if you were hoping for the OP to take it on board. Common decency would have kept you from being so horrid to someone you don't know. Sadly you appear to lack both.

The courts would disagree with your assertion that a woman staying at home to raise her children makes her "a gold digger". It's a very common scenario especially when one spouse is a high earner. It has hampered her ability to "get a job" hence why she was awarded spousal maintenance.

You do realise you're behaving like a goady fucker?

Calling you out on nasty comments is not being goady, however your comments to the OP could be construed as such.

Seeing as YOU mentioned it - why don't you tell us all what other thread i was being 'nasty' on?

Cheerfully :) It was the thread about an ex wife that you labelled a gold digger. You clearly have issues with ex wives, so may I suggest you start your own thread if you want to talk about it. And no it hasnt touched a single nerve or at least, not for me so sorry to disappoint.

And I see that you are throwing the words gold digger around on here too so specifically it was the thread about the ex wife not wanting to sell the former marital home and the second wife being unable to buy her chosen home unless the husband is off the first mortgage. HTH :)

Hmm. From what you've put in your posts OP, I'm fairly certain I would be able to point out where your ex lives. I am 100% certain I don't know him, but he would be fairly easily identified from the information you've given. I really hope you've changed some of the details, I hate to think his wife or similar would recognise him, and it would become extra shit for you.

His wife and he are possibly playing the long game here. Move further away, refuse to help make contact visits possible. You will at somepoint say no, I can't do this any more. I can't afford/other reason.

He will use this as an excuse to get you to court for being in breach of the contact arrangements. From my understanding they can at this point have social services involved for the emotional distress caused to the children (I can't remember it 100% but I was threatened with it when going through similar to DDs biological father)

When you say, I was happy to. I just couldn't afford.... when he would exclaim, but I give you money for that. How can you not afford x,y,z?? What are you doing with MY money?

The argument would then go, if she can't afford to make kids available for contact, maybe they're better off with me? All with a fancy lawyer.

You won't win this one. I was dragged through court again and again by DDs dad who didn't have a pot to piss in.

Just hold it together. Don't tell him you haven't got. Just make it happen, somehow. Don't give him any chance to consider you vulnerable.

PS- if you ever need to move out of the city Bedford is still fairly cheap. You'd not need to worry about travel cost either. X

referring to other threads IS being a goady fucker

Sometimes people need a reality check - and being blunt and frank is sometimes needed.

Some people will side with a woman no matter how wrong she is, i refuse to do that.
It's blatantly obvious she could have got a job a lot sooner even if it was part time.

The fact that she didn't is BECAUSE of the amount he was paying, not because she was 'hindered'.

Any court would see that she's in the wrong.

As for that thread - again, a woman refusing to communicate or comply with the ex and now, declaring she'll go after the new wife's assets if they don't just 'hand it all over' to her...after having gone back on the agreement that was made at the outset........yea, an unreasonable and gold digger reaction.

You seem to think all women are victims and should be pandered to.
I believe we all have personal responsibility -don't have so many kids that you can't maintain a life/work balance or afford on your own
Don't rely on a man paying your way in life - especially when you have the skills to maintain some financial independence.

He's remarried and OP still thinks he should be 'keeping' her?
Where's the self respect?

pyong

some of us are not so blind that we can't see a situation for what it is

op said it herself Up until now, because he paid a good level of maintenance and I have not worked

yea ivy, the one who feels the need to refer to other threads to support her agenda

Do the people saying op should get a job and move out of London not see the disconnect here at all? God knows what I'd do out of a global city- pay the commute costs and commute in would still be a better paying solution (albeit massive time cost which single parents cannot usually accommodate) than find a job that is outside of London.

@heebie I gave the same advice as you to the OP pretty much so if your not being a goady fucker why wasn't I pulled up on it? Because I wasn't rude and I didn't presume to know everything

It's your ^personal opinion/perception* that makes you think i'm being rude and aggressive.

Pussyfooting around the issue is ridiculous.
A dose of reality works better than patting someone on the back.

The reality here though is that the OP is being given £1600 a month by her ex to live on, she doesn't have a mortgage so that money is all for living costs only, and yet she is saying that the thing that has to give is the travel three times a year to visit the kids' dad?

Added to which the OP was able to buy a house outright with her divorce settlement, in London?

Even if the OP is unable to work for whatever reason, the fact here is that her income no longer enables her to live the lifestyle she has clearly become used to in London, and no, £1600 is not too little in central London to be able to afford to eat and have to rely on food banks, let's be a little bit realistic here. And if the OP hasn't worked for thirteen years then it's unlikely she's going to secure a well paid job anyway in the short term, and while there might be jobs in London there is also a lot more competition for the jobs there are, so I wouldn't consider London to be a jobs haven by any stretch. Oh, and I live in London.

If the ex were to lose his job tomorrow the OP would have no choice but to sell her house and move out of London. When you don't have a reliable income and you can't afford to live on what you have then you need to make sacrifices, and moving out of central London and selling the house which will fairly obviously have gained significant equity since she bought it should be her starting point.

I live in London now because of my DC's schooling (the youngest is doing GCSE's at the moment,) but when youngest turns eighteen the maintenance will stop and if I'm not in a position to work and afford to live here I will have to sell the house and move elsewhere. Such is life. And I don't receive anywhere near that level of maintenance from my eXH because I don't have the same number of children. I do however have to pay a mortgage.

But the thread is NOTHING to do with whether the OP should have got a job, it is a question of principle whether the non-resident parent should pick up their own children for contact.

The answer is yes.

However, I have mostly taken my DD to her dad as I have a car and he is on minimum wage. That is my choice, legally I am not obliged to. I have to make DD available for contact. It is nothing to do legally with who earns what.