To not understand why some parents refuse to pay proper maintenance?

[crunchymint]

Yes I know, its because they are arseholes. I know that. But I still don't emotionally understand how someone cares so little about their own children that they refuse to pay maintenance, or pay as little as they can get away with. What this really means is you don't care if your child has everything they need.

My ex would rather not work than pay me maintenance. He's a selfish fucker who hates me more than caring about the well-being of his 3 children.

I spend all mine on gin and nail varnish apparently. I currently get nothing but cms are very slowly sorting it out so at some point im the future my dc may be 47 quid a week better off.

Also when people mention dads buying extras instead of paying proper maintenance, this really annoys me. These are dads that will buy nice presents for their kids like electronics, but refuse to pay for the boring day to day costs like childcare, afterschool clubs, bills and rent/mortgage. It is simply a variation of Disney dad.

In my ExHs case he thinks he's justified because I am apparently making it impossible to see her and I am also holding his money hostage in a joint account. He also knows my mum and granddad won't let me and DD starve so he thinks he's got away with it.

OllyBJolly Ex wife can spend her own money on what she likes. My point is that she doesn’t spend the maintenance money ON the kids. It is for them, not her. She tells the children their dad gives them nothing. He pays hundreds each month - above what he is required to by the CSA. Ex wife even tried to get him to raise the amount via the CSA and they told DH that he was paying far too much! However the ex wife has categorically told her children than she should not be contributing to their upkeep, that EVERYTHING should come from DH but he gives her nothing for the children.
She sees the child maintenance money as HERS, not for the children. That is what we have the issue with. That by her own admission she doesn’t see why she has to provide for the children.
We are in the process of moving house so that DSD can live with us full time because living with her mum is intolerable for her. (New boyfriend told her she was lucky her mum put a roof over her head.)
I know that if ever my marriage broke down, DH would provide a roof over our heads and more than enough child maintenance. He’s a good man and a brilliant father.

My dad wouldn't pay any maintenance for me, his reason being that my mum was a teacher and therefore 'loaded'.

I hardly ever saw him though, he was untraceable for a while. A couple of years ago I got back in-touch, purely for the reason of getting in contact with my stepsisters, who are lovely, their mum is too. I did meet up with them a few times but it was like drawing blood from a stone trying to arrange to meet up, I haven't heard from him for at least a year since the last time I tried to arrange something, because a) he doesn't like speaking on the phone and b) he's pissed with me because I 'lived miles away' (45 mins away - where I'd been living since I got married)

Coming from another angle my DH's ExW pays nothing for her DS, he lives with us full time and she barely sees him, probably due to lack of interest on both sides. She will occasionally give grand gestures like iPads or designer jumpers (£180 for one top, handy!) but has never paid maintenance, however pockets the child benefit though. In our case benefits don't make up her shortfall, me and my DH. Not seeing your children is really no excuse to not pay for them but she's a lazy git who has missed out far more in the long run.

I wish they would teach the basics of the legalities of relationships in secondary school. The reasons to get married etc. What responsibilities both parents have to their children. I think a lot of people get involved in relationships with ill suited partners and simply trust they've chosen a decent person when really they should have taken a step back and waited especially if they come from dysfunctional families themselves.

DH pays £1000 a month in child maintenance and £1500 a month in spousal maintenance. It's a joint lives order so he will pay until she remarries or dies. She has a PhD and is more than capable of supporting herself. It seems to me the law saying she is his responsibility unless she remarries is a vestige if women being property. But she chose well when she married him and she's got a new ticket for life.

No spousal maintenance recognises that when women give up work to care for kids, it has an impact on their future earning potential.

This makes me so cross because it's all too common. My exh has paid about £500 towards our two dc in 9 years. He's been in and out of employment and is now (I believe) working cash in hand as my dc are apparently entitled to nothing from him. He buys expensive restaurant meals for them on his contact weekend but says he can't afford to contribute to uniforms at the beginning of the academic year.

Not quite - she took six months off with each child and went back to work. She chose not to stay home.

Tawanda Spousal maintenance is not given in this country in that circumstance. So there is something more you are not telling us.

This conversation should take place before the children arrive

I had this conversation with my ex before we had children. He claimed he would ‘dig ditches’ to make sure his children didn’t go without. 10 years later, still waiting....

I hope you don’t mean me, I myself payed mum money, but there is a line and blackmailing contact is one. We never stopped paying, but the amount increasing was extortionate which was why we turned to csa, which ended up in her being convicted for benefit fraud. We didn’t know she wasn’t declaring

How? Child maintainance hasn’t been deducted from benefits since the very early 2000’s whilst yes you are meant to declaire it there is no financial loss to the state if you don’t.
No amount of CM would make a difference to any benefit claim.

I don't understand why ex h's partner (who he is buying a house with) income isn't counted when if I were to move a man into my home (never going to happen) his income would be included in any calculations.

Ex h only has himself to provide for except eow.

He recently appealled his Cms payment because it went up to almost £400 a month (4 teens) and had it reduced to £220 a month because they agreed to use his most recent tax return (self employed) rather than the one they were going to use.

He has just got back from a weeks cruise as well.

Child maintainance hasn’t been deducted from benefits since the very early 2000’s

It was 2010.

Some people cannot afford to pay more than the minimum. Especially when they have a second family. Children and property are expensive and it puts financial strain on everyone.

You don't have more kids until you can afford the ones you have.

No there really isn't. The kids were still young when they split. The order was made ten years ago and wouldn't be made now in the same (at least I don't think!). I reckon DH could have fought it harder in court but didn't. I realize it doesn't fit with the narrative you're portraying @crunchymint but there is a big difference when it comes to high earners.

What often gets spouted on here as a given just isn't. There is a very wide range of court decisions that are taken. DH should have had a day or least have been included in the discussion over secondary schools. He tried to have the conversation and got a lawyers letter telling him to but out and that it was nothing to do with him and she alone would decide. He could have fought it in court but that wasn't in the child's best interest so didn't.

Yes Twandy it is true that with very high earners spousal maintenance is paid. So if he is a very high earner, I won't be feeling sorry for him.

My ex husband said he'd close his businesses down and "go on the dole" if the CSA contacted him about maintenance again.

It’s really upsetting to hear that some of you get very little, if any maintenance for your DC. I’m in the fortunate position of not needing maintenance per se, however, I will be seeking maintenance as is my legal right and will set up a savings fund for the baby.

There needs to be significant changes to the law to stop men and women from dodging their responsibilities to their DC. Assets are slowly starting to be taken into consideration when assessing maintenance which is a step in the right direction I think.

You don't have to feel sorry for him but I don't think it's fair to say you're a high earner so should be treated as a meal ticket. If you want fairness in the system it needs to be fair for all parties not just the ones you deem worthy.

I think it's as simple as that people who don't pay don't see it as their responsibility.

Regardless of seeing the kids or not they should be paying for the children they brought into the world.
Anything else is just excuses to justify being crap.

she doesn't spend it on the kids.

Oh so making sure they have a roof over their heads, get to school, are fed, warm and clean means she spends it on herself?

Bills have to be paid or those children end up homeless, cold and hungry.