To think that sometimes a new partners income should be considered by CMS?

[LolaLouise]

My ex hasnt seen our kids in 2 years, or paid a penny in 18 months. This includes birthdays and Christmas. School residential trips, school uniforms, childcare, activities, everything they need is paid for solely by myself. My ex quit his well paid job to live off some inheritance rather than pay for his kids. He said this was the reason for quitting his job.

6 months ago he entered a new relationship, where he now is a sahp to her two young children whilst she works full time. This arrangement has happened for he past 4 months. He is saving her a lot in childcare fees by staying at home and avoiding working so he doesnt have to pay his own. They have a good set up with extra from tax credits and enough to go on a summer holiday together.

Now aside from the morals of allowing a man you have known for 6 months to care full time for your children, she is well he is a father to 3 other children he has no contact or financial support for.

Am i wrong in thinking their household income should be considered by CMS? As it stands, as he has no taxable income, he is on a nil rate.

And im not saying she should pay. Im saying cms shouldnt be something you can chose to have zero rate on. It should be a household outgoing like any other. No one is forcing her to support him. He can work and is capable of getting a decent job. If it was made so there was a basic rate men had to pay regardless of having a job, and there were consequences for not making that basic payment, as there are in other countries, less men could just walk away from their children.

@YouAreNotImportant yes. We pay half the rent each. Half the bills. He buys food and cooks for them. I couldnt afford to live here alone off my wage and they wouldnt have the lifestyle they do without his income either. He does this whilst paying cms for his children. My partner supporting my kids doesnt mean their biological father can give up his responsibility though.

But you are saying she should pay. He isn't earning, you want her earnings to be used to say he is earning (as part of that household) ergo - she'll end up paying.

So if a bloke ( even a great paying involved dad) got with a new a partner and then some unforeseen circumstances, meant he had to give up work,he became really unwell e.g kidney problems needing dialysis, disabled,or to had to give work to care for a new partner who suddenly developed the above problems or same for step/new kids, should they be punished for making a decision that best fits their circumstances? As I say it opens a whole can of worms,going by the household income. It will punish whose who are good dads who end up in unforeseen circumstances. Also you could have child maintenance chasing an ex of your ex. How long would an exes new partner be liable for their exes kids after they and your ex split up? All other can of worms.

But its household money.

If he was working and she stayed home with the kids he would be expected to support her and the children. She wouldnt be able to claim single parent benefits at all, as his income is included as a household. He would support her children totally.

Why when they made the choice for her to work and him look after her kids, should he be allowed to ignore his biological ones. It should work both ways.

Your children live with you and your partner OP, would you expect him to be financially supporting your children if they didn't live with you and he'd never even met them?

@Fuglywitch if he became ill and was claiming benefits he would be on a basic rate as he would be now. If the father has an income, wage, benefits, whatever, then it would be calculated off that. But if he doesnt there should be a flat basic rate. As he does have access to money.

@YouAreNotImportant no because i would have a job and support them myself. I have enough self respect bot to be financially dependent on another person

You really think its ok a man can chose not to work or claim benefits to orchestrate a situation where he doesnt have to pay cms? By thinking this is ok its allowing men to fecklessly create children they have no obligation to provide for. They should be forced onto a flat rate and prosecuted for not paying. Much like women that withhold access without good reason.

Didn't you just say you couldn't afford to live where you are and give the children their current lifestyle on your wage? So are you not financially dependent on your partner?

I could live somewhere else if i wanted to. And you asked if my kids werent with me and he needed to pay. That wouldn't happen. As i am earning so his income would never be included

You say you have self respect and are financially independent,yet you are going after your ex? I would say good riddance to bad rubbish and be the best parent going.his loss.i certainly wouldn't be stalking him and seeing what he's up. The new relationship will collapse eventually as it sounds like 2 people taking advanage of each other.your kids are old enough to come to the conclusion who's their better parent.

No, no-one is saying it's okay for any man to abandon children and not provide for them.

But what you're saying is that if a man does that, you want his new partner to have her money considered to be his regardedless of marital status.

Which is just another way of making women pay for mens poor choices or fecklessness.

Im not going after him. I wont get anywhere. This country allows men to have kids and walk away and i think its disgusting its allowed. My kids know who the better parent is regardless. They were old enough to understand why they were removed from his care and how that was solely brought on by his actions. They know he doesnt support them in the slightest. They saw he got them no birthday or Christmas presents. Theyve seem it all, i cant protect them from it at the ages they are at. The amount I suggested would have zero impact on my finances, its a tiny amount, my kids get more in pocket money. But that doesnt mean i think he should be allowed to wash his hands of them. Its ridiculous that is a choice.

Im saying if they make a choice for him to be at home he should still pay a flat rate. No one is forcing a new partner, she has a choice to be with a loser and support him, or tell him no get a job and then we can have a relationship

She is supporting him and that's her choice. She shouldn't have to support your children though.

That's what people are saying.

If they married, it's different.

I agree totally that no parent should be allowed to walk away without obligations but as

Youarenotimportant says is correct. Why are you letting this bitterness consume you. I'm not commenting again as you sound like a bitter,angry woman who cannot accept your ex has totally moved on. NO it isn't right how's he's done it,but there comes a time when you must walk away from the sorry mess and get on with your life,end of.

Why is marriage a deciding factor when for everything else its cohabiting?

Im not bitter hes moved on. Far from it. Him being moved on finally means he leaves me alone. I may not have known where he was but that didnt stop his emails and evil reports to social services. Im glad he has someone else to dedicate his time to and is leaving me and my my partner alone to get on with our life - a new partner thats opened my eyes to how a relationship should be and how a real man acts towards his kids - and a new partners kikds. I dont care about his set up. I hope the pair of them are very happy.

I still dont think he should be allowed to chose to bot be responsible for his lids though. That's literally all its about

Not* kids. I seriously hate this phone

Because with marriage you have joint assests and joint debt. You have legally put yourself in a position where you share all of that.

Yet for everything else, tax credits, child benefit, council tax, unemployment benefits, student finances, etc, its cohabiting

Because that's a household. Your children are not in his household.

What if they were? What if he had them one night a week, more in holidays, so the new partner had a relationship as a step parent with them. Would you still thinks its ok for him to set up a situation where they dont pay?

Wow, Some of these replies are shocking, calling her bitter and going after her ex?
Why is it so socially acceptable for men to be deadbeats and the Mum to have to always pick up the slack after men use loopholes such as getting there partner to work to avoid paying for their children.

Op its disgusting, My ex did the same, and continues to do so.
If he chooses not to work and be a stay at home parent he is living off of family money soley, so yes I believe it should be assessed on that. Otherwise if he was working then no but obviously you arent saying that.
If not to be assessed on that then he should have to be made to pay a certain amount regardless set at a standard rate.
Kids dont stop needing food in their belly and clothes on their back because hes moved on with someone else and bringing up her kids.
There are too many children in this country who are not supported financially or emotionally by the non resident parent in most cases being fathers with over 2.5 billion being owed in child support.
Its wrong and too many people sweep it under the carpet.