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 4 5

Original poster

Maintenance

113 replies

Doughnut123 · 19/09/2018 13:05

Hello everyone. I agreed to less maintenance for a few months when my ex husband was made redundant. It was an amicable verbal agreement. But, stupidly, I didn’t get him to promise to give the arrears to me once he was working.
I am trying to get him to pay me now, but he says that we didn’t agree for him to repay me the money, so he’s not going to give it to me. Is there anything that I can do? I have had some free advice from a solicitor and he said that it’s obvious to anyone that he should give me the money and has just advised me to stick to my guns, which I have. The amount that was cut from my maintenance was almost £4,000. I cannot afford to pay for legal advice.
Thank you.

OP posts:

Fannybaws52 · 19/09/2018 13:06

Stop making life so easy for him and hard for you. Go through CMS and let them deal with it all. They won't be so accommodating!

Notacluewhatthisis · 19/09/2018 13:11

Is your original agreement in writing?

A solicitor may that it's obvious to anyone. But it's not really is it? Because you didnt discuss this part of it.

Sounds like poor legal advice to me.

If he is refusing and you can't pursue through the courts, then you are stuck.

It might be worth going through CMS to stop any of this in the future.

lexi727 · 19/09/2018 13:19

If your original agreement is in writing, and this separate agreement of less whilst he is out of a job was a verbal agreement rather than a formal contract then you are owed the money. However, if the original agreement isn't in writing then you might be a bit stuck. Probably best to go through the CMS from now on to avoid this.

NailsNeedDoing · 19/09/2018 13:20

I think your ex is right tbh. You didn't agree for him to pay you extra when he was working again, so why should he? Presumably he's paying you a fair amount agin now, and you say the amount was reduced while he was out of work, not stopped, so it sounds like he's done his best to still provide what he can. Being out of work for a long time probably cost him quite a lot too, especially if he now owes you as much as £4000! It seems a bit grabby to me to go after him for more money in these circumstances.

How long was he out of work for, and how much does he give you?

Travis1 · 19/09/2018 13:25

I'm kind of with your ex husband on this one. If he wasn't working I'd assume he was on benefits?

LemonSqueezy0 · 19/09/2018 13:29

If you go through CMS they would make a nil assessment if the NRP is out of work. £5/£7 if they are in benefits. Arrears will only accrue if he is employed but doesn't pay.. If he hasn't got it/had it, he can't give it to you in fairness.

flamingofridays · 19/09/2018 13:32

if you had gone through the CMS you wouldn't get the arrears, he cant pay you what he hasn't got.

Go through CMS in future then you both know where you stand.

HollyGoLoudly1 · 19/09/2018 13:35

I might get flamed for this but I don't agree with the solicitor that's it's 'obvious' he owes you the money. If he was made redundant but still managed to pay you some maintenance then it's not like he's trying to get out of his responsibilities and after being redundant I imagine won't be in the best financial position himself.

Don't know enough about it but I don't know if CMS would be any help in this situation. If an NRP doesn't have an income isn't the calculation only like a flat rate £7 a week or something?

Brazenhussy0 · 19/09/2018 13:37

I think NailsNeedDoing has, er, nailed it

He was made redundant and still paid you, albeit a reduced amount. The idea is that the NRP pays based on a percentage of their current income.
You can't then ask for him to backdate you extra money each time his circumstances improve. (I mean come on, he can't give you £4,000 he doesn't have.)

PatriciaHolm · 19/09/2018 13:39

As with the others above, I don't think it is obvious he owes you.

Maintenance is normally set as a % of income, in those months he earnt nothing, so owes you nothing surely? If he had a big pay rise tomorrow, you wouldn't expect a % of that for the past 9 months of the year that he hadn't been earning that would you?

Firesuit · 19/09/2018 13:44

I don't know how things work, so may be barking up the wrong tree, but could this be court-ordered maintenance from a divorce settlement, in which case he's possibly not legally entitled to vary it, without going back to court? If this is possible, then presumably arrears would be owed?

AngelsSins · 19/09/2018 13:45

So did he think the kids would be fed one meal less a day and have to wear shoes with holes in them whilst he didn’t pay, or did he think you’d basically sub him the money to make sure his kids still got everything they needed? If the second option, why on earth would he expect you to just give him this money?!

He’s an idiot who thinks the kids aren’t really his responsibility.

Notacluewhatthisis · 19/09/2018 13:48

AngelsSins Jesus wept.

Where's the talk of starving children with holes in their shoes? It's just ridiculous. Why do people have to take these threads so far?

flamingofridays · 19/09/2018 13:49

He’s an idiot who thinks the kids aren’t really his responsibility

fucking hell he lost his job he didn't just stop paying op on a whim!

AngelsSins · 19/09/2018 13:52

So if the mum doesn’t work either because she’s a SAHM, then it’s fine to just not feed your kids? I mean if it’s not reasonable to expect an out of work dad to pay, then it’s not reasonable to expect a mother to surely?

It’s bullshit. PARENTS (not just mothers) are responsible for financing their children, that is their responsibility, no one else. If he can’t feed his kids, he should be in court for neglect. A responsible father would have savings to fall back on in situations like this because they actually care about their kids well being, rather than shrugging and saying “well I can’t afford their school dinners this week - not my problem”.

Would love to know if he got a redundancy payment and if so, how much.

AamdC · 19/09/2018 13:54

Do you undetstand how maontemance works Angel? Its based on a pecentage of earnings , op isnt subbing him as he wasent working, if op wasent working he wouldnt have to give her more money .

flamingofridays · 19/09/2018 13:55

who said anyone wasn't feeding the kids?

if you're a SAHM you usually have a partner to support you, or you receive state benefits, both of which enable you to feed your kids. If op and the ex were still together, if he lost his job they would just have to cope while he found a new one, unfortunately op will have to do the same now.

he should not be in court for neglect.

I think you are projecting somewhat here.

you could say the same about Op, well she should have £££ in savings in case he loses his job.

Shit happens. We deal with it.

Notacluewhatthisis · 19/09/2018 13:55

AngelsSins get a grip. Because from your point, the mother (OP) should also has tons of savings just in case something happens as well.

Not everyone can have fortunes in savings.

You are being ridiculous. The kids didn't starve or have holes in their shoes, you have made that bit up.

Losing your job and paying less maintenance is not neglect. Do you think mothers on low income are neglectful too?

TwistedStitch · 19/09/2018 13:55

I don't think he has any legal obligation to pay back the difference in what he wasn't able to pay whilst out of work. Maintenance is based on earnings at the time so as long as he has increased the payments appropriately now that he is back in employment that's fair enough.

AngelsSins · 19/09/2018 13:58

Where's the talk of starving children with holes in their shoes? It's just ridiculous. Why do people have to take these threads so far?

My point is that with less money, cut backs need to be made, OR, someone has to make up the difference. Why should women always be expected to do that for free? Would it be acceptable if she suddenly cut back 50% of what she spends on the kids?

I’m sick of men getting a pat on the back for paying the absolute minimum for their kids whilst the mothers to pay the lions share and then even cover their short comings because they’d haven’t prioritised their kids, and think it’s a “bill” they can cut back on when it suits them.

Notacluewhatthisis · 19/09/2018 13:58

So confused why the OP legal advice was 'well it's obvious'. When it's not obvious at all and maintenance is based on current earning. So not obvious or obligatory.

OP was it actual legal advice, or a friend who thinks they know what they are talking about?

AamdC · 19/09/2018 13:59

Oh and Angel. We are on a low income dh has a low wage and im a carer as our child has disabillities , our kids still get fed and are not neglected , not everone has savings

Notacluewhatthisis · 19/09/2018 13:59

Would it be acceptable if she suddenly cut back 50% of what she spends on the kids?

Yes it is acceptable. If she lost her job
Or decided she needed savings, or wanted a holiday etc

Parents can cut back without neglecting their kids. The op hasn't said this caused her to starve her kids. So it's not relevant at all.

flamingofridays · 19/09/2018 13:59

angel stop projecting and get a grip.

Noboozeforme · 19/09/2018 14:00

If he was getting benifits during this time he should have been paying the correct % from that (which is pittance). Unfortunately he doesn't legally owe you anything above that.. morally is a whole other thread!

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Swipe left for the next trending thread