To say I understand why some people don’t pay child maintenance? X

[princessmum1]

Just that really. It seems crazy that child maintenance is not means tested beyond anything other than income. It doesn’t matter if your mortgage/rent or your ex partners is £2000 a month or £300 a month you’ll b expected to pay the same amount. Seems odd when you compare it to benefits that are very much means tested based on everything.

I agree, Seriousquestion.

and it'll seem like it's going well but 4-5 dates down the line he'll say he's "not looking to play dad", and this is way before the point where she'd even be considering introducing them so there's no suggestion of anyone being expected to "play dad".

Perfectly acceptable to not want to get at all involved with someone who has kids, particularly if you don't have them yourself. I did similar when dating if the bloke hadn't told me from the get go that he had kids. If her ex has gone on to find people stupid enough to date and procreate with a man who's already skipped out on the kids he had before then that's her lookout for being so stupid.

No idea why people want to complicate their lives with all these 'DP's who've already sired a brood of children and then whinge about how much maintenance he has to pay, how it's all so complex with the step kids, etc. Diddums when you take on someone with baggage.

Even the non resident parent has a right to move on and live. Have a family and more children which should not come 2nd to the first child. (I know very controversial on here...)

Everyone has the right to move on, yes, BUT NOT at their child's expense!

My Ex earns approx £120K per annum

He has 2 DCS with me after a 15 yr marriage and 1 DC from OW who he has now left - true midlife crisis.

OW thinks he should pay her more because, she has a low paid job, every benefit, tax credit etc known to man and she wants the lifestyle they had on his salary. He currently pays her £1700pcm - because if he does not then she refuses contact.

My 2 DCs get £400 pcm - because he can not afford any more and I earn enough so I allegedly I do not need it as much as she does and he knows I would never stop contact or play bitch.

Is that fair - no
He is too chicken to go to court because she will cause even more hassle and she is currently demanding more monies and he asked if he could drop mine even more. If she had her way, then she would get the £400 my 2 get aswell.

Other than EX needs to grow some - his 3 DCS are equal and their share of his salary to maintain them should be equal.

End of story - my earnings and her earnings are irrelevant.

I disagree that further biological children should cause maintenance for the first dcs to decrease. In a joined family, additional children are a decision taken by both the adults that it will affect and so if the older children will be significantly adversely affected, the joint decision is usually made not to have more. However in a split family, if the NRP goes on to have more that is not something the RP had any say in and so. It should not be allowed to affect the maintenance payable. And CERTAINLY maintenance should not be reduced of the NRP moves in with a new partner who has children.

nd if there are more biological children than the money should be split fairly. Not in favour of one child to the departmental effect of the others

I’m sorry, but I cannot understand your calculations. A single child costs an NRP around 12% of their income. That leaves 88% in favour of any child living in the NRP’s home. In what way is that detrimental to the first child? How is money split on a 12/88 basis favouring the first child?

child maintenance did leave us penniless. Because of the ridiculous way it was calculated about 10 years ago

10 years ago maintenance was calculated post-Tax on a 15/20/25% basis. Better than now pre-Tax for many. If it left you penniless it’s because there were arrears. Which means your partner hadn’t been paying maintenance, probably for some time.

I haven’t read the whole thread but what I have read is all about parents who have high outgoings (rents/bills...etc) paying less than they should. (Which isn’t ok)

But when you think about it the other way - A parent who earns well but has little outgoings, paying only the standard rate seems unreasonable.

A friend of DP owns a large home which was almost fully covered by money he inherited a few years before his DC was born. He broke up with the mother and as they weren’t married (only dated for about a year) she/the child weren’t entitled to any of that, now she’s struggling to juggle childcare and work to provide, whilst he earns around £45k a year and has basically no outgoings! He lives quite a luxurious lifestyle whilst paying the minimum contributions! Doesn’t seem fair!

Also, what I do not understand, please correct me if I’m wrong? But basic contributions are to cover housing, feeding and clothing (basics) that the resident parent provides the child. But if the resident parent wants/needs to work full time, why isn’t the other parent obligated to pay 50% of childcare!???

It seems like resident parents are almost being imprisioned by their parenters choice to sod off! Even if the resident parent does stay home and take care of the child- surely they’re still entitled to 50% of the ‘going rate’ for full time child care!

The child is 50% the financial responsibility of both parents if one parent is being stopped from working due to childcare costs or not earning due to caring for the child - surely the other parents can’t just hold their hands up and say “yeah well I paid my £200 for food and clothes this month so that’s your problem”!

A lot of divorces settlements will deal with childcare costs - our childcare was £30k a year and our court order refes to things like who pays the children's costs when they live with them, school fees, university costs etc. I agree with you that in most cases each parent should pay half the childcare costs where both parents work.

@Xenia

But what about situations where the parents aren’t married? I appreciate the legal advantages to being married (I’m getting married myself and waiting to have children until after as I feel it safer for me) however, in today’s modern world it’s pretty normal for children to be born outside of a marriage- what happens then?

Everyone does have the right to move on @sinuhe but it’s irresponsible to have more children if you simply can’t afford them.

I think the problem is the nrps who get with a new partner who wants a child and they could afford it if the maintenance dropped but not otherwise. My ex has recently cut his maintenance down to the minimum and I'm expecting a 'happy announcement' at some point. He was overpaying a decent amount that actually did do about 50% of costs but a few years down the line and his priorities have shifted. I work full time..i can survive without his money but its v v tight and why should we have to struggle so that he can swan off into the sunset. I bet a lot of the 'second' partners wouldn't stay if they knew maintenance to the first was an absolute non negotiable backed by law.

Paying around £400 a month on a personal hobby? That's the child support right there.

If he pays £400 a month child support..
That 10% of his money that would mean he gets £4000 a month wages....
Just how much is he paying?
As bet it is less than the lidger gives him.
In which case this is not about him being broke from child support, more his life is too expensive for his wages.

@feefee

I recall a post.

OP was in a full time job and wanted a baby, DP had been paying CM (well above the basic) until recently when he’d had an accident and had to take several months off work. Self employed no sick pay, so now the OP was ‘having’ to pay it. (They were not married but living together).
OP wanted to reduce to minimum as wanted her own child whilst ex wife threatened to stop the divorce going through if the OP stopped paying.

I remember reading this post like 🤔
The EX wouldn’t have gotten anything were DP still in the family home as he was bringing 0 in. So why she felt entitled to £500 a month I have no idea. But soooo many people (about 80% of commenters) have this OP complete Agro about ‘why would you have a baby when he can’t afford his first?’

Seemed to me that OP could afford her new baby just fine with her good full time job and decent benefits - nothing to do with DP-she was being emotionally manipulated into paying for the DP’s child that there was no legal or moral need to do. The DP was planning to re start his CM as soon as he could work again- how would it have been any different if he still lived with his ex and DC???

Feefeetrixabelle - I won't go into detail but, no there where no missed payments. More on the line of redundancy, finding a new lower paid job and calculation of last 3 months of wage for maintenance. That was 2 months higher paid job & 1 of lower paid job ... They would not recalculate for some time by which we where in financial difficulties, taking into account normal life expenses. Obviously there is more to it, but that is not for a public forum. Just that, at the time, the ex completely screwed us and it was facilitated by the law. It's changed now, and from my understanding this kind of thing should not happen to others on such a large scale.

the thought fox no, that's 400 of her own money that she has available because the father of the children is contributing a measly 10% of his salary. Are you really suggesting that an RP should use every bit if their income on the kids and none at all for personal spends before the NRP should have to chip in?

Students dont get universal credit as the student loan is viewed as income.I think your friend isnt giving you the full story. Also means tested maintenace? You're having a laugh surely.

thethoughtfox I get £400 every 4 weeks in child support from my ex. He earns over £50k a year as does his girlfriend who he lives with. Here in the Midlands that goes pretty far. He's definitely not living life in poverty. I highly doubt the bloke in the OP's post is paying that much and if he is then he needs to re evaluate his outgoings because on a wage of £50k+ he shouldn't be needing to take in lodgers to get by!

You can choose to buy a house with a smaller mortgage or live in one with lower rent, that is a choice. Your children needing food and clothes is not a choice and you need to provide for them above all else.

I'm a RP. I wouldn't rent a 2k a month place because I can't afford to because of all the costs related to the children. My ex the nrp tried to pull the living expense card to justify just 150 a month but if I have to make sacrifices of where I live to ensure the children have their needs met then so should he.

OP- are you sure that this high payments aren't normal payments plus arrears?

I think that there's no excuse to pay nothing.

If you're homeless and have no income?

Hmm, my now adult child told me today that his father said when he was a child - i can either give your mother maintenance or see you. I can't afford both, which do you want? DS now in counselling and has decided as an adult to go NC with his father.

i can either give your mother maintenance or see you. I can't afford both, which do you want?

What a shitty, blackmailing thing to say to a child.

My exh pays me £100/month for one child. He was previously paying £250 for his older child as well but that stoppedxa number of years ago. I asked him to increase the maintenance when he stopped his daughter's payments but he flatly refused because in his mind, he's not paying anymore money to fund my "lavish lifestyle"" if only!!!