AIBU to think his ex-wife-son are taking us for too much

[Shesonlyworth30]

Long time lurker, first time poster. It’s a long one so apologies in advance.

Been with my DF for almost 7 years, have a 3 (almost 4) yr old and getting married in the summer.

DF was married before (to C - she was also married before and had 2 other sons (both older) and has one son with DF (16 this year) who lives with C in Scotland. DF has never not paid for his son, he even chose to have it deducted straight from wages when CSA were in charge. He didn’t trust C and wanted there to be a proper paper trail if ever she decided to say she never received anything. Since we have been together the payments have been just shy of £200. I have never had a problem with him paying for his son.

C has never let DF speak to son or see him since he was 3. She tried to kill herself a few times (once when pregnant and once when son was born) so DF took parental responsibility for her 2 older sons and their own while she was sectioned. They split up when son was 3 and she told a court it would be detrimental to her mental health to allow DF custody and access. Court agreed. (DF living in north of England at this point and C in Scotland)

Fast forward to last year. CMS took over from CSA and they re-assesses him and told him his payments would need to be £500 a month. We argued that this was a massive increase. They said it was because of what he earned. However they were taking overtime into account which we said was wrong. His overtime was not guaranteed and he did that to pay for our wedding/holidays etc. They said they were right. He went to court and while the judge was sympathetic said there was nothing they could do. He even tried showing them that if he had a basic month, with no overtime, paid the mortgage (a not unreasonable £660) gas, elec etc he physically would not have enough to pay the CMS. They didn’t care. They don’t take household expenses into account. He then said he had another child to support (ours) they said they had allowed £30 pcm for her. £30 bloody quid. That’s not even a day in nursery.

Because C doesn’t want him to know where she is she wants everything doing through the CMS so he has to pay their admin charge (extra £83 pm) and now we are in a vicious cycle. He worked more OT last year to pay her and still have money for our savings but because he earned more he now has to pay more this year £634 pcm!!!!

I’m fed up with it. My daughter doesn’t have £634 a month spent on her from her dad. I expected his payments to go up but AIBU to think this is grossly unfair and there is a fundamental flaw in this thinking. Surely if CMS believe 2 children should cost £664 then that money should be split between the 2?

His son can leave school at any time now but we know she won’t tell us so this could be ongoing for another 4 years because there isn’t a doubt in my mind she’ll make son stay at school if she’s getting £550 odd quid a month. Oh and she’s back with her first husband!! 🤬🤬

He’s 16, education is compulsory to the age of 18, or the child has an apprenticeship.

Your figures simply don’t add up and even if they did, if your husbands basic is 32k he’s simply paying 20% of his annual salary which is 6400 per year!

The fact your partner hasn’t even tried to locate his son speaks volumes tbh! There is multiple agencies and solicitors that would do all this him.

I’m sure you will agree £6400 annually is nothing to raise a child!!!

Courts are not in the business of stopping good fathers from seeing their kids. Correct, but it doesn't mean that RPs do not frustrate contact in some cases, and given that a barrister charges in excess of £1500 per day it is not financial viable for most NRPs in that specific situation to continually return to court to try and enforce the court order.

I just don’t get the thing about access. Can you honestly imagine what you would do if your partner went off with your child - just not bother trying to see her because it would be to confusing/difficult what absolute bollocks

@nrpmum but that's not the situation that's been put forward here. It's apples and oranges. This isn't a man who was awarded contact and the RP just decided to be awkward. The courts have allegedly decided it was in the child's best interests not to have contact with him. We are talking about a man who can afford more children with a new partner, savings for holidays and a wedding but could not find any money for a single attempt at gaining access to his son. He saw one solicitor who told him it would be "expensive and long winded" so he just didn't bother.

I can’t speak for Scotland but it is generally agreed in England that there isn’t a lot of actual law in family law cases. Essentially, the child’s welfare is paramount and the child has a right to a relationship with both parents. The expense of court is therefore reduced and many, many men successfully self-rep. Indeed, there are many forums on the internet that are very helpful in this regard. Of course, it is more complex with accusations of abuse, drug abuse, violence etc but even then the onus is on the acuser to prove the abuse took place rather than the other way round. To suggest the cost of a barrister is prohibitive when it is clear that absolutely no mediation or court action has been attempted is deeply disingenuous on your part.

@Shesonlyworth30 - I think you're being treated horrendously here. That's AIBU for you. It might be a good idea to post in legal matters instead - separate the issue from the emotion.

She's not being treated horrendously at all. She's probably disappeared for a start.

If it’s relevant, compulsory schooling only extends to 16 here in Scotland, they can leave at Christmas or summer, depending on when their birthday is. I think that CM is generally payable for as long as they are entitled to child benefit (so in full time non-advanced education), but I could be wrong on that. And obviously there’s nothing to stop the nrp paying longer.

I sympathise with OP when looking at it from the perspective that she committed to a man who has no relationship with his son and is tied to the fact that any extra hours done to go towards a joint treat is affected by a chunk of it having to to a child with not even guarantee said child is benefiting at all.

I have little sympathy with OP believing that her OH is innocent in this situation. Like most posters I suspect he has been extremely selective with the truth.

@CanILeavenowplease and what experience is it you have with self representing oneself? My understanding is that someone who advocates for themselves has a fool for an advocate.

and what experience is it you have with self representing oneself? My understanding is that someone who advocates for themselves has a fool for an advocate

Are you calling me a fool? Because I have been through a very lengthy court process with a very vindictive ex who had money to burn when it came to legal representation. My children still live with me.

Children aren’t pay per view (luckily as this would mean my ex never saw his son) so the lack of contact is irrelevant. And I honestly find it shocking that he has been granted no contac at all, I work in this area and I’ve only seen it once and this was due to the risk dad posed to mum and the kids. Even in that case he was allowed indirect contact though a third party (letters, cards etc).

You say that for years he paid just shy of £200, so let’s say it’s £199. That means he contributed a grand total of £45.92 per week. Hardly a generous amount.

Maintenance goes off earnings (inc overtime) as it’s supposed to ensure that the child has a similar standard of living that they would have if mum and dad were still together. Children shouldn’t be financially punished for having separated parents. And if his DS lived with you then he would be benefitting from that extra income so it’s fair.

True story - I know a family where the father was caught for not only being physically
Abusive, horrendously so, to his wife, but also for holding thousands of indecent images of child abuse and also under suspicion for selling those images online.

This man is allowed contact with his three children, albeit supervised. A violent paedophile. Yet your DF was denied any custody whatsoever on his ex wife’s say so?

Another true story - another abusivr husband whose wife finally got the courage to leave with her three boys - each of whom was also physically abused at some point as well as witnessing the abuse towards their mother.

Despite all this and despite CAMHS and SS being involved for the youngest son, detailing how detrimental it was to his mental health to be forced to have contact with his father, all three children have to spend overnight stays with their father.

There’s far more to the story than your DF is telling you.

@CanILeavenowplease no I'm not. You are clearly able to detach better than I am. I have tried to self represent, but I was too emotional. Legal fees are eye wateringly expensive and my last court case wiped the floor with me financially, and ironically nearly killed me literally.

No mediation offered, straight into court. We are not all in the same situation and I genuinely do not know one person who has successfully self represented.

I was given two days to prepare. No cafcass report required and I was not going to lie to push for one and he got what he wanted by manipulating me and the system.

Tbf I probably am still bitter about it. I did what my daughter asked of me. I thought he would be reasonable about access after. How wrong I was. I cannot afford court. I am on my knees financially currently, and I miss out on so many things, most of all my daughter's awful singing and her cheeky smile.

OP you are obsessed with his wife.

& this story is nonsense. No way did your man have his child as mother was unfit to have him, then suddenly she has him back (!) & he 'can't' see him?

Why didn't he apply to the Family Court, couldn't he be bothered? & he's spun you the 'my ex is crazy' line. That line is so old it's got whiskers.

I don't believe you've ever met this woman. All you know about her is what your man says.

& the disablism is horrible. 'Mad'..'living off benefits'...do you think her being disabled = she shouldn't get benefits then .?

Sometimes we end up living our own penance and that's what's happening to you.

As often happens with the women who believe everything a man says about his ex - You're spitting teeth as you think she is better off than you financially etc and it grates on you...then you wonder about the line your man spun you about her too.

Her new relationship is nothing to do with you, and even if her man is contributing financially it's not his job to financially support your man & his exes' child

If you split up with him I bet you would expect at least £600 a month towards your daughter! I know I would! It's 50/50 when you ha e a child.

Something is really off here. Just doesn’t add up. No court would refuse any contact for a child with a parent based on the other parent’s health. There would absolutely have to be a very good reason why your DH couldn’t see his child, to do with his own actions. I’d bet very good money that there’s something pretty big that he’s not telling you.

Combined with the fact she’s moved away and is keeping her location secret, my guess would be domestic abuse.

You might want to think about a Clare’s Law disclosure.

Can afford court costs to challenge maintenance but not for access. Your DP is an arse of a man.

nrpmum. I am really sorry you and your daughter are in this situation. I am also sorry if I was harsh - I do realise every situation is different and what works for one won’t necessarily work for another. My ex wasn’t very clever when it came down to it - took legal advice but didn’t listen to. It. Thought he knew better. His attitude helped me a lot! I hope you are alble to resolve issues for the best for your daughter.

No court in the land would ever 'agree' to not allow a father see their child because it's detrimental to the mother's mental health. Absolute bullshit you've been fed a line!

Also, CSA do not allow fathers to choose to have payments deducted from wages as it costs a fortune! It is only ever done if they dodge payments!

Has OP been back on?

@Graphista well said, all your posts are spot on.

They split up when son was 3 and she told a court it would be detrimental to her mental health to allow DF custody and access. Court agreed. You actually believe this? No court in the land would grant sole custody with no access to the father unless there is a very specific reason to do with child safeguarding. Never mind to someone with previous serious mental health problems. I'm 99% sure you've been lied to here, but if there is 1% chance that you haven't, your DP needs to go back to court, because that ruling absolutely should be overturned.