Should CM be considered as part of income

[SnowJon]

Should Child Maintenance be included when claiming benefits?

Example child maintenance is being paid to the resident carer. Why should that parent then be enabled to claim further benefits like Free school meals etc? Is that not what the cm is for?

The system is screwed in my eyes

Yes ideally the CM would always be paid by the loving parent who wants only the best for their dc and then the taxpayer wouldn't need to pick up the slack. As it is I would rather see some people getting too much than any child not getting enough. Free school meals is a safety net that may prevent a child going hungry and we should be very careful about cutting that out.

I think you only get free meals if not working at all. If you are employed earning a small amount you wont qualify.
The RP receiving the big bucks in maintenance rarely qualify for any benefits anyway.
Though 2 similar mothers on minimum wage and top up, if one is getting 200 maintenance it doesn't seem fair.
The government should stop it from the NRP weekly even if it is a fiver feckless fathers.

@Venger that's the funniest thing I've heard interest based on childs interest. More like the RPs calculating nights they can stop etc

If the NRP doesn't like whatever access arrangements they have then they are of course welcome to make an application to the courts for more access however the courts won't automatically grant 50/50 access as - shock! - they base their decision on what is in the best interests of the child.

Do your stepchildren know how much you resent them and their mother or do you manage to maintain a facade of being a decent human being when they're around? Must be very hard not to let your mask slip.

What is this stupid goady thread?

My ex doesn’t want 50/50 custody

He also now has another child so my maintenance is pretty low for 2 DC

Luckily I have a job and work full time so that I can pay the bills. The extra he pays ONLY pays for their school meals. He also gives them nothing extra. Not one toiletry, not one pair of socks, he doesn’t wash their clothes and feeds one of them 2 meals a week

I don’t get free school meals and don’t begrudge any children who do! Shame on you if you do

If you want to make cost savings anywhere, picking on some of the most vulnerable in society is pretty low rent and distasteful OP

Yes all NRP should pay full whack but it’s way too variable and risky to rely on it. It could stop any time

SnowJon has been posting lots of goady shit about maintenance lately.

Basically she massively resents that her DH is paying money to his ex for the DC.

She should be embarrassed to be honest

Oh snowjon your bitter, thick slip is showing dear.

PP summed it up with Snowjon, you know nothing.

I’m nearly 40 I don’t happen to know any single mums living it up in the life of Riley on a wild amount of CM. We all work and battle with the NRP to get the bare minimum. Perhaps I do not move in the right social circles eh

@Wildthyme great post, cut to the chase 👏🏻

It is embarrassing.
I'm amazed that people like this not only exist but actually find people that want to marry them.

My Ex paid nothing for 18 months for 2 DC - then he paid a reduced amount becuase he was now providing for OWs 2 DC. They then had a DC and it reduced even furthe.
He has now split from OW and pays her 3 times for one DC than I get for 2 DCS.
If I relied on his pittance - he took them away for 5 days this half term ( first time in 4 years -yippee!!) but he did not paymaintenance to pay for it.

Luckily, I work my bollocks off and can pay for my DCS - I do not claim one benefit, tax credit etc. His Ex OW on the other hand works 40% FT, claims every benefit going and gets paid £800 maintenance from first father and £1200 from my Ex!!!!

At the end of the day her take home pay is £500 pcm less than mine and I work full time and she does not! I

In theory, yes. But not in the current system.

Personally I'd raise the basic benefits/ top up level for lone parents. And include maintenance. But with the money coming via the dwp so the onus is on them to collect the maintenance. Which would be set to reflect the actual cost of raising a child, not the current insulting level. And if the nrp chose to cohabit with a new spouse I'd include the spouses income to calculate maintenance too. For those receiving reliable maintenance at a level beyond benefits they could choose not to claim, and rely on just the maintenance.

It's massively unfair that two single parents could have the same salary and be entitled to the same benefits but one family have a much lower quality of life. But in the current shambles you'd just get loads more families plunged into poverty.

Maybe when RP can actually rely on maintenance it could be taken in to account.

I know resident parents who are owed thousands unlikely to ever see a penny in reality.

Instead of penalising the resident parent who probably already does most of the child rearing we could actually look at proper punishments for those that let everyone else provide for their child?

Agreed.

Thoughts and solidarity with the poor ex and her kids tonight.

What a ray of sunshine OP will be in all their lives.

Child maintenance is NOT included when calculating Universal Credit. Only spousal maintenance is included and deducted £ for £ so Im having difficulty understanding your question

Obviously in an ideal world benefits of any kind wouldn’t be a thing because everyone would meet their financial obligations and the welfare state just wouldn’t exist at all. But this isn’t the ideal world. Maintenance payments usually aren’t enough to cover even half the cost of raising a child and they often aren’t made. Children shouldn’t suffer for the shins of their parents.

In my area it is for council tax support but that's it.

And it absolutely should not be counted because it's not ever a guaranteed sum for many people.

It doesn’t seem fair for those whose NRP doesn’t pay that they only get the same benefits as those where NRP does pay.

Maybe benefits should be increased for main carers, and the govt should instead collect monies from the fathers through lower tax allowance or similar

What's with the insults? I was only asking should Child Maintenance be included as income when claiming benefits.

The hypocrisy is frightening though with regards CM. All the people whinging about their maintenance cut if NRP moves on with somebody with kids. The NRP household budget would increase with extra people living in them

Maybe the solution is to instantly give 50/50 access between both parents unless not safe to do so and not weaponise the children.

IME most Dads don't change their working pattern post-divorce while mums often went part-time after the child was born so maintain that too. It's easier and cheaper for the NRP to have the RP look after the child rather than pay nursery fees for "their" day and have the child in bed not long after getting home and having dinner.

How much maintenance do you think people are getting anyway? Lots of RP are getting pathetic figures like zero, £7 etc so your thread is goady bullshit. There are RP owed tens of thousands of pounds and they have the CMS begging them to write off the debt because the kids are adults. It suits the government not to chase NRP for payment and pay benefits so that children don't go without. Be angry at the NRP for not paying - not for the tiny minority who would survive without benefits because they get reasonable/generous maintenance.

The hypocrisy is frightening though with regards CM. All the people whinging about their maintenance cut if NRP moves on with somebody with kids. The NRP household budget would increase with extra people living in them

You're assuming that all stepparents pay for their step kids. There's countless threads on here from woman who lose benefits when their partner moves in and they refuse to pay more than half rent plus bills.

All the people whinging about their maintenance cut if NRP moves on with somebody with kids. The NRP household budget would increase with extra people living in them

But maintenance will often go down as the calculations take into account other children living in this new household with the NRP.

2 people live in the NRP household If they have more children together, and 1 in the RP if they are single/claiming benefits.

Both the NRP and new partner know fully well the responsibility they have for their existing children before they have more children. The RP has no say or control over whether the NRP has another 4 DC with someone else, and the CM reduces dramatically with each new child.

This is nursery grade maths that 2 incomes is more than 1 income.

This thread is bonkers, it’s goady and embarrassing for you

You asked and you were told no it shouldn't, and why, and that it had been tried before and the dire consequences of that for some families.
In that case is it not hypocritical not to include a new partners income when calculating what the nrp should pay? After all their household income has increased?
If it's calculated on household income it should work both ways to be fair and not hypocritical.
Your system doesn't work until the government find the will to force fathers to pay for their offspring so the state can be relieved from doing so.
I look forward to the that happens but I'm not holding my breath.