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

What you see as hypocrisy is more like mothers worrying about how to keep an income to feed and clothe their kids; on a parenting website.

We all know how precarious our situation is. The majority of absent parents are men and a lot of them don't pay what they should.

And then they spin their new partners a line about the evil, money grabbing ex who is bleeding them dry for every penny and weaponising the kids.

You won’t find any single RP’s who do not agree that more should be done to force NRP to pay suitable frequent levels of CM. We all think that

But it’s not happening
So your thread is completely goady and hypothetical.
It doesn’t work like that, it can’t work like that. It’s too unpredictable

I’m sorry you are so bitter towards whoever the RP is in your life who was there before you, and guzzling all of your DH’s income and living it up on free school meals. This is something all women should be aware of before getting involved with someone who has children with another woman - bitterness can eat you alive

People having a debate gets made personal. I'm not bitter at all. Pay what I need to pay love seeing my children but I believe people are nieve and the system is abused by both RP and NRP
I read here all the time how NRP are this and that when the actual fault is the system.

I know you will never agree but the amount of parents that weaponise the kids for money is shocking and this works both ways.

⁰

Sure, Jan...

Yep that’s right been a rp is such a lucrative role 🙄

@SnowJon

Don’t have children. This is a guaranteed way to save money

No the actual fault is the feckless amoral piece of shit ,male or female, who does not provide for their off spring.

The system should not be needed if these spineless wankers did what they are supposed to and pay for the up keep of their children.

I do not think the state should have to make it up, I work my arse off to pay for my kids and am 100% not relaint on any credit, benefit etc - I am lucky, many are not.

If anyone has/ takes on another child, it stands to reason that it's going to cost more, hence a parent should consider whether they can afford it without reducing the existing dc's lifestyle. This also applies to nrps.

My only personal experience with paying maintenance was dp paying many times above the legal level for plus every other expense. As he had since they split. Enough that both she and his ex could have had a very good quality of life even though only he had that sort of income. Which is exactly how it should be.

But realistically, I know very few separated parents where that is the case. The vast majority are rps providing the bulk or indeed all of the parenting, from financial support to care. With the nrp living a much better quality of life and rarely paying the legal minimum. And even then doing their best to ensure the legal minimum is calculated on an income that doesn't represent their lifestyle. Not to mention that anyone paying only the legal minimum obviously doesn't give a fuck about their dc.

I don't know hordes of rps living the highlife on benefits and maintenance.

Also anyone that is envious of someone claiming free school meals has serious fucking problems they should seek counselling for.

There is no one system that is fair for everyone. I understand the OP's concern, but others have pointed out the problems.

My husband used to pay maintenance to his ex (until about 25 years ago). He paid almost £500 a month for one child, so a pretty reasonable amount. He was not an exceptionally high earner, but between us we earned a reasonable amount and my salary was taken into account when determining the amount to be paid. He paid on the dot every month.

Despite the size of the payment she was no better off, as every penny paid was taken off her benefit. The only way she would have benefited would have been if the maintenance was higher than her benefit entitlement, but by then she had another partner, neither of them worked, and they had four of their own children.

I confess I thought it very unfair at the time that my husband was paying a substantial proportion of the cost of supporting a family of 7, when only one child was his responsibility, particularly when his ex and his child were no better off than if we'd paid nothing.

No, it’s been trialled and failed. The children suffered.

Ide love to see ds2 dad face if I said you've got to have him another 49.9% of the time.
He does not want his ds nor does he want to pay for him.
Actually I'll give him some credit for the last few months hes given me the amount set by the cms.
Normally I get nothing. So when I'm rolling around in that extra £150 do you know what I splash out on?
Gas, electricity, water etc etc

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
Is this your issue, either you've move on have another mouth to feed and your ex is complaining the payment has dropped.
I think if a person Dad moves on they shouldn't have more DC unless you can afford to pay decent maintenance for the existing DC.
They do move on have more and this is why the RP can't rely on maintenance.

@EmeraldShamrock what is a decent amount though?

YAB completely utterly and totally U.

Only someone with no actual clue could use the line CM lines the RP's pocket. I wish I could pay for all of the things I needed for my children for the 3.50 per child per day that I get in CM and have some left over .

I agree with @Trainspotting's ideas.

"With Universal Credit child benefit child maintenance plus wage the nrp could be earning at least 2k and still claim free school meals."

Not true, on universal credit children do not receive free school meals if their family earn more than £7,400 per year regardless of family size.

What's the issue with the FSM?! All children in England in the first 3 years of primary school get FSM regardless of income, should they not get FSM? Any household with any income over 7.5k no longer gets FSM which is ridiculously low.

There’s been loads of single parent bashing threads recently, idk, something in the water? Anyway just going to go watch my big plasma telly, nighty night all

Well exactly, there are children in ks1 that live in households earning 100k or 200k or more a year getting free school meals. So What?
The op obviously begrudges thier own children or stepchildren the whopping £2 worth of almost inedible food a day.
Most single parents aren't entitled to free school meals, most of us don't receive any or enough maintenance.
I don't get this thread.

Maybe these figures from 2017 will help you get some perspective
Unpaid child maintenance backlog in UK is £3.8bn www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39293209

How on earth can the RP be expected to bounce in and out of benefits entitlement on the whim of the NRP when the state can’t even collect the money they are owed.

@SnowJon
what is a decent amount though?
50% of all expenses including food, clothing, electricity, rent, childcare, activities, general every day expenses.
If both parents were to provide 50% then there wouldn't be a need for huge benefits, secondly this is harsh people wouldn't go on to keep having additional DC if they were so expensive.
Parent's can provide their 50% from work or benefits. I'm not saying stop benefits but 50/50 on bringing up DC.

@MadameButterface Enjoy you deserve it.
Any of my friends receiving maintenance it barely covers the essentials for a DC never mind the actually cost of running a home for the DC.

I've never ever heard a story of anyone NOT battling to get CM. Never. Whether it be to actually get it or get the right amount, I've never heard of anyone just getting the right amount and it being paid every single week/month and them living it up. I know a fair amount of people as well. I think there's very few of these people on massive amounts of CM and also on benefits. You're also neglecting the fact that benefits won't be paid if you have more than £6k in savings. So these people getting £££'s every month in CM, do you really believe they are actually claiming benefits? Do you think they're stashing all the immoral money they get under their mattress and having baths in £50 notes?

If NRPs weren't so tight fisted and neglectful, the old system would have worked. It didn't work and people were starving and children were in extreme poverty. I don't give a shit if the tax I pay goes to a woman getting all the benefits plus £500 CM a month. Her kids are fed and will remain so should her ex default and that's all I care about.

Parents weaponising children for money doesnt make your idea less shit.

50/50 access between both parents unless not safe to do so and not weaponise the children.

The 2 women I know with 50/50 custody still pay the majority of the expenses for the child in terms of uniform and clothes and days out. As the child aged, they opted out of the 50/50 (didnt want to be at dads half the time) yet the arrangement didn't change. One went back to court and was told she should make her 14 year old son go against his will because she isnt obliged to financially care for him more than half the time..