Child maintenance

[Orinoco82]

Hi all, this is my first post on here, feels a bit strange as I’m a bloke posting on Mumsnet but there we are!

I’m basically just after some advice and other folks opinion on an issue I’m having with my daughters mum regarding the maintenance that I pay to her monthly.

I’ll try not to go on too much so here goes.

I have a daughter who is 5 years old and lives with her mum. Her mum and I separated before she was born but I have been there since day one and have always paid maintenance on time and every time without fail and I have even given extra money and lent money (which I never got back) on occasion.

I normally pay just under £500 per month maintenance to my ex but when this Coronavirus crap first hit earlier this year and the country went into the first lock down, the company I work for basically cancelled all overtime and call out which would have a substantial impact on my earnings (approx down £1200-1500 per month). As soon as I found out my earnings were going to cut, I thought it only fair that I tell my ex that her maintenance will be reducing which, although not what she wanted, she didn’t give me too hard a hard time over. I normally do a lot of overtime as I have debts that I’m trying desperately to clear and I want to provide for my daughter at the same time. I said I will give what I can and hopefully the overtime will come back and I can start giving the normal amount again. I managed to give £300 as that was all I could manage that month.

After a month or so, some overtime returned and I was able to give a little more so I raised it to £400 per month. I have also bought my daughter clothes, shoes and other bits and bobs as any parent would do.

My company has now again removed all the overtime due to this second lockdown so I thought it right that I should tell my ex straight away that again, my earnings will be going down. This time she absolutely lost the plot and went nuts at me down the phone saying that I don’t provide for my child, make no time for my child, I’m a hopeless father etc.......... none of which is true.

I love my daughter dearly, she is all I have in the world. She lives over an hours drive away from where I live and I always collect her and drop her home and I’m more than happy to do this, my ex has dropped her to me 3 times in 5 years and every time asked me for £50 fuel for doing so (which I refused). I make sure that I have at least 2 weekends off per month so I can have her and spend time with her. If I finish work on a Friday at a reasonable time, I’ll go and pick her up for the weekend. If I’m off during the week, I’ll drive all the way down to where she is to pick her up from school and take her to the park and out for some dinner then get her back home and drive home again. If she has a school play or sports day or whatever, I’ll go there, watch her and then go to work. I honestly do the best I can so I find it very hurtful when I get told that I’m a hopeless father and I don’t provide. I don’t think that’s the case at all. I may be wrong, who knows.

The other thing that has annoyed me hugely is that she borrowed a hefty (to me at least) amount of money from me and when I mentioned this to her the other day (she’s owed to me for over 2 years), she says that because I have been giving less maintenance, then I can basically go and whistle for my money which I think is wrong.

The maintenance that I give her was worked out using the CMS calculator but we haven’t involved the CMS but I have told her that I now want to go down this route as I am sick of being told I’m not giving enough so at least this way, there can be no dispute. She has told me that she doesn’t want me to do this though. Don’t know why as surely it won’t affect her.

She is always telling me how she has no money yet she refuses to look for work, has a partner that works, has another child (who she gets maintenance for also). Surely if you’re that hard up for money, you’d do everything you could to find a part time job?Maybe that’s just me?!

I could understand her being angry with me if I was giving her a pittance and driving around in a lovely car, living in a big house and wearing fancy clothes etc........ but I have none of that. Yes I’m really into my cars but I haven’t had anything nice for quite some time but that is literally my only vice. My current car is worth about £1500 tops.

I’m very sorry, I’ve been rambling (more getting things off my chest I guess). I guess the question I’m asking is, am I really in the wrong to adjust the amount of maintenance I give considering I’m now earning considerably less money? I fully intend to pay the normal amount once my earnings go back up so I’m not looking to get away with not paying it, I’m not that kind of person.

Thanks very much for taking the time to read.

@Ideasplease322

A lot of people on this thread have also suggested the OP isn't paying enough. Comments such as "don't congratulate yourself on paying the bare minimum" etc. Where is the line? Who decides what is "enough"? Especially when an NRP is saving his extra income for special times with his kids, like holidays, days out, and Christmas. That money is for the kids as so many have been quick to point out. So when the NRP does this, he is saving that money and spending it on the kids, he's just doing it on his own contact time. It means the kids still have a lifestyle in fitting with dad's income - they are still benefitting and having a great time. I'm just curious as to whether this would be viewed as acceptable to an RP?

@Ideasplease322

Also it seems unfair that the resident parent would get a tiny amount from non resident parent to cover food and clothes and then have to rely on them to pay for after school activities, presents for birthday parties etc.

It must be lovely to be the parent who can treat the kids on the weekend, and this is fine as long as the resident parent can also afford to give a reasonable lifestyle. One parent can be roster than the other - that’s okay.

But isn't this just the nature of separation? If parents were still together they'd clearly be doing those things as a family together but they aren't together, which is just a reality. If NRP gave the bulk of his disposable income to RP, so RP could do the treats, fun, and days out, then NRP wouldn't be able to do it himself. Is that a fair situation? I'd argue not.

There are so many individual circumstances to rule what is fair and what isn't.

A nrp who pays £500 a month for a child in school when the ex cheated on him with his best friend and who refuses to work more than minimum hours is not surprisingly going to care to use any additional disposable income on enjoying treats with his child when they are together rather than giving it to.husex so she can enjoy the same treats paid by him.

However, a man who leaves his wife for another woman, a wife with a disability that makes it hard to work is likely to be more sympathetic at the idea of paying extra so that his child can also e joy good times with their mum especially if his financial circumstances mean he can enjoy these treats with the child too.

rps and nrps come in many different shapes and forms.

I think I am nor explaining myself very well.

Or perhaps people don’t agree payments should increase with Earnings?

What I am saying is the resident parent should have to ask the nrp if the kids can do after school clubs etc and rely on them to give money for these everyday extras if the nrp is a high earner. This is why The higher the salary, the higher he contribution.

Op shouldn’t pat less than cms just because the amount Is higher than some people have experienced.

I appreciate some nrp are brilliant, bit some aren’t.

@dontdisturbmenow

Your first scenario sounds a freakishly like my DP's exW! Just add a few instances of fraud in there too....

[quote LouJ85]@Ideasplease322

A lot of people on this thread have also suggested the OP isn't paying enough. Comments such as "don't congratulate yourself on paying the bare minimum" etc. Where is the line? Who decides what is "enough"? Especially when an NRP is saving his extra income for special times with his kids, like holidays, days out, and Christmas. That money is for the kids as so many have been quick to point out. So when the NRP does this, he is saving that money and spending it on the kids, he's just doing it on his own contact time. It means the kids still have a lifestyle in fitting with dad's income - they are still benefitting and having a great time. I'm just curious as to whether this would be viewed as acceptable to an RP? [/quote]
My comment was that when he dropped it, he dropped it by more than his earnings dropped (based on the figures he provided).

A lot of people told him he paid too much, even though he was paying the the cms calculated amount.

There be a view Form some that there should be a ceiling in what nrp have to pay, and that ceiling seems to be quite low.

What I am saying is the resident parent should have to ask the nrp if the kids can do after school clubs etc and rely on them to give money for these everyday extras if the nrp is a high earner. This is why The higher the salary, the higher he contribution
But doesn't the nrp have a right to also have a say in which activity to do if he is going to pay for it? Of course he could pay directly.

A colleague of mine offered to pay for football lessons when his DS said he wanted to okay but mum was adamant that he should play rugby (a sport her new partner happened to coach). On the end, she signed him up for rugby and told her ex he needed to pay half.

It's a multitude of scenarios like this that means its rarely black or white.

@dontdisturbmenow

What I am saying is the resident parent should have to ask the nrp if the kids can do after school clubs etc and rely on them to give money for these everyday extras if the nrp is a high earner. This is why The higher the salary, the higher he contribution But doesn't the nrp have a right to also have a say in which activity to do if he is going to pay for it? Of course he could pay directly.

A colleague of mine offered to pay for football lessons when his DS said he wanted to okay but mum was adamant that he should play rugby (a sport her new partner happened to coach). On the end, she signed him up for rugby and told her ex he needed to pay half.

It's a multitude of scenarios like this that means its rarely black or white.

I think this is what I've been trying to say, in part. There will always be disagreements between the parents about whether that particular trip away is a necessity, or whether to pay for this or that after school activity / friend's birthday party. NRP should get a say too in what the money he earns is spent on, and if there's disagreement then it stands to reason he is going to choose to book his own days out / holidays / activities for the kids. Ultimately they're still benefitting from that money,

There isn't always a NRP and RP though is there?

But in a standard eow set up, the nrp is unlikely to be the one actually facilitating the activities, working out the logistics of multiple kids being in different places, buying and washing the kit, taking them to matches. Other posters, including busdriver I believe have suggested in the past that rps should have to account for what cms is spent on but that really isn't feasible. There's a poster on here who's ex is loaded but she and the kids are in rented, cramped accommodation.. Is that OK so long as he takes them on days out twice a month or would it be better if he paid an amount commensurate with his earnings to even things up a bit in the everyday but dull 'standard of living' stuff?

would it be better if he paid an amount commensurate with his earnings

If he's using CMS calculator then he will be already paying an amount commensurate with his earnings. (Unless he's paying nothing but I don't know the particular circumstances for this person). But assuming he's paying what the calculator tells him he should be, are you saying he should pay more over and above this amount? How much and who decides? Minefield ...

@HugeAckmansWife You're correct. That's me. Ex is now using the fact that he has a huge house with all the mod cons and en-suites to suggest the kids are better with him as we've been in small privately rented for seven years. He even tried to say it was a Covid risk as we only have one toilet.

@LouJ85 It's 50/50 so he doesn't have to pay a penny. His earnings are entirely irrelevant (over £100k pa btw).

@Nicknamegoeshere

I'm confused, are you referring to your own ex here or the person @HugeAckmansWife refers to as "taking them on days out only twice a month". I was referring to the latter.

The problem is that we're all talking very much from our own experiences here. Either we know a shitty dad who does nothing for his kids or an unreasonable resident mum who can't come to terms with not having a "cash cow" husband any more.

This doesn't relate to the OP's situation at all, but I think it is useful to look at the statistics.

Here's a couple that I think are interesting:

• 68% of single parents were working in 2018, yet, in households with a working parent, 1/3 of children were living in poverty. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43140285

• Universal Credit covers up to 85% of childcare costs up to a maximum of £646 per child or £1108 for two or more children.

• The average annual cost of a full-time (50 hour) nursery place in the UK in 2020 is £13,100. That's £1,091 per month.

So a single parent with one child working full-time faces a shortfall of approximately £445 per month just to pay for a full-time childcare place.

An NRP would have to be earning at least £50-60k to pay that amount of maintenance for one child (assuming they weren't living with any other children).

An NRP on £50k not living with any other children would pay approximately £410 per month - that's not even enough to cover the shortfall in childcare costs from UC, let alone pay for any of the child's clothes and expenses.

What if the RP has more than one young child?

Given that someone who works full time (37.5 hours per week) at the National Living Wage would take home £1,272 per month, it's easy to see how working can become an unaffordable option.

It does get better when the children go to school. The average cost of an after-school club, if available, is £3,172 a year. The average cost of holiday childcare is £133 per week.

Assuming the RP can cover five weeks holiday with annual leave, that still leaves 8 weeks to be covered. That's a total of £1,064 per child.

So, for a school-age child, a single parent working full-time will incur childcare costs of around £4,236 per year (although if they're a low earner they may receive some help through UC with this) and will receive maintenance (assuming their ex is a high earner on £50,000) of £4,920. This leaves £684 left over for everything else for the child - food, clothes, activities. A grand total of £13 per week.

I'm talking about my ex. Re paying an amount commensurate with earnings; this is irrelevant in a 50/50 situation. So what about in a situation where it's 50/50 but one party earns significantly more than the other and also has a much greater earning capacity?

@Nicknamegoeshere. I think the legal position where the parties are married is that any choices jointly made by them that one person should stay at home/cut their hours to care for the children should be taken into account in dividing the marital assets. So a SAHM with impaired earning capacity might get a higher proportion of the assets to compensate for that. But spousal maintenance is rarely ordered unless it is unreasonable to expect the spouse to work due to factors such as age/disability.

There is very little protection in the law for unmarried partners if a relationship breaks down.

@MessAllOver I was married. To a narcissitic accountant unfortunately! Hence difference in standard of living to this very day.

[quote LouJ85]@Ideasplease322

A lot of people on this thread have also suggested the OP isn't paying enough. Comments such as "don't congratulate yourself on paying the bare minimum" etc. Where is the line? Who decides what is "enough"? Especially when an NRP is saving his extra income for special times with his kids, like holidays, days out, and Christmas. That money is for the kids as so many have been quick to point out. So when the NRP does this, he is saving that money and spending it on the kids, he's just doing it on his own contact time. It means the kids still have a lifestyle in fitting with dad's income - they are still benefitting and having a great time. I'm just curious as to whether this would be viewed as acceptable to an RP? [/quote]
They aren’t benefiting. They get two days out of fourteen when they get to benefit. That isn’t the same if the RP is struggling to pay for food or good quality clothing for the children who cares if the NRP can treat them 14% of their life. The vast majority of their life will not be in keeping with the NRP life.

@Nicknamegoeshere

Presumably if he sticks to the 50:50 arrangement, he's meeting their living costs half of the time? Therefore it seems on the surface (without knowing the ins and outs of your particular situation), that no maintenance would be due regardless of either parent's earnings.

Some RPs get a large financial settlement in the divorce but due to other circumstances such as a low income, a low earning partner or a baby planned despite poor living circumstances can’t use it to afford to buy. That’s just how it is.

@Nicknamegoeshere. . Apologies for my basic analysis and for stating the obvious to you.

The only thing that could help in your situation would be a shit-hot lawyer and a forensic accountant...

@SoVeryLost

In the case I'm referring to the rp has no issues putting food on the table or clothing the kids when she chooses to remain in employment (she gave up several jobs because she "didn't like" getting up early). She has a live in partner and family who can look after the kids to enable her to work; she just chooses not to. And the kids do benefit from the fun things they do with their dad, in this particular example.

[quote LouJ85]@SoVeryLost

In the case I'm referring to the rp has no issues putting food on the table or clothing the kids when she chooses to remain in employment (she gave up several jobs because she "didn't like" getting up early). She has a live in partner and family who can look after the kids to enable her to work; she just chooses not to. And the kids do benefit from the fun things they do with their dad, in this particular example. [/quote]
I hate these examples especially from other women about feckless women who don’t care about their children or whatever you are trying to prove. The fact remains that on the whole your example means the children only get a taste of being able to ‘do fun things’.

The reality is there are far more men who pay as little as they can and tell their ex their £7 a week of maintenance is supposed to cover uniform, food, clothing, after school clubs and the increase in living costs; than there are women who spend maintenance on their nails. I’m not saying there aren’t women who do this but my focus is on how can we make sure the children get the best start they can. Missing out on clubs (swimming lessons, instrument lessons, chess club whatever) because their RP is barely keeping their head above water while the NRP can enjoy nice cars is insane.

So what about in a situation where it's 50/50 but one party earns significantly more than the other and also has a much greater earning capacity?

By this logic, if my ex and I had 50:50 care of my DD, I'd have to pay him maintenance? Because I earn significantly more and I have greater earning potential because I'm educated to PhD level and trained in a specialist area, whereas he does not have any specialist training and is a delivery driver. However, his wife is a SAHM who was gifted a very large farm house by her well off parents - they have acres of land and ponies. So he really landed on his feet! My daughter loves it there, unsurprisingly. We live in an average house and unlike ex and his wife we pay a mortgage. But by your logic, if we went 50:50, I'd have to pay him?