To email ex about uni fees?

[coffeerevelsrock]

Two dc ages 14 and 12. I am a teacher and was the higher earner. Since we split 7 years ago I have bought ex out of the house (£14k ish) and have to pay him another £10 k when ds2 is 21. He has the dc 4 nights a fortnight - a bit more in the holidays but also misses quite a few Saturday nights across the year. He pays about £130 per month as he's on a low income and that has only been for the last 18 months or so. He buys nothing else, though he does pay for d1's sport club fees (quite cheap and only half the year.)

He inherited from his dad earlier this year. I don't know the full amount but he has been able to buy a house outright for £180k. As the dc get older I am increasingly anxious about uni costs. I'm on my own on an income of about £48k. I do okay but with two teens and the cost of living going up I'm not saving loads every month. I also had to pay off quite a bit of debt when ex left. Last year I inherited £30k and have £25k of that put away (did some much needed home improvements with the rest). Ds1 is looking at expensive universities (Oxbridge/London) and from what his teachers are saying it's not at all out of the question, which is great apart from financially!

But with dc and life in general getting more expensive, I don't think I can save what is needed for uni and the £10k I need to give ex in the 9 years I've got left - or not without being quite frugal anyway. I'm conscious of wanting to make the most of the time I have with my dc in terms of holidays and don't really want to save every spare penny. I don't know, I just feel this hanging over me and it's uncomfortable.

Would IBU to email and see what he says. He has zero financial sense and has pissed so much money up the wall over the years. He also massively resents having to pay me anything as I earn more than him (because I'm not workshy) and doesn't really seem to see that he has a financial responsibility to his kids. So in a way I don't see the point, but then why should I be the only one having to think about this stuff? I just feel with such a large inheritance he should have thought about his kids and perhaps he has, in which case I should know as it would be a relief and would give me a realistic idea of our situation. He has told the kids he intends to move abroad when they leave home so I imagine he has bought the house as a way of keeping his money safe (I can't imagine his inheritance would have been much more than the house cost) and he'll then cash it in to go abroad. If he does that while the dc are in uni, a relatively small amount could go to their costs. AIBU to bring it up?

*Also, mrsm432, I'm not sure I agree with this:

The amount of top up that your children will need is based on the resident parent's income, and is the bill of the resident parent to pay. Obviously, the non-resident parent also has a moral responsibility to pay for their children, but that does not reduce the amount that the resident parent has to pay, as the calculation is made based on the resident parents income only. The non resident parent should give any contribution they make directly to the young adult, and this should be over and above the standard top up from the resident parent's household.

Surely the reason they don't take both households into account is because it would simply be too complicated. I agree that nrps should give contributions directly to the child of course, but you seem to be implying that if he stepped up and gave them a decent amount I should still pay whatever the calculation is as otherwise I would be cheating (who - the dc? the state?). I don't see the logic in that. The dc need what they need - why would they need massive amounts while I struggled/went without? I want them to have plenty of course, but I don't see it as a bill to pay. It's both our responsibility as parents to ensure they have what they need and are supported, not me having to pay a bill like a kind of fine for being the rp! I've already had that for years with him paying no CM then a minimum amount.*

Actually, I think that's a perspective that I hadn't looked at, and a valid point. As a parent, I would want to pay the full amount that I was expected to, and I would want my children to benefit from extra money from their other parent if it was available, but you do have a point that they only need the amount they need, which is the top up to the full loan. I guess my issue is that you can't expect your ex to pay half of the bill calculated on your higher income. He needs to be limited to the amount that would be the shortfall in loan if it was means tested on his income, and then I guess you could meet in the middle - so you pay a bit less than the calculated amount for your income, he pays a bit less than the calculated amount for his income, but in total your children get their loan fully topped up to the maximum amount. That would seem fair enough, your children don't lose out, and you and your ex both gain.

I think you're being glib saying luckily it's all affordable - plenty here are already in the situation and have said it's not.

Genuinely, I do think its affordable for every family except those who have chosen to overstretch themselves. I also think that its not a surprise expense, and it should have been factored into financial planning when looking at what budget was available to buy property/buy cars/take out loans or make financial commitments. And you yourself have already outlined how you can afford to pay it from savings, so it is affordable to you. Its clear you don't want to pay it, but you can afford to.

And do you also despair at all the NRPs who pay no or limited CM?

Yes, I really do despair at the NRPs who don't pay their full calculated amount of CM. Again, it's means tested to be affordable, and there's no excuse for not paying it in full.

Wow, your ex sounds like a waste of skin.

Oxbridge are actually one of the cheapest unis to go to, as accommodation is very reasonable and there are a lot of bursaries available.

YANBU to ask the question to ex. What a tosser that you need to stress about this. You made the kids 50/50 and shit like this infuriates me.

Its clear you don't want to pay it, but you can afford to.

Please -I do want to pay it in that I want my dc to go to university if it's what they choose and have a fantastic time without having to worry about money. I will do anything to make sure that happens and the most likely outcome of all this is that I will pay what is needed by myself and I will do so happily. It just rankles that ex won't pay his share or any amount while he is actually well off now. But that won't stop me paying it all just like I've paid for all the dc have needed over the years, essentials, school trips, hobbies, phones, days out...everything. And I absolutely do not resent it one bit but I do resent him paying nothing but still calling himself a great dad.

I guess my issue is that you can't expect your ex to pay half of the bill calculated on your higher income. He needs to be limited to the amount that would be the shortfall in loan if it was means tested on his income,

If said he wanted to contribute, after I had fallen off my chair I would just discuss with him what he would like to pay. I don't think I'd bring the calculation into it. I'd see what he said he could afford and top up the rest or something? The one thing I know won't happen is my dc going without. I'm not going to give my dc the bare minimum so they have a miserable time or being limited in their choices while sitting back counting my money. That'll be his role

Sorry, I still think you sound judgemental about whether it's affordable. What about when people's circumstances change? Happens all the time. In my case, ex's circumstances have changed massively for the better yet that is not going to be taken into consideration.

@coffeerevelsrock

Its clear you don't want to pay it, but you can afford to.

Please -I do want to pay it in that I want my dc to go to university if it's what they choose and have a fantastic time without having to worry about money. I will do anything to make sure that happens and the most likely outcome of all this is that I will pay what is needed by myself and I will do so happily. It just rankles that ex won't pay his share or any amount while he is actually well off now. But that won't stop me paying it all just like I've paid for all the dc have needed over the years, essentials, school trips, hobbies, phones, days out...everything. And I absolutely do not resent it one bit but I do resent him paying nothing but still calling himself a great dad.

I guess my issue is that you can't expect your ex to pay half of the bill calculated on your higher income. He needs to be limited to the amount that would be the shortfall in loan if it was means tested on his income,

If said he wanted to contribute, after I had fallen off my chair I would just discuss with him what he would like to pay. I don't think I'd bring the calculation into it. I'd see what he said he could afford and top up the rest or something? The one thing I know won't happen is my dc going without. I'm not going to give my dc the bare minimum so they have a miserable time or being limited in their choices while sitting back counting my money. That'll be his role

Sorry, I still think you sound judgemental about whether it's affordable. What about when people's circumstances change? Happens all the time. In my case, ex's circumstances have changed massively for the better yet that is not going to be taken into consideration.

If your ex had bought a more expensive house, with a mortgage, would you be OK with him saying that because he now had a mortgage to pay he was going to pay less than the means tested maintenance amount? Or would you say that his means tested commitment to pay £x in CM should have been taken into consideration before be took out that mortgage (or car loan or whatever).

I guess I think that the parental contribution to Uni fees should be recognised as a required financial commitment, just as CM should be.

Look, your ex sounds like a bit of a loser, and it sounds like you're the responsible parent that keeps things afloat for your children. Just because he's had an inheritance, it doesn't mean that you should benefit from that. He lets his children down, you don't. You have the moral high ground for sure, but not an entitlement to his money! Your children will know who saw them right, and who did the bare minimum.