Child maintenance advice needed.

[Cmsadvice]

Hello. I've name changed for this.

Ex and I have been separated for a few years. We have a son. He was employed and paid x amount a month in accordance with cms guidance. We didnt go through cms legally as we didn't feel it necessary. End of last year, ex quit his job to go self employed. He didn't actually end up going SE as it fell through with one thing and another. He has a stash of savings so continued to pay for our son at x amount a month.

Since September he has found full time work which is a higher income than his previous job. Today I broached the subject as he is still paying me a flat rate of x. When I ran the new figures through the cms calculator, according to that he should be paying y (more than what he is doing).

He has said that because he continued to pay me throughout his unemployment, he shouldn't have to pay more now. Its only £30 a month more. He said he will deduct what he has paid throughout the months he wasnt working until I have squared up with him.

Is this correct? Thanks for all and any advice. Prepared to be told I'm unreasonable for asking

The bar for men is so low and I'm depressed reading these comments. Your ex is a selfish twat. You are not wrong.

@Outfoxedbyrabbits

Why are you allowing him into your home for "contact"? You shouldn't have to see him, he should be seeing your child elsewhere.

Do you pay for his dinners three nights a week, too?

Because he lives with his parents 25 miles away and by the time ds was picked up from afterschool club and taken there it would be pretty much time for him to come back again which means he would be tired, hungry and reading/homework not done. Of course I pay for the food. Ex showers at mine too. Couldnt make this shit up honestly. I didn't put this in OP because I wanted to know of the principle of me paying back CM was correct and if so, how would it be done.

Cm covers approx. 12% of my living costs for me and dc. Extra £30 would make it 14%.

Go via CMS. I just have and it's been sorted really quickly. My husband left 3 years ago at first he paid what I worked out to to be half of costs - I had to prove it with bills etc - I accepted that cos I wanted my children to still have a relationship with him but what he paid never went up and he saw very little of them.

This September middle child started university - he texted me while I was driving them there to say he was now reducing his payments. I queried the amount for the first time - based only on what I knew he was earning when he left and the govuk calculator came out higher. He said that was wrong and he had used the calculator too.

Q. Can you guess what happened?
A. He now has to pay an extra £140 per month.

Q. What did I learn from this?
A. He lied about everything before he left and he's still lying now.

@Cmsadvice

My energy bills are going to go up by more than £30 a month. And what he currently pays is laughable.

Go via CMS then, it's the only way surely, if you think he's not paying what he should?

Just be prepared that it works the other way too and he could end up paying you less if his pay fluctuates or he becomes out of work.

Cm covers approx. 12% of my living costs for me and dc. Extra £30 would make it 14%.

This could be about right then, since his contribution is supposed to cover dc, not you?

And who provides the childcare when the OPs ex is working? Oh yes, the op. Either through paid childcare who h us not all covered by tax credits or UC or by impacting her own earning, so yes, cms can go toward the OPs costs. Most RP households are all one 'pot' of money, they have to be. Asking to separate out the cms and show its only spent on the kids would be unworkable.

You shouldn't be giving him dinner OP!

Get him to take DC back to his or out after school.

@HugeAckmansWife

And who provides the childcare when the OPs ex is working? Oh yes, the op. Either through paid childcare who h us not all covered by tax credits or UC or by impacting her own earning, so yes, cms can go toward the OPs costs. Most RP households are all one 'pot' of money, they have to be. Asking to separate out the cms and show its only spent on the kids would be unworkable.

I don't think anyones saying that, I think they're saying it's not worked out based on her total costs, which is true. We all know in reality it goes into one put but it's not based on x amount of the rps mortgage and bills as most nrps also have these costs (not this giant baby clearly but many others do)

Op we could have the same Ex. Mine was way more interested in controlling me with the CMS then actually providing for his kids. He has a regular job and is self employed on top so I managed to wrangle a deal where he now pays the same for my 2 as he does for his older ones but it was stressful and horrible. He was also coming to my house for contact although I only allowed once a week as that was already too much for me. I honestly don't know how you cope with 3 times a week and why on earth is he showering at yours!!!

I'd be telling him to keep the £30 but notifying him he now has to take DC out for supper or to an activity on HIS contact days instead.

@LittleMysSister

You shouldn't be giving him dinner OP!

Get him to take DC back to his or out after school.

I discussed with him taking ds out for tea but he kicked up a fuss so I let him have it here with us. He does do bedtime some night etc. And ds isnt too tired after a long day at school. I have to think about ds needs even if the situation isn't my preferred solution.

It's probably quite confusing for ds surely? Parents split up but daddy comes for tea three nights a week does bedtime and showers there?

Are you sure it's best or is it just easiest? The two aren't always the same.

Id stop cooking him dinner since he doesn’t want to pay for his child! Tell him things are tight and you aren’t feeding a grown man 3 times a week, he can take your son out / come round after dinner for 20 mins or however long that allows or not bother.
Of course he paid from savings, just like he would have for his own basic expenses. His child is not less important than his own expenses. He will get laughed out of court taking you. I think I might just go through cms and also stop paying for him to see his child. Just set it up so you don’t have to be hands on, and save the extra you aren’t paying on food for when he decides to go self employed again and decides his son doesn’t need to eat. At least it’s clear how much he cares then.

Now this has been raised it won't ho away. He now has in his head he is the one that is hard done by (hence his ridiculous threat of court). A private arrangement is all well and good whilst it works. I anticipate he will either not pay at all or deduct from the voluntary payments so I would got to CSA ASAP if I were you.

oops CMS not CSA

Do you need more money just because he is now paid more, or were you happy with the amount beforehand?

I am a bit taken aback at his attitude. I thought savings were meant to cover life setbacks. Rainy day and all that.
I am not sure how you are to pay him back. Ask him how you are to make your shared child cost less.

I discussed with him taking ds out for tea but he kicked up a fuss so I let him have it here with us. He does do bedtime some night etc. And ds isnt too tired after a long day at school. I have to think about ds needs even if the situation isn't my preferred solution.

I think it's really admirable that you're doing this, but tbh if it doesn't work for him to see DS during the week due to DS being too young to get home a little later then I'd be pushing for it to stop now tbh.

He's absolutely taking the piss coming to your house so often whilst eating your food and using your shower. Even if you cut it down to one evening a week that would be better for you.

offthequattro sadly there are lots of nrps who do think their cms should be itemised and accounted for. If the RP is ever 'spotted' buying anything nice for themselves they are accused of stealing the cms.

To the pp who said that if the couple were together they'd have had to tighten their belts.. Theres so many variables there it is not a relevant point. If they were together the op might have had more input into is decision to give up his job, she migh have benefitted from his presence so she could work more, their overall outlay would be less so money spent on the dc might not be impacted. The fact is that nrps can and do make major lifestyle choices which have a direct impact on RPs and dcs but the RP gets no say or choice in it. There's no real solution to that.. Ex partners obviously can't dictate what the other party should do but where it is voluntary, as in this case, the nrp should not be allowed to drop his contribution or piss and moan about being asked to pay the right amount.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

It's probably quite confusing for ds surely? Parents split up but daddy comes for tea three nights a week does bedtime and showers there?

Are you sure it's best or is it just easiest? The two aren't always the same.

Well it is easier for ds as ex refuses to take him back to his parents during the week.

I think it's really admirable that you're doing this, but tbh if it doesn't work for him to see DS during the week due to DS being too young to get home a little later then I'd be pushing for it to stop now tbh.

Apologies, I'm not sure I understand. You mean lessen contact between ex and ds?

If I was unemployed and had savings, I would still pay housing, food, transport and clothing for my DC from that stash. Why shouldn’t he be expected to do the same? He might not be legally obliged to do it but morally it is the right thing.
Stop feeding him, go through CMS and don’t even think about paying him back.

I've told him he is morally obligated to his son. His reply was I'm a cheeky bastard and that he will move to another country where his relatives live so he won't have to pay at all.

Just go via CMS

He is sort of correct, in that he would have had to pay very little whilst unemployed / self employed if it was through the CMS already. However, the right answer to this depends on lots of things.

How reliable is he with paying? Is the amount he pays a reasonable amount? What is your relationship with him like? Does he provide well for your DC when they are with him?

My ex quit a job so that he didn't have to pay maintenance, worked for cash, hid his earnings and dragged it out for years whilst not even feeding or clothing the DC properly when they were there. If they want to the system allows them to screw us over.

In your position I would probably agree to leave as is for now and pick a date in the future when you will raise a cms claim. Once that is in place there is nothing to debate.

@HugeAckmansWife

offthequattro sadly there are lots of nrps who do think their cms should be itemised and accounted for. If the RP is ever 'spotted' buying anything nice for themselves they are accused of stealing the cms.

To the pp who said that if the couple were together they'd have had to tighten their belts.. Theres so many variables there it is not a relevant point. If they were together the op might have had more input into is decision to give up his job, she migh have benefitted from his presence so she could work more, their overall outlay would be less so money spent on the dc might not be impacted. The fact is that nrps can and do make major lifestyle choices which have a direct impact on RPs and dcs but the RP gets no say or choice in it. There's no real solution to that.. Ex partners obviously can't dictate what the other party should do but where it is voluntary, as in this case, the nrp should not be allowed to drop his contribution or piss and moan about being asked to pay the right amount.

Yes I know that, but I don't think anyone on this thread suggested it?

Unfortunately that's the risk you take with a private agreement. And to be honest I would advise anyone never to rely on maintenance wherever possible because of issues like this. It's not right but it's common. And yes if they were together she might get more input but it's the same in that their child doesn't cost less.

We don't know if he's realistically being asked to pay the "right" amount either.