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

It amazes me how feminism goes out the window on MN when the partners of NRPs come on these threads to start defending their amazing men (who will do it to them one day) 😂

@BigYellowHat

It amazes me how feminism goes out the window on MN when the partners of NRPs come on these threads to start defending their amazing men (who will do it to them one day) 😂

I'm not sure anyone is doing that

Go through the CMS. It stops the arguments. He’s a petty motherfucker though.

He has a point, I would suggest saying to him that you understand he used his savings so can you revisit child maintenance in a year once he's had a chance to get his finances back on track

@Getyourarseofffthequattro You only have to read some of the posts and it’s glaringly obvious. Why on Earth would any woman think it’s ok to just say ‘fine, take food from OUR child’s mouth’. Yet, there’s so many people basically saying that. He had the money (his savings) and needed to use it until it was spent. Otherwise what else would it go on? That’s what would have happened if they were still a couple. He should have only stopped paying once the savings were depleted as his obligations didn’t stop.

[quote BigYellowHat]@Getyourarseofffthequattro You only have to read some of the posts and it’s glaringly obvious. Why on Earth would any woman think it’s ok to just say ‘fine, take food from OUR child’s mouth’. Yet, there’s so many people basically saying that. He had the money (his savings) and needed to use it until it was spent. Otherwise what else would it go on? That’s what would have happened if they were still a couple. He should have only stopped paying once the savings were depleted as his obligations didn’t stop.[/quote]
Well for context he is above getting any kind of state benefits due to his savings capital.

None of them said what you've actually accused them of saying have they? No. Maybe stop making nasty assumptions and go back to the feminism board.

@Getyourarseofffthequattro

None of them said what you've actually accused them of saying have they? No. Maybe stop making nasty assumptions and go back to the feminism board.

No

@BillMasen

Just talking about the financials here

Whilst you’re within your rights to go to cms and get it increased, he has been paying whilst not earning, and if I were him I’d feel you were only reverting to the cms when it suited you, and I’d managed to continue paying when I (legally, not morally) didn’t have to

Fine if you want to do that, but I’d remember that, and if my income ever fluctuated again you’d be sure my payments would too

Think carefully if you want to follow the letter of what should be paid, or the spirit…

Cannot imagine reducing my child’s money just to point score against my ex.

I think the crucial point here is that he CHOSE to jack in his job and he had sufficient savings to cover his expenses. He wasn't sacked or made redundant and he didnt fall on the bones of his arse. He had the money to pay his (minimal) bills so why on earth should he not have continued to provide for his child? He's hiding behind the cms rules that doesn't count savings. Lots of the cms rules are glaringly, obviously ludicruous yet are used by nrps to avoid adequately supporting their kids.

@BillMasen you’re pitching up as a fellow man prepared to cut down his maintenance to serve his own ends, to stand up for this vile man? Yeah, good one.

@HugeAckmansWife

I think the crucial point here is that he CHOSE to jack in his job and he had sufficient savings to cover his expenses. He wasn't sacked or made redundant and he didnt fall on the bones of his arse. He had the money to pay his (minimal) bills so why on earth should he not have continued to provide for his child? He's hiding behind the cms rules that doesn't count savings. Lots of the cms rules are glaringly, obviously ludicruous yet are used by nrps to avoid adequately supporting their kids.

So true

[quote Briarshollow]@BillMasen you’re pitching up as a fellow man prepared to cut down his maintenance to serve his own ends, to stand up for this vile man? Yeah, good one. [/quote]
Not what I said at all

I think he has a point

Somehow I think it necessary to remind some posters of the reality of this issue.

Men (as it is mostly men) get to walk away from their kids and pay a small sum of money and give a minimal amount of their time to them, if they so choose.

Women (as it is mainly women) then have 100% of the effort, time, money and sheer bloody mondedness of raising kids in whatever circusmatnces they are left in. No matter how muuch or how little moeny the father gives, women have to make their household income work. No matter how much or how little of their time fathers give women have to make their lives meet the needs of their kids and themselves alone. With little or no choice in the matter. The kids exist and she has them..

And there will always be someone who say "Yeah, well I think he has a point" whenever some relatively absent dad moans about money.

Think again...

@BillMasen

Just talking about the financials here

Whilst you’re within your rights to go to cms and get it increased, he has been paying whilst not earning, and if I were him I’d feel you were only reverting to the cms when it suited you, and I’d managed to continue paying when I (legally, not morally) didn’t have to

Fine if you want to do that, but I’d remember that, and if my income ever fluctuated again you’d be sure my payments would too

Think carefully if you want to follow the letter of what should be paid, or the spirit…

Please see paragraph 3 of your own post @BillMasen. How is that not ‘prepared to cut down maintenance to serve your own ends’? Reading it again, there’s something vaguely threatening in your tone; “I’d remember that…”

To me your post smacks of warning little women not to upset men, because they hold all the power and we should remember that.

It never cease to amaze me that some people are like this, will only pay the minimum ( or nothing)and expect the resident parent to magic up the money to support their children

Just go to cms

Thanks all, I've taken the advice onboard. Preferred method is still a family based arrangement and I'll see if we can come to some sort of agreement. I'll use cms as a last resort. Maybe cut down on him eating/showering here too. Don't wish to be petty, it's not my nature but then I'm not exactly dealing with Mr Mature so maybe I should not martyr myself at the same time. Food for thought.

@BillMasen were you between jobs? Or like this guy were you deliberately self employed? Not made redundant or fired, An intentional decision to give up your salaried work? If you did that having made a budget decision you could afford it by not contributing to your child then you’d be a terrible parent who doesn’t deserve to see their child. I give this guy zero points for having continued to contribute, his other costs are negligible. I’ve quit my job for 6 months. It was a careful decision having factored in savings that we could continue to afford our children. Cms and bar the house to him, then relax knowing your child will never see their dad abuse their mum in his house again OR their mum tiptoe around their dad in her house because he’s abusive.

@Briarshollow I simply meant it would move in line with the cms calculation, up or down.

I’ve literally said how I dealt with a similar situation. Not sure how you’re getting threatening little women out of that but whatever

@Cmsadvice

Thanks all, I've taken the advice onboard. Preferred method is still a family based arrangement and I'll see if we can come to some sort of agreement. I'll use cms as a last resort. Maybe cut down on him eating/showering here too. Don't wish to be petty, it's not my nature but then I'm not exactly dealing with Mr Mature so maybe I should not martyr myself at the same time. Food for thought.

Why on Earth do you let him eat and shower at yours?

Can't stand conflict and the fact he lives 25 miles away so I appreciate it's difficult for him to find time to finish work, eat etc. Try to be as accommodating as possible. Just consideration I guess.

His contribution is pitiful. You're saving him hundreds of thousands over the next 18 years, the cost of 24/7 'childcare' alone would be extortionate day to day, let alone the practicalities of food, clothing, bills etc etc. He's responsible for 50% of everything every week but manages one night?
Calculate costs for a 24/7 nanny for the childcare element 2.5 days a week (what he's currently down on) add on for living costs and multiply that figure by the number of weeks you've been sole parenting. That's his arrears to date. And he feels hard done by? Pathetic.

He's a controlling asshole who is still trying to exert control over you.

You are NOT responsible for making him a good parent. If he can't figure out how to facilitate looking after DS properly in his own time and own space, that's on him. You do not need to enable this man b letting him in your home, and letting him bully you into toeing the line.

Go to CMS and tell him from now on he can collect DS for contact but you can no longer facilitate contact in your home. And you certainly won't be feeding him or letting him shower.

Be warned that a NRP can still exert financial control via the CMS. Mine refuses to pay while there are wranglings about how much should be paid per month. The CMS take ages to sort it out, he throws in another curveball and the clock gets reset. I tried to get it moved to Collect and Pay, but he just phoned them up and they immediately reversed the decision. The arrears are building but he has managed to persuade them to allow him to pay them off over 3.5 years.

And is your consideration reciprocated? Is he understanding of how hard you work, how tricky finances are?