Child maintenance

[Lalala1]

Posting here for traffic!

The amount of threads on mn surrounding child maintenance I’ve noticed there’s completely opposite opinions on it.
Some find the way it’s calculated fair some don’t.
Some say it doesn’t cover everything and “certain things should be split” out with cms.
Some say people get too much because they only get lower and are “greedy ex wives” so they should be grateful.
Some say the rules around calculations are wrong and should be changed.

So I’m curious if you were in charge of cms what would/should it be?
How should it be calculated?
Should it cover everything or not?
How would it or could it be changed to be fair for all children?
Or
Is the way it is set up and conducted fine as it is?

Just putting this for vote

YABU- cms is fine as it is no change
YANBU - cms should be changed and how?

When it comes to child maintenance it’s the NRP needs to house the children also electric/gas/food etc yet there’s some People on here who argue that “ their home isn’t the children’s home as they are hardly here they live with mum and “visit” here therefore they don’t need a room/space,possessions etc” it’s contradictory

Obviously not everyone thinks this way. There will always be some people who contradict themselves on MN about any subject. But poster's here aren't just one individual so unless you've seen the same poster make both of your points, it's not really proof of anything.

I'm a step parent but I absolutely don't think my step children are just visiting or this isn't their home. They have a bedroom here, clothes, books, games consoles, uniform, bikes etc... They are certainly not just thrown on an airbed in the home office. But yes, all of the above is a cost to us as well, we, like their Mum, have to pay for a house big enough for them to have their own rooms etc... They do live more nights with their Mum so of course my husband makes a contribution toward that but it is right, in our case, to say that we also have to provide most of the same things as their Mum does too.

And most posters on MN think that is right (understandably) so why shouldn't it be acknowledged?

It's a tragedy that some people think an adults personal wishes and needs trump those of the children they have.

What of taking responsibility for ensuring the children you already have are taken care of before you go on to another life or have more children? Yes children need a bedroom in the NRPs house, but that child also needs a roof over their head and their needs met in the RP's home as well. An NRPs wants should not come at the expense of the needs of a child they brought into the world. Nor should their partners, or their partners children, or any new children they choose to have. It's grossly irresponsible to go on to set up a new life or take on someone else's children, or have more children when it detriments the child you already have. An RP can't magic up double the income (or more) to cover what were household expenses just like that. Its all very well saying the NRP owes the RP nothing as they aren't together, but they do have a responsibility toward the child that had no choice in the matter.

Not taking on additional costs you can't afford seems like a basic... I've never understood why it's considered ok for the NRP to just pass the costs along to the RP on a pro-rata basis when the NRP is just as responsible for those costs just so that the NRP can fund his nice new life, often with no responsibility at all for the children left behind.

I think the issue is that many nrps use that as a reason why they should only pay the pretty paltry amount that cms usually adds up to, whilst having the option due to not being the RP to earn more. A lot depends on the time split.

Anecdotal tale but my friend has 3 DC with her ex. He moved in with a woman and her two children a couple of months after they split so he’s always got away with paying less purely because his girlfriend has 2 children. Two children who are not biologically his at all and had he lived alone or with someone who didn’t already have children, he’d pay more towards his biological children. Somehow that rule doesn’t add up to me and makes no sense. I don’t think stepchildren should be involved with the calculation at all.

Also, the bare minimum isn’t enough for anyone. My friend gets £220 a month through CMS for three children who are not small so cost a lot every month. He barely sees his children either, about 12 hours a month and no overnight visitation because the house he shares with the GF and her kids isn’t big enough for them to stay over.

That situation just doesn’t seem fair to me personally. I think it’s far too easy for Dad’s to walk away, pay next to nothing and do fuck all for their children. Women generally always end up picking up the slack.

The CMS doesn't seem to benefit anyone. Except the CMS.

They charge £10 (or that's what it was when I opened my claim five years ago) and then as I use the collect option they take a percentage of the £20 a month my exh pays.

There is over £10k debt on the account.

He is self employed.

They do nothing to address the debt. Nothing to investigate what he earns as is self employed.

I took them and my ex to court, it was court ordered that he should pay £440 a month yet I've never had more than £20 a month but because he's paying "something" they won't take any further action except send him a letter demanding he pay which he ignores.

Absolute waste of 3 years pursuing this.

I sat in court and I had to demonstrate a similar role in a similar area to give a rough guide to his earnings as he didn't turn up to any hearings or provide any of the financial records the court asked for. The csa sat there and argued that he probably only earned £20k per annum. I had to point out this wasn't possible seeing as he took £40k of dividends that year alone.

They are a joke of a service.

There are some good suggestions on this thread about penalties for non payers but none will ever happen as they don't follow through on anything now.

@Bubblesandsqueak1

I worked out the cost for my ds which is around 110 per week, that includes everything food, clothes, clubs, ect so £55 per week per parent £238.33 PER month i do think its crazy then nrp pay 500 plus per month or more however if child is under 5 they should also split childcare nursery cost on top of that

You’d be horrified then with what my ex pays

And why not? He’s an incredibly high earner and he has the children for alternative weekends

Thankfully he’s happy to at it

@Dithercats

Reducing CM if you live with another woman with children - or if you have another child should be stopped. Men should pay for their children regardless of who they go on to be with.

Yes, we get next to nothing now.

The NRP opening a business in their OHs name. The OH paying the NRP a ' mediocre wage but above the minimum wage' then the OH having double the wage. So their household income is lovely but the NRP has to pay pittance to the RP.

@ChocolateMassacre

But why would the NRP need to pay someone for 24/7 care for their child? The NRP also looks after the child and the RP is the parent too.

Clearly if NRP and RP were doing 50/50 care, no one should be paying anything.

@ChocolateMassacre

Well there wouldn’t be a NRP then, would there?

@OrganisedChaos22

The NRP opening a business in their OHs name. The OH paying the NRP a ' mediocre wage but above the minimum wage' then the OH having double the wage. So their household income is lovely but the NRP has to pay pittance to the RP.

Not as easy anymore

Has to be registered with HMRC
Set up on payroll
Etc

My ex moved away. And re married.
It. Didn't bother me that he payed less as she had dcs. As I'm sure she would have lost her tax credits when he moved in etc and she's a good step mum to dc

I didn't agree he gets a variation because he moved away and costs him more fuel to collect ds! So gets a percentage off for that.
He moved away not me.

It is registered with hmrc.

She is the director. Takes a whack of a wage plus dividends.
He does 50 hour weeks for £540pw.
Which is all he has to pay maintenance on.

@OrganisedChaos22

It is registered with hmrc.

She is the director. Takes a whack of a wage plus dividends.
He does 50 hour weeks for £540pw.
Which is all he has to pay maintenance on.

He must really Trust his new wife. Completely and totally Because to say he is vulnerable - would Bea understatement

Either trust her or daft?

Thing is he tells dc what they do and why. He also pays into a pension to lower it.

It's a piss off but he does care for ds well when there as does the SM.
Never had any major issues. Its just some things are frustrating

So much depends on the circumstances. Where both parents earn similar amounts (say circa £40k +) and the woman didn't take a significant financial hit having children then the current amounts are quite fair. Where the absent parent (lets say dad ) earns lots and lots, resident parent earns hardly anything because they were a sahm for years due to child with disabilities and h with long hours it's quite different. I'm in the latter situation but my ex pays spousal without a court order.

The best thing to happen would be for all parents to act like grown ups and be fair but that's as likely as pigs flying. Plus there's often extra factors.

Children are for life, unfortunately not everyone seems to realise that

@OrganisedChaos22

Either trust her or daft?

He MUST trust her Because by registering his business entirely in her name He’s leaving himself very vulnerable if that marriage goes peer shaped

gogohm why are the current amounts fair? I guarantee you that two parents, both earning similar, one with EOW contact only will NOT be paying the same toward the childrens' day to day expenses. I guarantee you that the RP will be paying more than 18% of their income and doing all the leg work.

all of this adds up to what I said on page 1 - that there is no solution short of individual case loads and regular reviews, backed up by robust enforcement but all of that would cost far too much and isn't desired. The current "one size fits no-one" approach leaves everyone feeling hard done by one way or another.

@OrganisedChaos22

It is registered with hmrc.

She is the director. Takes a whack of a wage plus dividends.
He does 50 hour weeks for £540pw.
Which is all he has to pay maintenance on.

I don't think people realize how easy it is to do stuff like this all in the name of smoke and mirrors.. and to do it perfectly legally.. It's just another loop hole that NRPs can and DO exploit

If my ex-husbands dividends had been considered I'd have been entitled to apply to court for maintenance as his earnings would well exceed 150k. Instead he opts to ''diversify'' the earnings from his employer, live the life of a king AND pay next to no CMS!

It's pretty obvious to anyone that you can't own a house worth just under a million pounds, wear nothing but designer clothing, eat out at least 4 times a week, drive a snazzy expensive car, take at least 4 international holidays a year + various ''mini breaks'' with your wife ( yes he does cancel contact for these!) on the salary that goes through HRMC.. but trouble is no one is looking. He's laughing his arse off...

I think the proboscis is that there isn't a single solution that suits everyone.
PP the other day wakes away with 70% assets and brought property outright. Assuming daughter costs half of all bills etc it came to just over £300 in total. Mom got £350 so didn't financially pay a penny for daughters living costs and she still wanted him to go e her money and had wanted spousal support (they both worked). On the same calculation someone else will get barely anything and it won't come near half the costs.

You can't bare it in actual lifestyle costs because the resident parent could deliberately increase them to cost the ex more and screw them over.
Salary leads to issues above.
If your deduct for new kids, your imposing that in the first family, but the reality is if you have more kids, you are likely to adjust what you spend on the older one anyway.

Perhaps there should be a basic minimum payment and if you can't afford to pay it, the govt g go but it's deducted from your benefits / added on like a loan

As a stepparent I think CMS calculations are laughably low, especially if you need to take nursery or other forms of child care into account. Other countries manage to take child payments out of paychecks to make it non-optional, I don't understand why the UK can't.

That being said I also think it's tragic that 50/50 in the UK is not standard, if the father wants it.

I worked out the cost for my ds which is around 110 per week, that includes everything food, clothes, clubs,

I mean of course one should live according to their means and all, but really? Housing, transport, holidays all included?

It should be quite a straightforward thing to bring CMS and the tax system into line. A straight % deduction from payroll on employed income. Where the NRP has unearned income then they should simply pay the same percentage on that income in two installments in the same way as tax is paid on SE income etc. The % should also come off gross income (ie including cash value of benefits but ignoring deductions for pension/charitable giving etc)..

goghm -
I earn a decent wage as does EX roughly the same.

What is a hit? My wage is bloody good in comparision to many but I have done al childcare / either myself or pad for it, sickness, holidays etc etc.

So you would argue I have not taken a hit but when I compare myself to my male colleagues who have not had children but had their wife at home doing all child related stuff - I earn 2/3s what they do because I have not been able to do the late night schmoozing - same contracted hours.
So yes I am worse off.