Divorced/moved out dads not paying for our children

[FloatyFairy18]

Do any of you have to go through the same as me here... my ex I caught having an affair so kicked him out and divorced him after giving him two chances, which he blew. He subsequently re-married and had another child to add to his now four kids from three different women, latest one already also having two kids of her own

In the Divorce Decree Nisi + Decree Absolut it was cited he had to pay a certain amount for both children until they were 18, he did this for a few years then stopped paying the full amount so I had to get the ludicrously outdated very sexist old fashioned still believing women stay at home being housewives men go out to work nonsense of the CSA at the time, now CMS - he then had a run in with his work and is refusing to work any more making out he can't due to a medical condition (which is all on show for when he leaves the house, but not any other time) and so is on benefits now = so that the CMS can't touch him

Morally he should be paying, he signed the Divorce papers to say so, but some lawyer told me because I had to get CMS involved that wipes out any Divorce payments he is supposed to make for the children

Is this right?

I have tried all sorts of means of getting this sorted but come to a blocked wall each and every time as the government seem blind to what is going on and just by thinking "oh we get child benefits, that will suffice" ... no no no!!! These dads should be paying for their kids no matter what

How can I get him to backpay what he owes (£23K) and going forward to pay monthly what he is meant to be paying without getting solicitors/greedy lawyers/courts involved

These are his children too, why is it expected by him and the government and CMS that I am to somehow find money to clothe, feed, keep them warm general day to day expenses, they live with me but see him every other weekend and 4 weeks holiday periods but he didn't even want that, it is only because child custody had to set things in stone that we had to go down this route thank you to his controlling money grabbing greedy wife, at his all he does is tell them he is paying for them when all he does is spending money on "treats" like sweets/toys/games for the Xbox rubbish etc, but point blankly refuses to pay towards raising them

I know of many "dads" who try to fiddle the system, either claiming they are on minimum wage, can't pay this or that, but paying themselves a lot more whilst living a very nice lifestyle without the CMS knowing, same as my ex who has been on three 10-day holidays abroad in the past 7 months and about to go on another one! I also know of millionaires who have done this to avoid paying for their own children, what is it with these guys that they have a grudge against paying their ex-wives/partners for their own children

I really believe a huge campaign needs to be started her - it needs a petition to go to The Houses of Parliament, we need a massive backing here, the Family Law needs to be changed, the Child Maintenance System NEEDS to be updated urgently and change to benefit us mums, they are so one-sided favouring the dads still, it is ludicrous and most importantly of all a minimum amount of money needs to be set by law that these dads MUST pay each month PLUS THEY MUST PAY IN A CERTAIN SHORT TIME-FRAME ALL THE MONEY THEY OWE IN BACK-PAYMENTS

Who is in to help me here???

My ex actually hasn’t had other children thankfully! (As far as I’m aware anyway) I hope he doesn’t he has enough already that he doesn’t bother with, laughing about the comment that nrp have to provide a home for their children! Mine hasn’t had them in 5 years!

Did you mean me?

If so, yes I am single mother. My dc are older now though.

By that logic a parent on benefits who "doesn't earn enough" should be pursued by the state for all the child related benefits claimed. I despair at how some minds operate.

The regulations literally allow this.

Okay there appears to be some misunderstandings here - not wanting to cause any upset, instead trying to help those of you who are in this same vicious circle of unfairness - but the fact of this matter is, the dads here had children, so they should be equally 50% responsible financially in bringing them up without any pathetic excuses until they reach 18 - this is where the major problem lies, irrelevant whether they do or don't see the children, they are their responsibilities to provide for them just like us mothers have no say in the matter and just HAVE to somehow find money to raise these children, feed them, clothe them, put them through school with uniforms, shoes, bags, trips - WHY SHOULD THESE DADS get away with not paying their fair share - they are HALF of them, what is wrong with these guys and the antiquated system???

Shows they only have one way of thinking and unfortunately it appears most of these selfish said guys sit in the Government or excuse the pun, pulling the purse strings, which is way we need a huge backing when in this day and age where it is all meant to be equal - why are we still living on the 1950-1970s era when it comes to this?

I have a friend who’s Ex is a millionaire yet his children have free school lunches, they will get their university education paid for by the state, they receive carers allowance and full benefits as mum can’t work and be in hand for disabled child who is hard work.
He’s been on many holidays abroad and takes all of the summer holidays off to luxury hotels around the world.
One child is working to save for university, the other two have very part time jobs to buy clothes.

Its the children and government who are being fleeced.

but the fact of this matter is, the dads here had children, so they should be equally 50% responsible financially in bringing them up without any pathetic excuses until they reach 18 - this is where the major problem lies, irrelevant whether they do or don't see the children, they are their responsibilities to provide for them just like us mothers have no say in the matter and just HAVE to somehow find money to raise these children, feed them, clothe them, put them through school with uniforms, shoes, bags, trips - WHY SHOULD THESE DADS get away with not paying their fair share -

The thing is, mothers that just HAVE to somehow find money turn to the state to provide it for them. They might be providing their own childcare, but children need financial support as well as practical, and plenty of mothers don’t provide for their children financially.

If you bang too hard on the drum that says all parents should financially support their children regardless of how much they see them, then you’d ultimately punish women.

What’s good for one parent has to be good for the other. When the state provides financial support for the child and it’s carer, it is doing so on behalf of both parents, not just the one who is able to claim.

I do think more must be done to make men who can pay pay.

In Dh's home country you can sue grandparents for maintenance.

Op

Is your ex disabled?

EXACTLY - my ex "is not giving me anything in the first place", no money, this is my whole point here

I do pay for the children for everything as I have to because he is choosing not to making out he can't but he can when he's jetting off here and there and playing the fudge card when it suits - he is NOT paying anything at all and hasn't done so for well over 5 years, he sits there watching TV day in day out getting paid way more in benefits money than when he was working or that he should be entitled too as he's fiddled the system, refusing to go to work when he should be then telling me "if I'm that hard up I should go and get another job" when he's sitting there doing sweet f.a. and not even doing one job to provide for the kids

It is nothing to do with childcare as that isn't required, what IS required is for these dads to pay monthly towards the food, the clothes, keeping children warm school clothes, school shoes, regular shoes, general day to day keeping them fed and watered, they are his children too so why can he not pay for them - this is where the argument stands. I know I am speaking for an awful lot of mums here, if you are not one of them, then this thread isn't applicable for you

I do get you that if you are saying if there is a mother who is earning loads of money whilst the divorced/split/moved out father is the primary carer but she is refusing to pay the father then it's the same thing, but I think you are missing the key point here. I'm not talking about free housing or benefits or anything like that, I am purely stating dads should be paying for their children no matter what - the mothers have to find the money two fold, double the amount because the dads are not coughing up for what they owe for their children

There some really good dads out there and we're not tarnishing them all with this brush, but the majority who have left the mothers of their children are fiddling the truth about what they earn or refusing to work so the CMS don't get them to pay - I'm guessing you did not have such a tough time otherwise you would fully understand what we are fighting for here

There is a massive loophole in the system which needs patching right up to become 100% LEAKPROOF

I wish it was seen as repugnant and never excused. Sadly far too many people think it's ok. Feckless men. The women who hook up with a feckless man and support him in avoiding paying.

Ideally, cs should never be written off. It should be a lifelong debt and yes, if you die owing it and have any assets, it should be taken.
Additionally, persistent avoiders of their parental obligations should potentially face jail time and other measures such as confiscation of driving licence and passport.

A lot of people are outraged by that idea. How will they earn a living? Blah blah blah. They should transfer that outrage to the idea of parents not supporting their kids. You know you pay or spend however many days in jail and you'll find far fewer people even trying to avoid it!

Everyone who doesn't think parents who spend their lives ducking out of supporting their children are wankers who need dealing with severely are part of the problem.

Being unemployed after earning well and racking up a huge amount of child support debt is a very common tactic because CMS cannot take any enforcement action against someone on benefits.

But they weren’t on the dole when they racked it up, and therefore should be made to pay.

In answer to your earlier question, the CMS overrides any maintenance agreement in a consent order.

You can't make them. There's just an "arrears due" section on your annual statement that goes up each year and no one does anything about it, unless you want to return to the hell of court.

@ClocksGoingBackwards sorry what? "women get free or subsidized housing?" ooh good, I must have imagined the mortgage I've been paying as a single mother for the last 7 years then. If women, who are usually the resident parent because the ex does not want to be (certainly true of my ex and many others I know personally) gets some kind of help beyond basic CB its because their earning potential is limited due to being the RP, or needing to cover child care (which, lets not forget can be 4 figures a month and is not factored into CMS). They are not getting some kind of free gravy train. If I only saw my kids 4 days a month like my ex, I could seek promotions, work further afield from home and probably add 20k to my salary. My ex is entirely free to do these things and buy as many homes, cars etc as he likes.

I looked at what other countries do. There will always be deadbeats who find ways not to pay. No system will suit everyone. One of the big complaints about the CSA is that it lacks vigour in using its powers to pursue arrears ,fraudulent information and income from anything but PAYE wages. The other complaint is that it allows arrears to time-lapse.

We could .....

Adopt a Scandinavian type system. Where parents can't agree privately, Government Support Agency pays the custodial parent a guaranteed flat rate until the child reaches 18. The Agency tries to recoup from the non-custodial parent with interest and penalties for late payment. If it can't recoup,the Agency bears the loss.The flat rate would be equal to half the Universal Credit Rate for a child or children.It would be assessed as part of the mother's income for means tested benefits and tax. The Agency could recoup by freezing bank accounts, seizing assets including cars and fixing a mortgage or charge on any houses, buildings, land ,insurance policies or other assets owned by the defaulter. It could deduct at source from benefits,pensions and wages. If the agency itself has to shell out when a parent defaults , surely it acts as a huge incentive to pursue the defaulter.

Some countries have local tribunals to deal with disputes and assessments. I suppose those might act as a psychological pressure on some deadbeats.

YAY... I knew there would be support, thank you all who have commented here, right so next move.. with enough backing, who is up for starting some kind of petition (although how you do that I do not know) - but something has to be done with enough support and points and facts put forward the Government then HAVE to discuss it and with enough pressure they also have to resolve it

It has to be worth a shot, the system needs a massive shake-up, overall and to get with the modern times of proper financial support

Yes but they don’t ever use them! They are toothless and men know it.

So he's on benefits with no requirement to seek work?

So is he disabled?

I’m in the position of being a PWC and I’ve had times when I’ve not received maintenance I was entitled to and neither was I back paid so we ended up borrowing
money as we already had spending commitments. However in general I think the CMS does a good job.
I do think your being unreasonable. If it was you not working for any reason or choosing to do a minimum wage job then you would get state support to assist you financially so is it fair your ex doesn’t have the same choices. If you were still married and his income went down for any reason the family would have to adapt like any other family does in those circumstances.
If you are on a low income anyway you’ll be entitled to state support so it’s not as if you’ll all be left destitute without this money. I know I’ll be totally against the grain here but you can’t force someone to earn money for you. Could you suggest he has the kids 50/50 if not able to contribute so much financially?

Lol, CMS are crap.

My ex job hops, as it takes 12 weeks for HMRC to tell CMS where he’s working, and CMS a further 12 weeks to apply for a Deduction from Earnings, by which time he is long gone and at another job.

The speed of that needs to change.

They have a total of 5 Liability Orders which cannot be enforced because he sofa surfs with friends and family, sometimes he’ll live in a house share but soon gets the boot as he doesn’t pay rent.

Twice they’ve caught up to him when renting and working, and he’s immediately gone on the dole as fathers rights groups are a hive of how to avoid CMS enforcement action. Plus he only rents furnished house shares so they can’t take anything from his room

He doesn’t drive so they can’t suspend his licence or remove his car.

That was all during the first 3 years and after 5 failed LOs, I gave up even bothering to call for an update. They’re supposed to automatically apply for LOs every 6 months, they haven’t bothered since I stopped calling

In the 80 months of my child’s life, I’ve had 6 payments.

His chosen life style of never seeing our child, spending all his money on booze and ensuring he has as few financial commitments as possible in order to avoid CMS is fucking gross.

I know I’ll be totally against the grain here but you can’t force someone to earn money for you.

Which is unfortunate, he and his kind should be sent to jail for non payment towards their children's upbringing.

Could you suggest he has the kids 50/50 if not able to contribute so much financially?

You can't force someone to take and feed their DC either.

It's a man's world. Why isn't CMS hitting his benefits too even for a small amount, enough to punish him up for non payment.
Feckless fathers who refused payments by court order have gone to jail in Ireland.

@EmeraldShamrock1 non payer and not involved at all here. The non involvement is fine by me, he’s a chaotic alcoholic who was abusive. The scumbag can’t even be arsed to pay the bare minimum CMS, goes to extreme lengths to avoid it, has proudly bragged about how he does it (to CMS on the phone AND to anyone who will listen) and where he found the info.

The lot of them are rank and need shooting in the nearest black hole ASAP. It is nothing short of financial abuse and neglect of a child

he's on BENEFITS though.....he can pay £5 a week like most people on benefits

it was £5 weekly when mine were younger, doubt its changed

and that £5 is taken at source and paid direct

you cannot force this as he needs enough to live on