Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Anyone think the UK is a joke when it comes to not paying child maintenance?

275 replies

SleepDreamThinkHuge · 11/07/2022 17:14

You hear a lot of stories especially in the UK where courts are not that strict on individuals who are no longer together to pay maintenance for their child. Unlike the UK, USA is much more stricter and it is much harder to avoid paying child maintenance.

Anyone think the rules need to be a lot stricter in the UK? How can it be better enforced in the UK and what is the minimum amount a month you think someone should pay for maintenance assuming someone is on around £1.5k-£2k after tax a month.

OP posts:
PoleFairy · 12/07/2022 11:40

Yep, my cousins are grown up now but my aunt was owed £25k maintenance from her ex. Never paid

ChiselandBits · 12/07/2022 11:53

Oh I didn't mean "compensation" in that sense and I think you know it. I mean maintenance should be paid at a level that means the RP doesn't have a disproportionately large % of the burden of costs and childcare at their door. - You know, how it is for the vast majority of RPs. If you really think that's massively unreasonable then we have no common ground. And the NRP DOES get to work whatever hours / overtime they like at the expense of the RP who is the default childcare. They can tailor that around set contact sure, but the point it, that 26/30 days, my ex can accept extra hours, last minute changes, etc with absolutely no thought to our children. I can't. His contact is so minimal that it would not enable me to do anything meaningful in that time earning wise and so I go into debt to give my kids the hobbies etc they love while he pays the CMS minimum and (which is about 1/4 of what they actually cost) and can come and go as he pleases. Yay.

You can self rep in court quite easily these days for about £250. Be organised with the paperwork, keep careful notes of what contact is and what you want and go and see. If it is in the childrens' best interests to see more of the NRP, a court will look at it.

gfwantsmoney · 12/07/2022 12:44

ChiselandBits · 12/07/2022 11:53

Oh I didn't mean "compensation" in that sense and I think you know it. I mean maintenance should be paid at a level that means the RP doesn't have a disproportionately large % of the burden of costs and childcare at their door. - You know, how it is for the vast majority of RPs. If you really think that's massively unreasonable then we have no common ground. And the NRP DOES get to work whatever hours / overtime they like at the expense of the RP who is the default childcare. They can tailor that around set contact sure, but the point it, that 26/30 days, my ex can accept extra hours, last minute changes, etc with absolutely no thought to our children. I can't. His contact is so minimal that it would not enable me to do anything meaningful in that time earning wise and so I go into debt to give my kids the hobbies etc they love while he pays the CMS minimum and (which is about 1/4 of what they actually cost) and can come and go as he pleases. Yay.

You can self rep in court quite easily these days for about £250. Be organised with the paperwork, keep careful notes of what contact is and what you want and go and see. If it is in the childrens' best interests to see more of the NRP, a court will look at it.

Out of curiosity. How much do they cost? In the same token, if I am a high earner, should it be capped as a child doesn't cost more because I earn more.

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 13:02

CMS have extensive powers. There is just no political will to use them.

For example CMS can take money from bank or post office accounts without going to court - but they rarely do.

One of the sanctions they can obtain really easily is putting a charge on a non-payers house. It doesn’t necessarily get the money out of them right away, but it sure puts a spanner in any sell-up-and-fuck-off plans until they’ve paid! Yet in the three months I worked there people I worked with expressed surprise whenever I mentioned that.

There is zero political will to push for this.

For a while the system was that if the RP was on benefits they only got to keep the first £20 a week of maintenance and the rest was owed to the Secretary of State to go toward the welfare bill.
it got to the point that the amount owed to the Second of State was so high it was decided that ‘something’ must be done.
so with all the options available to them what was decided? That RP’s could just keep all maintenance…

That says it all. It’s never been changed or bettered since.

Also if you are owed historic arrears and get w letter saying they are writing it off - object. If the debt is still there then it’s still there. A lady I know recently got a debt paid from her ex husband’s estate as she’d refused to allow it to be written off. They won’t chase it, but they have no right to write it off without your permission. That money is now being used to do things with the grandchildren that couldn’t be done with the children as there was no cash.

ChiselandBits · 12/07/2022 13:24

@gfwantsmoney I'm not going to put in figures because the minute you do that you go down a rabbit hole of comparisons and what things should or shouldn't cost and what is or is not necessary. In general terms though, I don't include in my calculations of cost my mortgage or utilities as ex has those too, but factoring in food at home and school, uniforms, sports kit, clothes and shoes for school and home, bus fare, activity fees (one sport each, one set of music lessons total), phone bills (modest, like £10pm each), entertainment eg trips out once a month or so, pocket money - teaching money management so they get some on a card every month, laptop for school use etc, the maintenance I get covers 1/4. It was significantly less of a % when I was also paying for childcare over and above what was covered by tax credits. I earn a decent wage so only ever got the childcare element and not WTC.

Of course there is no one size fits all and it will never be fair while they try to operate a system like that. But as a pp said, there is zero political will to address this properly and fund a system that would be fair to ALL parties. I don't think high earners should be capped - why would you NOT want your children to benefit from your wealth, especially if they are with the other parent most of the time - I'm not sure many people would see it as good parenting if 26/30 days the kids were in cramped and pretty average settings with no hobbies or outings but get taken on some amazing holiday once a year by a disney dad. I get that "fear" that the money isn't spent on the kids but that's another well worn trope isn't it? An RP who dares to ring fence some of their own money for their own use is "spending the maintenance on gin" or whatever. My ex thought this and was disabused at mediation. He thought that so long as he topped up the "gap" between my total earnings and the household cost that was enough. The mediator had to explain to him that I was entitled to some of my wages for my own use, not that it should ALL be swallowed up by the household.

What I do know, is that if I ring fenced 18% of my salary and ONLY used that for the kids, they'd run out of everything long before the end of the month and I would have a fuck load more money to spend on myself than I currently do. And the joke of all that is that he is actually paying the CMS amount. I'm not even arguing from the position so many are in where they receive little or nothing, but its still not right. And I am 100% sure there are NRPs or partners of them on here who could absolutely legitimately complain that they are getting the shitty end of the stick. The one thing we mostly agree on is that the system is buggered and does not work for pretty much anyone.

rushrushflat · 12/07/2022 13:33

BalloonsAndWhistles · 12/07/2022 05:25

The child maintenance service directly or child maintenance. To blame suicide on the CMS is a big assertion, where did you get your stats from?

The same place I posted a link previously I'd you choose to read the whole thread before coming out with a big assertion on your part.

Catfordthefifth · 12/07/2022 14:49

ChiselandBits · 12/07/2022 13:24

@gfwantsmoney I'm not going to put in figures because the minute you do that you go down a rabbit hole of comparisons and what things should or shouldn't cost and what is or is not necessary. In general terms though, I don't include in my calculations of cost my mortgage or utilities as ex has those too, but factoring in food at home and school, uniforms, sports kit, clothes and shoes for school and home, bus fare, activity fees (one sport each, one set of music lessons total), phone bills (modest, like £10pm each), entertainment eg trips out once a month or so, pocket money - teaching money management so they get some on a card every month, laptop for school use etc, the maintenance I get covers 1/4. It was significantly less of a % when I was also paying for childcare over and above what was covered by tax credits. I earn a decent wage so only ever got the childcare element and not WTC.

Of course there is no one size fits all and it will never be fair while they try to operate a system like that. But as a pp said, there is zero political will to address this properly and fund a system that would be fair to ALL parties. I don't think high earners should be capped - why would you NOT want your children to benefit from your wealth, especially if they are with the other parent most of the time - I'm not sure many people would see it as good parenting if 26/30 days the kids were in cramped and pretty average settings with no hobbies or outings but get taken on some amazing holiday once a year by a disney dad. I get that "fear" that the money isn't spent on the kids but that's another well worn trope isn't it? An RP who dares to ring fence some of their own money for their own use is "spending the maintenance on gin" or whatever. My ex thought this and was disabused at mediation. He thought that so long as he topped up the "gap" between my total earnings and the household cost that was enough. The mediator had to explain to him that I was entitled to some of my wages for my own use, not that it should ALL be swallowed up by the household.

What I do know, is that if I ring fenced 18% of my salary and ONLY used that for the kids, they'd run out of everything long before the end of the month and I would have a fuck load more money to spend on myself than I currently do. And the joke of all that is that he is actually paying the CMS amount. I'm not even arguing from the position so many are in where they receive little or nothing, but its still not right. And I am 100% sure there are NRPs or partners of them on here who could absolutely legitimately complain that they are getting the shitty end of the stick. The one thing we mostly agree on is that the system is buggered and does not work for pretty much anyone.

The issue is its subjective. I don't spend 18% of my salary on my child, let alone 18% of both our salaries so to me it seems a lot. Clearly you do, so it doesn't. There's no one size fits all which is why it's massively irritating when people say "CMS isnt enough" - it could be £7pw or £250pw. Its never enough in a lot of peoples eyes! However to others it'll be more than enough or at least adequate! I can see peoples frustrations but I'm not sure there's a solution unless all cases are individually assessed and all circumstances are taken into account. But it's unrealistic unfortunately.

ChiselandBits · 12/07/2022 16:15

which is literally what I just said about 10 pages ago. Its just that I would rather the "unfair" bit, if there has to be one, was skewed in favour of the children, not the NRP, and again, whilst you absolutely are right that there are great NRPs and shitty RPs the stats are undeniable about how the sheer volume of unpaid CMS or absolutely joke minimal amounts being assessed for. 18% of my gross salary minus pension is only about £370 (back of the envelope sums there). That doesn't go far between 2 kids over a month. Less than £200 each when bus is £40, school lunches are £70-80, hobby is £40. That's £160 and I haven't fed them yet or done anything else at all. So yes I spend considerably more than that per month when everything is factored in, but of course you are right about it being a completely impossible sum to fix as people simply won't agree on what is reasonable.

Threetulips · 12/07/2022 17:13

What about rent - you wouldn’t need a two/three/four bed house unless you house children, they use electric, need clothes furniture, internet etc and hats before food and clubs - petrol to get them places, school trips, hobbies, days out, all adds up quite quickly

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 17:17

In the same token, if I am a high earner, should it be capped as a child doesn't cost more because I earn more.

CMS is capped. The most anyone can be assessed for is the % for £156k a year. I think it’s about £1250 a month from what I can recall.

Anyone who wants a higher assessment from a higher earning NRP has to go to court, where it’s done on individual circumstances.

gfwantsmoney · 12/07/2022 17:39

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 17:17

In the same token, if I am a high earner, should it be capped as a child doesn't cost more because I earn more.

CMS is capped. The most anyone can be assessed for is the % for £156k a year. I think it’s about £1250 a month from what I can recall.

Anyone who wants a higher assessment from a higher earning NRP has to go to court, where it’s done on individual circumstances.

I meant in the sense of under 156k. If I pay around a thousand pounds a month, if that going to be used on the child? I don't believe so. So the amount should be capped at around 100 per week. That should cover the additional cost of the child in full without any contribution from the RP.

Catfordthefifth · 12/07/2022 17:45

Threetulips · 12/07/2022 17:13

What about rent - you wouldn’t need a two/three/four bed house unless you house children, they use electric, need clothes furniture, internet etc and hats before food and clubs - petrol to get them places, school trips, hobbies, days out, all adds up quite quickly

The nrp also needs all those things if the kids stay with them....

Catfordthefifth · 12/07/2022 17:54

I get that @ChiselandBits . What's a fair amount though?

GrandTheftWalrus · 12/07/2022 17:54

My friend is on 1.1k per month before tax etc and they take 375 off his wages before he even sees it for cms. If he gets less shifts a month it doesn't matter, it's still 375. But that's also due to arrears from when he wasn't working.

howtomoveforwards · 12/07/2022 17:59

The nrp also needs all those things if the kids stay with them

My children have always stayed with their dad on a weekly basis. He has never paid childcare - but is happy to use the childcare I pay for (I can't not pay it because he buggers off at a moment's notice on holiday and I don't have a job with any 'give' in it so I have to keep the childcare option open), or for any activities (including those that take place on his time), he never takes them anywhere so has no need for additional petrol costs, and he's certainly never taken them on a day out or a holiday. Sure, he has to feed them - but still expects me to pay for a school lunch the next day rather than he provide a packed lunch, he doesn't return clothes so never has to buy any, never buys shoes or coats or pays for haircuts...

I mean sure, the NRP technically has costs as well...but there are plenty out there who are not willing to take that responsibility seriously.

imnotthatkindofmum · 12/07/2022 18:03

@gfwantsmoney so if you earned that much but the RP parent didn't, you'd want to live that lifestyle but not share it with your children in their day to day life?

Catfordthefifth · 12/07/2022 18:05

howtomoveforwards · 12/07/2022 17:59

The nrp also needs all those things if the kids stay with them

My children have always stayed with their dad on a weekly basis. He has never paid childcare - but is happy to use the childcare I pay for (I can't not pay it because he buggers off at a moment's notice on holiday and I don't have a job with any 'give' in it so I have to keep the childcare option open), or for any activities (including those that take place on his time), he never takes them anywhere so has no need for additional petrol costs, and he's certainly never taken them on a day out or a holiday. Sure, he has to feed them - but still expects me to pay for a school lunch the next day rather than he provide a packed lunch, he doesn't return clothes so never has to buy any, never buys shoes or coats or pays for haircuts...

I mean sure, the NRP technically has costs as well...but there are plenty out there who are not willing to take that responsibility seriously.

Ah okay, so because your ex husband is a shit parent that must meet nrps in general don't have any of those costs. Got it.

Although he presumably has a mortgage or rent, increased bills etc.

gfwantsmoney · 12/07/2022 18:07

imnotthatkindofmum · 12/07/2022 18:03

@gfwantsmoney so if you earned that much but the RP parent didn't, you'd want to live that lifestyle but not share it with your children in their day to day life?

I want to pay for my child's expenses. I don't want to equalise the houses' incomes. She can get a job if she wants to do that.

Hrpuffnstuff1 · 12/07/2022 18:08

I think it should be on the split/divorce.
50/50 assets.
50/50 care.

If you have to change your job, tough, old family home, sold, tough.
Both parties should work and pay their half for the children.

No one gives a fig, if you peeled more carrots for dinner, whether he or she goes on holiday, or whether they have a bigger tv or longer nails, or they cheated, whatever.
If you dissolve the relationship both pay equally. It's about time parents put the children first instead of petty entitlements and grudges.
The end.
That's what we did.

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 18:12

gfwantsmoney · 12/07/2022 17:39

I meant in the sense of under 156k. If I pay around a thousand pounds a month, if that going to be used on the child? I don't believe so. So the amount should be capped at around 100 per week. That should cover the additional cost of the child in full without any contribution from the RP.

well it’s all proportional isn’t it?

The children are expected to live a lifestyle that ties in with the earnings of their parents. That costs.

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 18:16

GrandTheftWalrus · 12/07/2022 17:54

My friend is on 1.1k per month before tax etc and they take 375 off his wages before he even sees it for cms. If he gets less shifts a month it doesn't matter, it's still 375. But that's also due to arrears from when he wasn't working.

He wouldn’t have built arrears of more than £7 a week when he wasn’t working. CMS for one child, no overnights on that salary is around £130 a month.

His story doesn’t add up somewhere.

gfwantsmoney · 12/07/2022 18:18

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 18:12

well it’s all proportional isn’t it?

The children are expected to live a lifestyle that ties in with the earnings of their parents. That costs.

So if I as the NP but I am in MW and the RP is the very higher earner, should she subsidise me so the children can have the same lifestyle at both houses?

howtomoveforwards · 12/07/2022 18:19

Although he presumably has a mortgage or rent, increased bills etc

No, he's mortage free. I am not sure why his bills would be more - he is still heating the same space whether or not the children are in it if we are playing by your rules?

so because your ex husband is a shit parent that must meet nrps in general don't have any of those costs. Got it

And because some ex husbands are good parents, that also doesn't mean that some are shit and leave the cost of bringing up children to the other parent? You don't want this to be a one way thing yet only see it one way yourself?

So basically, I have paid for everything for 3 children for 13 years and my ex is still in the right because he (might have) had a small increase in his bills to accommodate his kids every week? Got it Star

lemmein · 12/07/2022 18:20

I'm glad 50:50 wasn't a thing when I was a kid. My dad would've definitely taken advantage of it just to avoid paying CMS - instead he left his job when he split with my DM and didn't work for the rest of my childhood 🙄

JustLyra · 12/07/2022 18:22

It’s amazing how CMS threads about non payment always end up in yards of whataboutery over the tiny number of people who get high payments.

Every time.

it’s very indicative of how the subject never gets tackled properly generally because it always gets turned into “well I know someone that pays £54873684 a week and it all gets spend on nails and nights out”.

Swipe left for the next trending thread