To say no to OH increasing child maintenance

[Nastyurtium]

Need a sanity check here.

OH pays maintenance at CMS level to his ex for their three children. We have them every other weekend and half the holidays and provide everything they need whilst they’re here, as well as paying half of school uniform and trip costs.

I earn double OH’s salary and pay around 75% of our household costs. He is paying off joint debt from his first marriage; I pay for the children’s holidays, clothes and hobbies whilst with us. We live ninety minutes from the children (his ex moved after the split and this is as close as we can be with OH working in his field - if we weren’t worried about proximity, we could both earn double living further away in the UK).

His ex has been commenting a lot on the children costing more as they grow up (they’re primary age), the cost of living going up and the fact that she’s had another baby so can’t work as much, and I’m expecting a formal request for more maintenance money soon. We have a cordial relationship. She has a partner, who is self-employed and she works some hours for his business. I don’t know a lot about their finances but they take more holidays than us and seem to have a similar lifestyle, albeit in a cheaper region. We’d happily have the children for more of the holidays or even full-time but this has always been refused.

AIBU to just say no? If OH was paying half our living costs, it’d be his choice, but he isn’t and has nothing left at the end of each month, so realistically any increase would be coming from my salary.

Why on earth do you believe this?

Who do you think sorts out disputes between unmarried couples with regard to the division of assets?

They were married. Pittance or not, it’s what is affordable to him. Either way, that’s still nothing to do with OP. Even if married, she is not financially responsible for his children. That she chooses to provide for them when they’re in her house is just that: her choice, as opposed to an obligation.

I agree it's not the Ops responsibility.

They sort it out between themselves. Are you for real?

I'm not just talking about divorce so please don't be obtuse.

Child maintenance - CMS sort it. That’s literally the whole point of CMS to provide for children where the parents were unmarried and have no other recourse to the NRP’s finances.

Many don't and there are legal avenues and legislation that deals with it.

Are you seriously trying to claim all unmarried couples split amicably and there is never any dispute?

I think I'll have some of what you're drinking 😂

But what you’re saying is ONLY relevant to divorce. I’m not being obtuse I’m being factual.

Absolutely. The privilege is definitely on display on this thread. £400 isn’t a pittance. It could be half as much again if he wasn’t paying off debt accrued during the marriage for assets his wife still retains. She can’t have her cake and eat it.

No you are being ridiculous.

The courts deal with disputes between unmarried couple every single day.

Of course there’s dispute but finances between an unmarried couple are not the jurisdiction of the family court.

If it’s property etc it would be litigation like any other financial dispute because there’s no legal relationship (like with marriage) that enables the family court to have jurisdiction over their finances. A financial settlement that takes into account everyone’s assets etc is purely for divorces. You cannot have recourse to someone’s pensions or discuss offsetting their debts in the case of co-habiting couples. It would be no different to me owing the shop keeper money. Debts are joint and sole responsibilities so you would struggle to bring a successful claim against the other party. Legally if one can’t pay, the other has to. End of.

Not in the way in which you are describing and you are not distinguishing between the different types of courts. As I’ve said above there is no such thing as a financial settlement or “clean break” for unmarried couples. There is nothing to govern the financial arrangements between unmarried couples.

I can guess I have spent longer studying and practising law than you. Admittedly family law is not my specialty but I definitely have a better awareness of the system than you.

https://www.elitelawsolicitors.co.uk/financial-settlement-in-a-divorce/

Note - DIVORCE

https://www.cj-law.co.uk/family-law-solicitors/unmarried-couples

For unmarried couples, irrespective of the length of the relationship, there is no equivalent process or automatic claim to the assets or property of the other partner. Each party retains their own money and property, whilst anything owned jointly, including money in joint accounts should be split equally. Where there is any debate or dispute over the ownership of an asset, they are individually assessed according to the applicable law on trusts and property.

If what you say is true then anyone with more than one child is a selfish arsehole. Including the DPs ex.

You can post reams. It does not hide the fact that you have had to backtrack. You clearly said unmarried couples just sort it out themselves which no lawyer would ever say as its laughable.

Feel free to check my history which will evidence that I actually am a qualified solicitor of many years standing but I digress as I'm not getting into a pissing contest.

None of this now has any bearing on the OP so I will step back and wish you a good weekend.

Oh and Schedule 1. You must have forgotten that.

Whilst I think the CMS standard calculation is ridiculously inadequàte, in your particular situation I think you're being more than fair. The shared debt changes everything. He is over a barrell on that one and doing her a favour by paying her share and saving her credit rating.

I’ve not backtracked at all. You’ve said the debts etc will all be taken into account by the courts and are not a matter for CMS. You said it will be sorted in a financial settlement.

None of which is correct as they’re NOT married.

Schedule 1 relates to child contact and child maintenance- not the wider financial arrangements between an unmarried couple. So what’s your point?

It’s also primarily used in cases where the NRP is very wealthy and so is outside of the remit (or has scope to go beyond) provision provided for by CMS. At 36k I think that’s unlikely.

It depends what the divorce settlement was.

This is the post my replies have hinged on. I pointed out they weren’t married (or always there’s no suggestion they were), there isn’t a divorce settlement, the term “clean break” is used to describe ending financial ties between a husband and wife. You cannot claim for a share of a pension under Schedule 1 of the Family Act 1989, again, that’s something available only to divorcing couples.

Schedule 1 is also very unlikely to be utilised by a couple with one person with no assets - you can only get a share of something tangible! He has nothing. CMS clearly have jurisdiction here and yes he can apply for (although whether he would be successful I don’t know) a variation on the basis of their joint debts.

Like you said let’s not get into a pissing contest.

You did miss it. Court ordered ex wife to pay half and ops partner to pay half. Ex wife told partner she couldn't and wouldn't pay and would declare bankruptcy to avoid paying. Partner took on burden of it DLL to protect his own credit rating from being destroyed by her actions. So she can't afford her own share of debts, can't afford to support her three children without more money from her ex, but apparently can afford several holidays a year and ban afford to not work and have a fourth child.

Didn't the poster work it out that after you deduct the days the DC are at dads house (and the mother has no expenses those days) it works out at £55 a day for the days they're with her?

(I haven't checked the calc, that's just what was said)

On whether the £400 covers their additional expenses: I think it probably does. We both have suitably sized houses to heat and run, we take them for most of their haircuts and buy anything medical they need, we pay for their music lessons and instruments, they have fully stocked wardrobes here and their mum usually gets second-hand bundles from friends. Childcare outside of school is by her family.

Additional water, electric and food for three small children probably is within £400 a month. I’m sure it wouldn’t cover it when they’re teenagers and eating like horses and wanting expensive clothes though.

It was my post and then a couple of people backed me up. Yes for the difference in days they are with dad up to the 50% a year (as obviously they can’t do a 50/50 shared custody as mum decided to move the kids further away after she shagged someone else) he pays her £55/day for the kids.

thats on top of the school uniforms/trips/music lessons etc etc etc plus her £200 half of the marital debt that’s still outstanding.

but apparently he’s a bad dad 🤣