To ask if anyone here actually thinks a step parents wage should be considered for CMS?

[TheSpoonAndTheFork]

Because my husband's ex seems to think so and is currently enraged that I have zero plan or requirement to.

I'm fully aware that CMS do not take into account a SPs earnings and that legally she is not entitled to anything from my wages. I'm just curious as to whether more people think like her (entitled as imo) that they should take it into account.

YANBU - no it's right that CMS don't take into account a step parents earnings

YABU - they don't but they should.

As a step parent I paid a lot of my income on family things, bills, food and clothes for my SC. Had it been mandated I would have moved out!

Hmm I’m on the fence on this one. I’m a step-parent - my DP’s ex is a single parent who isn’t able to work so as we have joint living expenses then it would be fair to take that into account.

We have a very amicable relationship money wise with DP’s ex and have my DSS 4 days a week so pay accordingly with that, but if it did go down the CMS route I’d expect them to take into account our household income.

It depends surely

I know a couple of families where the dad has become a stay at home parent to avoid paying maintenance for his other kids.

If a 2nd family benefits from no childcare bill because of that and it allows the stepmum to work then damn right that should be taken into account.

Well obviously if people choose to do it then that's different and kudos to them. But I certainly don't think it should be law/mandated. At the end of the day my husband and his ex made his children and should be responsible for them (in the main), just like me and him are responsible for our children, I don't have a random 3rd party helping to fund my kids!

I do pay jointly for bills, food, holidays at our house so imo that is a sufficient contribution from me given I'm not their parent. I certainly don't expect to have to send money to his ex!

Had it been mandated I would have moved out!

Me too!

Its a difficult question that works both ways with step families , you don't want your wages taken into account fair enough, but if your partners ex moved in with a higher earner and was comfortable whilst you , your partner and any joint DC you had struggled, you may feel differently. So the fairest way is for the biological parents to be responsible for their own DC

but if your partners ex moved in with a higher earner and was comfortable whilst you , your partner and any joint DC you had struggled, you may feel differently

I think as much as anyone can say how they'd feel in a situation they aren't actually in, I don't think I'd think it was her new partners responsibility to give us money.

Yes if cms is reduced because the step parent has their own dc and moving in with them is considered a reason for cms to reduce. Also yes in the circumstances that @Willyoujustbequiet refers to.

Generally no. However I would expect any parent who has more available money to contribute more to their child’s costs over and above cms.

I think it's odd how a step parent children being part of the non residents household allows for a reduction in CMS but a step parents income isn't factored.

It seems like it should be either the step family factored in or not rather than a mixed approach that only benefits the non resident parent.

I'm sure it's equitable in your case but what if one parent is skint and the other is a SAHP married to a rich spouse? You don't think the kid is entitled to live in comfort like its parent does? Because I do.

I'm not one to bemoan the 'taxpayer' paying for stuff - the more the better imo - but if the alternative is the single parent claiming more from the state for their joint child surely claiming from the parent instead is better? Unless the married parent is being financially abused and doesn't have access to family money...

I'm a stepparent - my husbands ex thinks my income should be taken into consideration. She's having a giraffe.

I follow The Legal Queen - a lawyer on Facebook , she says they do take into account a new partner's earnings if you live together.
They say it can impact your lifestyle if you have two incomes and the ex and RP only has one.
Not sure what I think about it. I certainly would t be happy to have my earnings taken into account for a partner's children.

DH’s ex tried this too, she didn’t get anywhere. She didn’t want to have to go back to work.

‘Oh I thought yogasaurus would WANT to contribute to the DC’

I do, in my own home. I am not going out to work so that she could continue not to.

Exactly, my income already pays for them to have a better life with their dad - food, the extra mortgage. I'm not covering it at mums. Especially because she works part time through choice as she "doesn't need" to work more.

Who takes it into account? The CMS certainly doesn’t. Court might, but that can be overridden by the CMS after one year and one day anyway.

Parents are responsible for their children, no one else.

And it would have to be a pretty extreme/non-standard case for court to even look at SP earnings.

If they are going to start taking into account my income then they should take her earning ability into account too and her actual housing costs (she has no mortgage).

I have a friend who is struggling to keep the roof over their heads and clothe the dc. In the meantime, the exh has had a second family with a rich wife, lives in London, sends his second family to private school, doesn't pay a penny to his first family because it's her money.

He's an arsehole, and I have a low opinion of any woman who would live with a man who behaves like that. He's essentially told his first family they are second best.

Weirdly I learnt from here that when applying for uni finance they do take into account stepparents income. Which is a joke as there's no way I'm financing them through uni!

Oh I agree, I don't think it should be mixed. I don't think it should go down when a parent moves in with someone else's children and I don't think it should count toward uni grants either.

In terms of families playing the system and becoming a SAHD. I don't know, I guess there are always people who play any system. I don't know what the exact answer is to that but I certainly don't think it's mandated consideration of SPs income across the board. Perhaps a high legal minimum a NRP is required to pay whether stay at home or not

That's all him though. He's decided not to bother providing for his other kids. She is perfectly entitled to have a successful career and provide for her family.

No it shouldn't and that works both ways. If the mother moves in with a good earner, dad still needs to pay maintainance. I've known a few men argue that they shouldnt have to keep paying in that situation 🙄the biological parents are responsible for the children they chose to create. If you weren't involved in the conception you owe nothing. I would even go one further and tell step parents to ensure they aren't subsidising anyone, cos that becomes expected too.

But that's the ex who's the issue - his new partner is successful and spending money on her family, why should she be responsible for a man's poor decisions and bad behaviour?

I don't disagree he's an arse. I disagree it's her job to pay for his first children though because she happens to be richer than him and his ex.