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.

@Turnleftturnright you are right it is conflicting. They are so many variations. A rule has to be made though and ultimately there is no one fits all solution.

I do think it's bullshit that single parents who don't have dad paying cms gets stinged by benefit rules.

I also think that taking a sp income into account when looking at student loans is also bullshit.

I certainly believe that loop holes need to be closed re maintenance dodgers and self employed ect. We should be more like America and it's approach with missed maintenance payments.

I also don't think cms should be reduced due to dad moving in with a women with kids. In my circle no dad has reduced their maintenance because of their partners kids or any subsequent kids but I do believe it happens. But if it does that's down to dads morals, and I don't think that's suddenly becomes his partners fault by proxy. That choice is dads.

I don't think a step parent income should be included in maintenance.

I truly do believe though that as women if we stopped blaming each other for the faults of bad men there would be a lot less bullshit going around.

But there could be fairness. There is the option for it to be fair. It’s a decision for it not to be.

@3BSHKATS I'm not sure about fair but definitely the system needs to be improved. You could be a single parent but a higher earner and you could be getting CMS but on paper the minium that is my case it is really complex. DS dad Banks me a higher amount I've informed CMS but they aren't interested despite it looks so odd on our annual review calculations.

What would you suggest to make it fair?

My income has nothing to do with BM or SS and if they asked for it to be taken into consideration, they'd be told to fuck off to the far side of fuck.
My husband made him with BM, how they fund him is between them.
I fund my own kids and I do whatever is necessary to make that happen.
My DH is in no way a high earner (not to avoid CMS, it's always been this way) but his CMS payments are his business. They have gone up over the years and he sorts that himself. I tell him how much to put into our bills account and what's left is his to spend as he wishes or needs. If he can't survive it's on him to find a job that makes that happen.

I don't think the current system is fair for anyone. Everyone I speak to has different things affect their payments; court ordered overnights whether they're followed or not for example. It needs to be a 1 rule for everyone, not whatever the advisor is in the mood for on the day, because that's what it feels like at the moment.

I just think it should be about the biological parents, their collective income because that's what they would have to spend on their children if they were together, vs the time they each have the child. I don't think overnights works because they eat, do activities etc in the day and some, not all, BM's refuse overnights to manipulate the system.

There also needs to be something in place to stop dads playing the system by not working because we all know it happens. But what that is, I have no idea. L

Australia has a very confusing system where both biological parents incomes are added together, less a ‘self support’ amount and then this total is used to work out that the child support owed would be. It is then apportioned to each parent based on the percent of the income they contributed to the child support income. the paying parent can be given credit for some of what they have to pay for having regular visitation

what this means is that if both parents earn similar wages, there is little child support paid. But if the payee parent gives up work to have another baby, their income is now 0, and the child support to be paid goes up by a lot. So the paying parent essentially ends up paying for the other parents new biological kids.

if the paying parent has more kids there there is a small correction to the self support amount. But it makes very little difference. Step parents income isn’t included and neither is other non bio kids in the household. You can apply to get them included in some circumstances.

there is also something called capacity to earn, where if one parent stops working or reduced their income you can apply to have the payments based on what they used to earn. I think it’s a fairly involved process though.

i think no matter what you do, someone will always think it’s unfair. My dh earned good money. When we got together I was still studying, he was paying CM and the mortgage on the house his ex lived in. It was a real struggle. Once I started working I straight away went onto a high income. His ex didn’t like that and caused all kinds of issues. We could afford things she couldn’t and she didn’t like that. She didn’t work and didn’t want to. Dsc are now mid 20s and she still doesn’t work and still is struggling and bitter, like it’s dhs fault she has nothing.

Nope. They're not the step parents children. They have two parents.

It would prevent an awful lot of single parents from finding love again.

Should not be mandated.

I'm a step dad who earns a decent if not staggering wage (it should be more for the job I do as my union agrees even as I type but we will gloss over that) and I pay my ex over and above the monthly amount I'm meant to even though I have my kids every weekend and she has a new partner - because I don't want my kids to miss out on things and I trust my ex to use the money wisely for the children.

My new DPs ex is a complete Arsehole. Works for his mate as a dodgy salesman - gets maid NMW and all his commission is paid to his dad so it isn't in his name. He pays, when he can be bothered less than 100 quid for two girls who we have pretty much full time because as he tell my ex "your dickhead boyfriend earns enough". All this while he goes away on holidays nearly every month with just his new GF and not his kids (despite telling them every time it he will take them next time), has bought a brand new motorhome and three big cars between him and his new girlfriend while we have scrimped and saved to go on a foreign camping trip with all of the kids. Doesn't surprise though as he was a nasty, controlling piece of work when he was with my DP so no wonder it extends to this.

So no - new partner's wage should not be taken into account - it gives an excuse for complete dickheads like this to continue to be absolute arseholes.