Page 15 | To agree that DH should reduce maintenance

Tiamaria86 · 2023-08-27T12:16:19+00:00

I have a DSD. We previously had her 2-3 nights a week in general. Sometimes it was more and sometimes less. Her Mum has decided to retrain in a different career and this has meant late nights and early starts so we now have DSD more like 4-5 nights a week. DSD has her own room with us and has friends round and we take her to all her hobbies and clubs etc. DH pays for half her uniform and we buy her clothes and trainers and electronics etc. DH has approached DSD mum and suggested that maintenance shouldn't be paid anymore. He's happy to go half's on anything she needs as well as continue to buy her things but really monthly maintenance is no longer appropriate. DSD mum doesn't agree and is really shocked he has suggested this as we are a 2 income household and she will really struggle without it. DH has suggested paying a lesser amount for now as a transition period which I think is really reasonable. DSD mum is really unhappy about it and can't even believe its been suggested. My PILs also think DH is unreasonable and should continue to pay. Am I going mad? Maintenance isn't appropriate in these circumstances is it? Or are we wrong?

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 27/08/2023 20:03

You both are very generous and gracious.🌷

imnotthatkindofmum · 27/08/2023 20:12

BibbleandSqwauk · 27/08/2023 13:24

Are you actually saying that your DH would become the resident parent, in receiving child benefit etc? If it's going to be 4/5 out of every 7 nights then that would be technically the position. Does she regard your place as her home or somewhere she stays?
Thing is technically, you may be right. But if you are a dual income family and the mum is not, and retraining to provide a better quality of life for her and the DD, would the morally right thing not be to just keep the status quo to support this? If you can do it without significant hardship? How is the DD going to feel if suddenly mums house is much tighter for money and you've got extra? I know your income as a step parent is not relevant for CMS maintenance purposes but ultimately you have created a blended family that ought to be about mutual support and doing the best thing for all concerned..if that means your household can accommodate a couple of extra meals a week for the DD without a stretch, why not keep things as they are at least until the mum is qualified?

I agree with this. And I'm a step mum where my DSDs mum and new family has significantly more than us and yet we have always paid the correct amount and more.

At least allow the ex to improve her income opportunities. In the long term its better for your step child. That's not to say you can't reduce it in time but right now that support could make a huge difference to your step daughter's life.

I do think perhaps a conversation between your Dh and ex with a long term plan is a good idea. She can't expect it but your Dh can offer to support.

ZeldaWillTellYourFortune · 27/08/2023 20:14

@imnotthatkindofmum

The ex has had 10 years since the divorce to improve her income opportunities. Her child's father is not responsible for her livelihood.

Tandora · 27/08/2023 20:14

Findyourneutralspace · 27/08/2023 13:18

If it’s 50/50 it’s usually no maintenance but I can understand the mum’s struggle. Life is hard for single income households at the moment, and the maintenance probably goes towards essential bills and keeping the home running.
The question is what he can afford really, as her mum can’t really downsize given SD still spends a lot of time there.

This. Legally of course he doesn’t have to pay maintenance, but that’s not the same as what is right/ fair,

AnneLovesGilbert · 27/08/2023 20:27

Tandora · 27/08/2023 20:14

This. Legally of course he doesn’t have to pay maintenance, but that’s not the same as what is right/ fair,

Show quote history

“Legally” the ex has to pay as she’s the non resident parent. It’s not remotely complicated.

Boomboom22 · 27/08/2023 20:36

Technically she should pay you cms and you claim the cb. So just say it's fine for her to keep claiming the cb and you don't expect maintenance from her but you can't continue to subsidise her bills just because her ex has a new family with another earner.

aSofaNearYou · 27/08/2023 20:38

This. Legally of course he doesn’t have to pay maintenance, but that’s not the same as what is right/ fair,

It's been said a hundred times, but would you say it was right/fair for a NRP dad to claim maintenance from a RP mum because he was struggling and she was in a relationship?

AnneLovesGilbert · 27/08/2023 20:40

aSofaNearYou · 27/08/2023 20:38

This. Legally of course he doesn’t have to pay maintenance, but that’s not the same as what is right/ fair,

It's been said a hundred times, but would you say it was right/fair for a NRP dad to claim maintenance from a RP mum because he was struggling and she was in a relationship?

Can you imagine 😂

SweetStrawberrie · 27/08/2023 20:42

Kudos to you guys that you are actually as reasonable and thoughtful as you are.

Really, you shouldn't have to pay maintenance at all.

If you already pay half of everything, are now having her most of the time AND paying the other parent maintenance too...I don't really understand. Why should you guys be paying her?

And yes I have seen your update, I think your DSD mum is very fortunate that you are both as giving as you are.

Enko · 27/08/2023 20:45

Well done OP Its nice to hear when people speak about stuff and work out good solutions.

CornishGem1975 · 27/08/2023 20:51

Fraaahnces · 27/08/2023 13:22

Run it by CMS. I imagine she didn’t get the new job just for the love of it. Her income will have risen at the same time that she has less custody of DSD. Who knows, maybe she might discover that she had to pay YOU, and then she will STFU.

This.

If this was a reverse...

CornishGem1975 · 27/08/2023 20:52

This. Legally of course he doesn’t have to pay maintenance, but that’s not the same as what is right/ fair,

Legally she should be paying HIM maintenance if we're talking about what is right and fair.

Bellsbeachwaves · 27/08/2023 20:56

Crossinsomekindaline · 27/08/2023 14:06

Not true. Cm is calculated on who has the kids for overnights. If your friend is having the kids 182.5 nights a year (on average), it wouldn't matter if he's earning 500,000 and she's earning 10,000 there will be no maintenance due from either party.

Please check your facts before posting as if you're speaking gospel truth. It's misleading.

Show quote history

They also take into account who is the primary carer because some parents have 50/50 but one '50' in time includes gp appts, uniform buying, shoe buying, pocket money etc, whereas the other '50' in time includes bollocks all except time spent. So what you are saying is not entirely true.

Bellsbeachwaves · 27/08/2023 20:59

Tiamaria86 · 27/08/2023 19:43

Thanks for everybody's input. There's been some really interesting points made and some posters have made me think about things I hadn't really considered.

Just to address some questions, this arrangement has been in place since January. There have been the odd weeks where DSD has been with Mum more but on average she is more with us.

As an update DH has popped round to see her and it turns out DSD has told her that she really hates an activity she has been doing for a couple of years. She had brought this up before but apparently now she really wants to stop doing it. This activity costs about £120 a month plus costumes and competition fees and DH and her mum split this. They have agreed DSD will stop this activity and DH will reduce maintenance by £60 a month for now. This means that her Mum won't be any worse off but we will save around £120 a month.

We are going to leave it at that for now. DH told me that once they sat down together his ex had calmed down and they were able to have a chat. Apparently her finances are bad so tbh we both would feel bad making them worse and we absolutely don't want her to quit her course as some previous posters have suggested.

I think some PP were right in that this should have been discussed earlier and maybe money reduced gradually but look none of us are perfect in these situations.

I'm happy with what they have come up with and I'm glad I posted as I did get some interesting perspectives.

Tbh you sound really nice and like you're looking at the situation rather than being black and white about it. Refreshing.

AlwaysFoldingWashing · 27/08/2023 21:09

The fact you have two incomes is neither here nor there, I would absolutely be cutting the payments of this was me. Why should you be subsidising her studies and footing increased costs? She sounds entitled

Remagirl · 27/08/2023 21:26

Child's mum needs to understand any money is in relation to the childs needs and not income she is entitled to rely on in order to further her career.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 27/08/2023 23:44

Well done, OP. That sounds like a very reasonable solution for now. You and your DH are both very generous, and maintaining a good relationship with dsd's mum will definitely benefit her in the longer term.

The double standards on this thread haven't surprised me, they're a constant on MN. They do annoy me though. The OP has been very clear that the dsd's mother has worked FT throughout, and that the OP/her DH have actually facilitated a lot of the school pick-ups/drop-offs etc between them, so it's clear that the mother hasn't been left to manage everything by herself, and yet we're still told that the ex wife must need supporting because a mother couldn't possibly have a successful career.

When are we going to stop painting women out to be so hopelessly incapable that it's inevitable that they will need a man to support them, even when they are no longer in a relationship with them?!

Findyourneutralspace · 27/08/2023 23:48

Tessabelle74 · 27/08/2023 13:47

Maintenance is for the child though not keeping your ex! If the daughter is with her Dad more then the money is needed for her when she's with them and quite rightly the maintenance should stop. The proposed arrangement is more than fair

Show quote history

But the child needs a home, and a lot of those costs don’t go down when the child isn’t there. The mortgage and council tax remain the same, gas and electric may be slightly cheaper, Wi-Fi will be a fixed monthly cost. These things could be reduced if mum moved to a one bedroom flat, but if her daughter still lives at home some of the time or is likely to return, mum can’t easily reduce those costs.
Maintenance doesn’t just pay for clothes and food - it helps to provide appropriate housing.

Milkkbottles · 27/08/2023 23:50

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the OP's request.

Findyourneutralspace · 27/08/2023 23:53

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the OP's request.

This is a change of circumstances. Mum was main carer and is set up as such.

Anyway, reading the update it sounds like they have come up with a sensible solution, rather than taking a black and white approach. It’s refreshing.

Milkkbottles · 27/08/2023 23:54

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the OP's request.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 28/08/2023 00:04

Findyourneutralspace · 27/08/2023 23:48

But the child needs a home, and a lot of those costs don’t go down when the child isn’t there. The mortgage and council tax remain the same, gas and electric may be slightly cheaper, Wi-Fi will be a fixed monthly cost. These things could be reduced if mum moved to a one bedroom flat, but if her daughter still lives at home some of the time or is likely to return, mum can’t easily reduce those costs.
Maintenance doesn’t just pay for clothes and food - it helps to provide appropriate housing.

Show quote history

But surely, by that argument, any NRP with overnight contact should be entitled to maintenance because they need to maintain a home for their child!! So the parents would have to pay each other for the nights when their dc is with the other parent?

This is why there is usually no maintenance for 50/50 arrangements. Both parents are financially responsible for the dc and both need to maintain a home. If one parent has the dc for more than 50% of the time, then maintenance is due.

The OP and her family have to pay for a home that is big enough to accommodate dsd as well, and would have done this for years while paying maintenance to the RP mum. If they had not had any overnight contact, they could presumably have downsized.

It is the mum's responsibility to provide a home for herself and her dd when dd is with her. The dad is already providing a home elsewhere.

Tessabelle74 · 28/08/2023 00:23

Findyourneutralspace · 27/08/2023 23:48

But the child needs a home, and a lot of those costs don’t go down when the child isn’t there. The mortgage and council tax remain the same, gas and electric may be slightly cheaper, Wi-Fi will be a fixed monthly cost. These things could be reduced if mum moved to a one bedroom flat, but if her daughter still lives at home some of the time or is likely to return, mum can’t easily reduce those costs.
Maintenance doesn’t just pay for clothes and food - it helps to provide appropriate housing.

Show quote history

But the child isn't there and those costs are the same whether she is or not. Why should her ex sub her? Why should the ex support the child in BOTH houses?

Findyourneutralspace · 28/08/2023 00:58

As I said earlier - it depends what he can afford. I don’t disagree, I just know that a single income household is likely to suffer if a part of their income gets pulled away, and it’s a question of how to manage that reasonably, which OP and her DH sound like they are doing.

Honeychickpea · 28/08/2023 01:22

Tessabelle74 · 28/08/2023 00:23

But the child isn't there and those costs are the same whether she is or not. Why should her ex sub her? Why should the ex support the child in BOTH houses?

Show quote history

Because he has a penis, apparently.