Ex partner reducing maintenance because he has other children.

[sandyofthesea]

ExH and I share a daughter. He has always paid maintenance of the same amount every month since we split even after his children with new partner were born. He has now said he is going to reduce maintenance in around 6 months because he has other children.

I’m not sure what to think. Part of me thinks okay, he has more kids to pay for. But I also feel why should DD miss out.

Just to add he is a very good Dad. There is no animosity between us, or myself and his wife, but something just feels a bit off. I can’t put my finger on it.

What are other peoples opinions/experiences please? AIBU to feel this way?

I don't have the motivation to keep engaging when questions have been answered and clearly I'm not going to share personal finances. You appear to be being deliberately obtuse and I have no wish to be labelled a troll hunter.

I'm sure there will be someone else along soon for you. Enjoy your day.

Please stop misquoting as I never said that.

Just look up the new legislation. Google is your friend. I must stop now as I'm getting second hand embarrassment for you.

You're not answering the questions.

You can't/ won't share the legislation.

You've said cm should be a "realistic" amount but won't tell us what that is.

You've said your ex pays you £3 a day but is a lawyer but won't say if he's hiding his income?

Why say all this shit if you don't want people to respond. I'm not a troll, I've seen you on this board for probably years at this point saying the same crap and then flouncing when people challenge you.

I have. It talks about enforcement (good!) But not about this?

I said I'm a lawyer. Perhaps you need to reread and it may help your comprehension. My personal finances are not your concern.

I didnt realise expecting both parents to pay for their children was a controversial position. It certainly doesn't seem to be with anyone else or judging by the thanks received.

The new legislation planned for CMS powers for unearned income is freely available. There are numerous news articles as well the statutory legislation framework on Government sites. Anyone who is reading this is free to look it up. If you are worried about what it means for your own personal circumstances then seek legal advice from another solicitor rather than expecting it for free on here.

It's all suddenly clear with your last comment so thank you for making it obvious to everyone else too. I'm would be flattered that you remember me but it's coming over as a bit stalkerish.

You have made me chuckle so I appreciate your engagement.

Okay sorry he's a teacher. But he pays you £3 a day. That's funny. If he's employed he can't hide his income.

Its not a controversial position nor has anyone said it is, except you?

I've just read it and it doesn't say anything like what you've claimed but OK.

This has absolutely no bearing on my personal circumstances whatsoever. But thanks for your 'advice'.

It's not stalkerish at all. A lot of people on this board know and recognise your posts. It always ends like this.

You mouth off. People disagree. You flounce and try personal insults. And it goes on.

If he and you are 50:50 he doesn't have to pay anything op in maintenance. Just be careful here

I always thought if it was 50/50 custody then you didn't receive CMS as custody was equal?

You can still yes in certain circumstances.

I think as you have 50/50 custody, it's probably not unreasonable to reduce it slightly. Obviously, there are factors that might not have a legal impact but do have a moral one eg like whether he's a super high earner vs you being a low earner or whether the money he pays for maintenance is his only contribution to outside costs (beyond the basics of feeding and housing her during his contact time - eg clothing, school uniform, extra curricular, childcare etc).

But if money is generally tight, then a slight reduction is reasonable.

If it’s 50/50 custody then he really owes nothing that’s like you paying him for his equal split so you should be grateful for anything

So he should only move on with his life if its with original family 🤷‍♀️ not half bitter!! Don't buy this story at all if I'm honest either it's literally their policy to take into account other children...

Maybe the man is struggling like EVERYONE these days, OP has stated this is the first time this has happened he also has the child 50% of the time so is not entitled by CSA policy to pay anything! Not everyone is trying to dodge paying or has an agenda some people struggle sometimes..

@Justus6 I'm not bitter at all, I'm thrilled DD has a sibling and that he and his partner are together.

You don't need to 'buy' my story, it's what happened, I don't know why and I expected it to change.

Ofcourse men can move on beyond the original family, however men generally have many more children than women, plenty of men go from woman to woman having multiple children and then each time how much they pay gets reduced (if they pay at all) so each child has less to live with. It is very rare for a couple to have 6+ children together but not uncommon for men to have that may spread across different family units.

Regardless that's not particularly relevant to OPs original question

That's not the same as cms reduction for children you live with. If you're paying maintenance to several mothers then yes it will reduce more.

That's not what's happening here or in your situation where the cms have wrongly advised.

To all the posters saying he doesn't have to pay anything, my friends ex pays hers 'maintenance' even though they are 50/50 because they both need wraparound childcare, and her child does two paid for clubs, and she organises buying school uniforms/birthday presents for other kids/extra school stuff and it's easier for one person to deal with with arranging/paying for that. (I mean arguably he should be taking some of the load, but they are both happy with this arrangement)
Might not be the case for OP but if that's the case then it makes sense he would be paying.

@Foxblue I don't know why posters are so hung up on the father paying for his own child. Legally he doesn't have to no, perhaps morally he wants to. Which is evident in OPs case as the man is still willing to pay.

Ignoring this 50:50 scenario- it is not morally right that one parent ends up having to cover the share of costs of the other partner because they decided to have or even more galling have step children.

The original child/ren did not magically become cheaper and expecting the other parent to pick up the short fall, so the other partner can afford his new life is immoral. They have no say in the Ex having more children / step children but receive less monies and fund the lifestyle of their EX. If they choose to more children themselves, then they do not have recourse to ask the other parent for more monies - they have to work it out themselves. ( I appreciate some parents do ask)

'Nothing to worry about' is a strange comment. Of course it's normal and this is standard but it's also normal to worry about it.

That extra money may have funded a club of some sort that now can't be done.

In a nuclear family decisions are made together. When this situation occurs it's foisted upon the old family. We all know CMS is woefully below the realities of raising a family.

I think in this instance where I believe it's 50:50 it's not so unreasonable but you can be sure mum is spending far more on dc than dad is because mum is the one who typically ends up buying all the clothes and arranging extra curricula's

@Justus6

Maybe the man is struggling like EVERYONE these days, OP has stated this is the first time this has happened he also has the child 50% of the time so is not entitled by CSA policy to pay anything! Not everyone is trying to dodge paying or has an agenda some people struggle sometimes..

But you can pretty much guarantee the OP spends more on her dc even with 50:50. I don't know many men who buy their dc clothes or shoes for example

Do you only know particularly shit men?

I don't think you can guarantee it. Lots of men are good parents. Just because you don't know any doesn't mean they don't exist.

Fund the lifestyle of their ex haha

Do you know how much the actual reduction is?

@Chocolatebuttonns

Do you only know particularly shit men?

I don't think you can guarantee it. Lots of men are good parents. Just because you don't know any doesn't mean they don't exist.

No. I know some great men. But none of them have a scoobie doo about buying clothes and shoes for their dc and none of them are particularly involved in organising their dc social lives.

Sorry but they're not great men then are they.

How hard is it to buy your own child clothes. I'm not divorced but both of us buy our child clothes and are involved in his social life. I wouldn't expect any less to be honest.

@Chocolatebuttonns

Sorry but they're not great men then are they.

How hard is it to buy your own child clothes. I'm not divorced but both of us buy our child clothes and are involved in his social life. I wouldn't expect any less to be honest.

Because in most relationship different people do different things. My dh hates shopping. I love it. Guess who bought their clothes? I hate standing around in winter at the side of a sports field. He doesn't. Guess who did that?

Hardly makes either one of us 'not great' parents. Or maybe you think it does.

No... You literally can't guarantee that at all. What a weird assumption