To think I’m entitled to child maintenance?

[Blondeyoghurt]

Hey all,

I honestly have no idea if I’m wrong or right on this one so please be gentle!

I have a nearly 4 year old with my ex (never married). He’s decided today that when she goes to school, he’s not going to pay the privately agreed child maintenance anymore. He’s told me he’s spoken to CMS and they have informed him that if I put a claim in they would just shut it down straight away, as we share our child 50/50 (this does differ sometimes as he has on call duties in his job, so may have a couple extra days with me or my mum etc).

He’s on an extremely healthy wage (just over double mine), and I am the receiver of child benefit.

I was sure that even with 50/50 custody, he would still have to pay to me - is this wrong?

I have absolutely no idea and I don’t want to cause a stir without knowing exactly where I stand.. the websites aren’t too clear in this instance😭

help please!

You either work it out amongst yourselves or HMRC decides who is in receipt of it.

It really isn't about subsidizing anyone, it should always be about the quality of life for your joint child.

All the tit for tat is meaningless.

They aren’t if everything is truly 50/50. As far as I’m aware you can have a situation where there is no ‘paying parent’. But it’s up to the OPs ex to sort that with CMS not the OP. I assume that’s why the calculator is less accurate with 50/50.

If he’s not a deadbeat Dad or Disney Dad it shouldn’t be an issue.

There's more to bringing up a child than "doing your bit".

Is he wanting several years of painstakingly splitting bills for all her clothing, clubs, shoes, presents for friends' parties, etc? What if you disagree with him on anything? A friend of mine had to produce receipts of everything she bought - it was awful.

If ops dh is a high earner, are you claiming child benefit ? As you’d not be entitled to any money (you’ve to return it all). I stopped claiming mine last year for example as I hate doing the self assessment

And yet just last week on a thread women were being advised to have a " running away" fund ,just in case they should ever need and most posters thought that it was perfectly acceptable for women to have several thousand squirreled away but that's perfectly acceptable apparently.

I've not read the posts but I've got a lot of recent knowledge in this area.

My partner does 50/50 down the middle with his ex.
He pays half of all costs for uniform; school trips, lunches, hairdressers etc.
He pays for wrap around care on his days. He earns approx £8k more than her.
Because she claims the child benefit (simply because he goes over the threshold and she is under) she is classed as "primary carer" and can therefore make a CMS claim. It's absolutely bullshit. She shouldn't be entitled to it but the CMS system is a joke in many ways and he has to pay her £400 a month for absolutely no reason, other than her being classed as primary carer.

This is the most stupid thing I've read in a long time - think about why some women would benefit from having a get away fund for goodness sake.

I really don't think it's so they can get out of paying for their kids, do you?

If he's stopping paying then HE is rocking the boat. Of course you put the claim in in that scenario, nothing to lose

‘Hi DDs dad, I appreciate what you’re telling me, and I’m sure you’ll appreciate that I need to check it out for myself. So I’ve applied to CMS, you’ll hear from them if they consider that you need to pay maintenance.”

I was replying to the poster who said some men are determined to keep their money hidden away from their wives
By pointing out that some posters seem to think it's perfectly acceptable the other way round
You have just proved my point
How mumsnet is full of hypocrisy.

It is acceptable for women to have a get away fund because that is an entirely different situation to squirrelling away money to get out of contributing fairly to your children.

So no, your point has not been proven at all because your point is entirely irrelevant to the context of this thread.

I don’t understand if he has the child 50% of the time, why you feel you are entitled to child maintenance? What he earns to you is irrelevant.

Apart from the fact ,loads of women can't afford to squirrel away money from the family
It's just typical.mumsnet ,if a man squirels away money he's financially abusive, but if women does it its perfectly acceptable as its a ," running away fund" .

I'd tell him actually we do 60/40 due to your job, but I will apply myself and see what happens, but why an earth a man who earns what you do begrudges his child anything is beyond me, but let's see what happens.

"women can't afford to squirrel away money"

"if a man squirels away money he's financially abusive"

Please do the math yourself.

I would check how many extra night you've had your child over the past 6mths to a year and work out what percentage that is. Also does he contribute to clothes etc?

Why do some people on the internet feel the need to be so nasty?

@Blondeyoghurt there's no way they'd say that, and even if they did they are wrong. They can only tell you to make a claim and it will be calculate from the info given. It sounds like you have her more then 50% i also dont get why he's paying it now, but not once she starts school. Yeah cos school kids need less.

What about the gender pay gap?

No because he's not in receipt of child benefit

Does he have any more children as that can make a difference

I'm not sure who this is aimed at, possibly my post for referring to a comment as stupid.

But if you're going to be so misinformed about the disproportionate hardship and abuse women suffer financially (and otherwise) at the hands of men then you deserve to be called out on it, especially when you are making comments like that on a public forum.

@Blondeyoghurt not always true! My friend knows someone who has to pay ex partner so much per week even though they share 50/50 care of the children! one parent earns more so it is to keep the standard of living in each home for the children equal!

Exactly I have heard of this too

I think in some circumstances, when there is a significant disparity in income (and therefore what each parent can provide for the child) there should be a mechanism to mitigate the disparity.

Note that I said ‘some’ and ‘mitigate’, not ‘all’, and ‘equalise’.

Anyway, it appears that indeed there is such a mechanism.