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!

@Otherstories2002

Never assume anything

Also, never go around making up possible scenarios in your own head that the OP didn't disclose and run with a whole bunch of judgement based on your own made up scenarios. (esp when it's highly likely due to the nature if the post that she would disclose all info suggesting he's a dick)

Best to stick to the OP description huh?

Reg 50 states no CMS due for shared care:

Where the person named as the non-resident parent of the qualifying child also provides a home for that child (in a different household from the applicant) and shares the day-to-day care of that child with the applicant, the case is to be treated as a special case for the purposes of the 1991 Act (reg 50 of the Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulation 2012).

The effect of reg 50 is that, where there is a division of care in two different households, the non-applicant parent is to be treated as the NRP if they provide day to day care to a lesser extent than the day-to-day care provided by the applicant. Where the facts show equal responsibility for day-to-day care then there is no NRP from whom maintenance may be claimed, and there will be no assessment.

@Otherstories2002
To be fair though. Ongoing posts do indeed make the guy sound like he's not pulling his 50/50 weight

Even if he is doing 50/50 of everything that still doesn’t remove entitlement to child maintenance where there is unequal income.

Im aware. I read the full thread.

Yes It does. See my post above on reg 50

Interesting thread...I am the larger earner with the STBXH on the lower income. He will be able to claim child benefit. We are looking to split custody of the children 50:50.
TBH him doing 50% will be a massive step up- only since I have filed for divorce has he started picking up costs for Christmas and birthday presents. He still doesn't contribute towards childminder fees, school lunches, clothes and uniform.
I'll buy clothes for the kids for when they're at mine, and he will buy clothes for them to stay at his, working to his budget.
Child care costs will be split- I pay if I need a childminder on my days, and he will pay for his. Joint costs (school uniform, trips, lunches, clubs) should be split equally.
I'd be hacked off is he came at me for maintenance...he currently spends his income on his trainers and gaming PC so what's the say the kids will see any of it anyway?

Quick update on the situation - he’s told CMS he is the main day-to-day carer and so they have took his word and closed the case. I’m back to square one (:

You need to contest this as unless he has provided proof of this, it's a load of crap.

If you receive child benefit and the child is registered at your address for doctors, nursery etc then YOU are the primary carer. He HAS to prove otherwise, they don't just close the case because "he said so"
My OH has been fighting the exact same battle for 2yrs and it's still ongoing. Apparently because she claims CB and the child is registered at her address for doctors etc then she is classed as primary carer. Which is what I imagine you are?

But receiving benefit doesn't prove she is the primary carer. It just means she is the lower earner of the two.

Don’t give ve up! Surely he’s not the first at CMS to try to pull this shit.

Don't take legal advice from your opponent.
If he gets upset at you applying, then he's likely lying to get out of paying.
Trust the website calculator over the man who doesn't want to pay.

Did he give them any evidence of this? Can you show how much you do?

I didn't say it proved it, I said that if she recieves those, it will be her who is the primary carer in the eyes of the CMS. I know that is how they decide who it is.
If she is saying the opposite to him, eg she is the main carer AND she claims the CB and addresses are linked, they will award her the "primary carer" status