Is this fair?

[greenShooe]

I just don’t know anymore.

I earn 58k, ex 90k. He pays 950 a month which is slightly more than the maintenance calculator and on top of this he will buy Dd things she needs now and then, if i prompt him. For example last month he bought her a table and chairs set and new sleeping bags and bed sheets. Cost probably around 80 quid in total.

However nursery is 1600 a month. I feel he should be paying half this and his maintenance. The main reason I think this is because I am literally doing everything. My career is taking a huge hit as I am rushing every day to do drop off and pick up. He visits most weekends so I get around 3 hours on a Saturday and 3 hours on a Sunday to myself but essentially I do it all… all her washing, expensive heating bills … you get the picture.

He lives in a more expensive area (for work) and often claims he has nothing left at the end of the month. I don’t see how this is true.

I don’t want to rock the boat but also I know that I am in a precarious situation. I’m hoping to get a promotion but I can only so what I can do and I’m just managing to stay afloat as it is.

do you think this arrangement is fair? I don’t know.

But remember op, if you still get £950 a month from him till she's 18, then once she finishes nursery he will be paying far far far more than half her costs. So, whilst you could just about cling to an argument now, nursery costs are very short lived.

I don't think I'd rock the boat because as PP states nursery costs are only for 3 or 4 years at the most and often less than this. If he's paying over CMS and buying her bits she needs too I'd bite my tongue. Maybe get him to buy her bigger gift at Xmas or pay half towards her Xmas stocking. Soon you'll get a government subsidy for nursery fees. He'll be paying a high amount of CMS until she's 18 or 19 or until leaves education.

I think YABU.

He pays £900 a month. If your contribution is equal to his, that's £1800 a month, plus child benefit - surely that more than covers the nursery fees and any additional costs?

There's no way it's fair that he pays £900 plus another £800 for nursery!

As a slight general aside to this particular situation...

A lot of people are saying the nrp should only be paying 50% with the rp also paying 50% of the child's costs. But surely the nrp should contribute far more than 50% financially to cover the fact that the RP is doing the vast majority of the child care?

If the RP is doing all drop offs/all pick ups etc, every evening and morning childcare etc, then the RPs ability to earn money is compromised whereas the NRPs isn't, so surely it wouldn't be a 50/50 financial split?

Doing all the pick-ups and drop-offs doesn't necessarily mean you're compromising your earning potential, though.

I know OP says it is in her case, but the child support system needs to (broadly) work for everyone - they can't change it for every single set of circumstances ever to exist.

Seriously? Pay them to do childcare, are you for real? If she doesn’t wish to parent this amount then she should discuss shared custody not ask to be paid for her efforts.

good lord.

Of course I'm for real. There's 2 parents. Why on earth shouldn't they do absolutely equal amounts of childcare if you think the finances should be absolutely equal?

What a hero 😂

90k isn’t what it used to be but he needs to dig a little deeper.

@Jf20 i offered 50/50… he didn’t want that. He’s chosen to be a weekend dad

So expenses are split 50/50 but care and supervision isn’t.

So he’s failing as a dad.

No, that's what the nrp is doing. If the nrp was doing 50/50 then no maintenance would be paid and each would be paying the child's costs whilst child was in their care. Because the nrp is not sharing care and therefore costs, they're paying maintenance, which is calculated based on the amount of time they have ( or in many cases don't have) the child.

Exactly @YourSnugHazelTraybake ...and my point was that many of the posters on this thread have said, well he gives you £X in CM so you have to also put in £X making £2X, but not taking in to account at all that CM is in fact based on the fact that the NRP has the child less so pays CM to cover for this disparity in care. Not so the RP can then also, on top of the more childcare, put in that same amount of CM to the pot.