To be AMAZED at this cms calculation?

[whatnowws]

Recently split from DS’s dad. He won’t communicate or see ds, so after several weeks I contacted cms. They are getting in touch with him but… the claim is for 730 a month?!? He earns almost 80k? How can this be right?

meanwhile, I’m earning 46k and paying 1,700 in nursery costs and all other costs for ds?

how on earth is that supposed to be fair?! This calculation is also assuming he continues not to see ds. If he wants him a night or more then costs reduce further… basically he can do what he wants and I’m expected to pick up the financial pieces no matter what.

You're right op. But I'd take it and shut up.

When Op & her ex were together they had three times the income but the childcare costs were the same.

Now Op is still expected to pay that with no help from the child's father.

Ridiculous!

Well, if he can’t afford to adequately fund his existing child, he shouldn’t be having any more children: and being such a poor father: it would be best all round if he got a vasectomy

I'm sorry op, I'm totally on your side and I can't believe the people justifying it. You shouldn't have to pay more than half and it's ridiculous the posters saying 'but you chose to work'...cmon, it's not the fucking 50s where women have to give up their jobs so the man can work because he's so big and important.

9 years ago full time childcare for my son was £1k per month (in a very cheap part of the country) this was standard.

its not beyond the reaches of imagination to assume that in a high cost of living area that full time childcare these days is £1700.

You seem to post this a lot I'm surprised no one else has noticed you post this constantly, my kids dad pays £7 a week I would love to have your "problem" oh and he hasn't paid it since November because his debts are more important apparently

The system is unfair, that is true. And (to generalize but not that much) being a single mother usually comes with a raft of unfairness. The idea that it is morally reprehensible to drop hours to get additional support from the state for a short time in order to ride out an unexpected/unwelcome/financially desperate situation is, in my view, just another example of the unfairness heaped on women in this situation.

Just on an economic basis there is long term benefit in the state supporting single mothers and pre-school children. Mothers will in many cases be able to increase hours and income once the early years are behind them. The economic benefits of investment in early years for children and populations as a whole is widely documented. The detriment to women of giving up work/reducing hours etc in the early years is also widely researched and well known.

If the OP cannot afford childcare, housing, utilities and also to (for instance) eat then she IS where money is needed. It would be even better if she could get some support without dropping hours (eg. tax reduction for childcare in a similar vein to pension payments), or if her child had more support in the form of cheaper good childcare options. Instead of viewing this situation as the state supporting feckless parents perhaps you could view it as an investment in gender equality and young children, and ask how our state could do better with those things?

https://www.change.org/p/reform-child-maintenance-payments-to-fully-cover-children-s-needs

www.change.org/p/hold-parents-accountable-ensure-child-maintenance-payments-for-all-children

www.change.org/p/make-child-maintenance-a-recognised-enforceable-debt

And you all come on to tell everyone how little you get and contribute nothing of value to the thread.

Why should she pay for him to go to work? Because that’s what nursery costs are.

stonking rich on £46k? Paying out about £20k on childcare? … are you kidding or actually that thick

The op literally posts this over and over again!! The last one was about a week ago...

@sixtyandsomething your jealousy is embarrassing.

She's not "surprised" she posted this thread last week

No… this sort of shit is letting deadbeat fathers get away with it

And you always come on the threads to reply! I've seen you post about your ex's payments and debt on other threads. Stop being so bitter that other women get more for goodness sake.

OP, would you get a better arrangement by negotiating a private one using a lawyer? I don't know how practical that is, but just putting it out there.

@TVD2103 Assuming you're a woman, how disgusting the way you excuse the patriarchal expectations put on women by society. You should be ashamed of yourself. I bet you don't have many friends. Probably extremely insecure and beat people down to feel better about yourself.

Funny how you don't mind the op posting this same thread every week 🙄 complaining about receiving nearly a grand every month

IMHO he should be paying 50% of childcare and 50% of their costs - e.g. if it is a 3 bedroom house, then he should pay 1/2 of 2/3 of the mortgage (1/3), food and bills should be calculated in the same manner.

i agree he should be paying towards childcare, but why should he contribute to the OP’s mortgage when presumably he has to pay his own housing costs too?

mega mega mega loaded, not only does she has this massive salary, she is also raking in over £700 a month in CM!

Anyone who can't see this is stonking rich is more than a little out of touch!

I don't mind it because it should absolutely keep being talked about, maybe then men would pay what they're supposed to. People like you who get barely anything should be encouraging OP, you might end up getting more yourself if we continue to shout about it.

You've got to be taking the piss now.

That’s because CMS is a joke. I continue to be shocked and dismayed when English friends talk about CMS calculations. It’s less than the bare minimum imo.

Why should he get free childcare while he works? If he wants to work full time, he also needs to pay nursery costs.

CMS should be adapted to also pay half of childcare costs when both parents work. It's unfair otherwise