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.

What has happened OP for him to walk away from his son? To not see him at all? Are you not communicating at all - other than via CMS?

I had a similar situation when my ex and I split up (fairly acrimonious) we agreed on a certain sum as he said he'd done the calculations and we didn't need to go through CMS. About 6 months later when I was feeling stronger, a friend said it sounded like a low amount considering what he does for a living. I phoned the CMS and the figure they told me the kids were entitled to was over twice what he'd been paying me...I proceeded with them and he went bananas. He eventually had to suck it up though.

But if she cuts her hours, she cuts her pay and pension! People have bills to pay!

OP - I get you. My partner is on a similar salary and takes home over £4000 a month. So I think £1k would be reasonable.

HOWEVER when your child gets their funded hours you'll see much more of it and there's a good chance you'll end up meeting someone else in the future (I realise it's probably the last thing on your mind at the moment) and your household income will increase again.

Without the nursery costs, £700 will cover a lot, granted I agree generally women are still majorly disadvantaged when a family breaks up.

You're right, it's not fair but I hope it all works out for you. Your ex is very shortsighted, the fact he can abandon his own child shows he's clearly missing something, you may both be better off without him on the long run.

@Halfheadhighlights nobody is entitled to UC when they have savings x

I'm quite happy for parents of young children to get financial support that enables them to stay in the workforce.

If the alternative is parents quitting their jobs, going on benefits or even just not fulfilling their potential (and their education was probably paid for by the taxpayer), then yes I'm happy for parents to be supported in work.

If the financial support comes as a tax break, a grant, free nursery places or state schools, I don't really mind.

The rest of the country helping you stay in a reasonably well paid job for a few years, seems a fair investment. You'll make it up to us in taxes over the next couple of decades and hopefully your nipper will too.

The CMS is a lousy system - taking x% of someone's earnings without any regard to their living expenses or the needs of the recipient, is unfair. Just saying you want more money isn't a solution. Parents who desperately want more time caring for their children shouldn't be driven into poverty as a punishment for having lost access to their children.

The whole way the CMS is calculated needs to be revised to take into account needs and ability to pay. If anyone can work out a way to stop maintenance being a perverse incentive for parents to try to deny the other parent time with the kids that would be great too.

She contributes by raising the child that her scumbag husband walked out on.

@rainingsnoring

As far as the situation stands it is.

He has largely abandoned the child.

That child is going to have mental health and all sorts of issues due to coming from a single parent family and needs all the support possible to ensure their needs are met so they grow up to be a functioning member of society.

I am more than happy to support a mother and child who have been let down. I think it’s right to do so where the father is failing to step in.

Do I think there should be a better system so that he is held accountable - of course. But that is a matter to lobby gov for not run around in circles in a meaningless conversation here.

The practicalities are this - op is on her own, he is doing the bare minimum. She needs to have proof that she has applied and been refused other support and then she needs to seek legal advice to see if there is any way of holding him accountable. I doubt it as they weren’t married, but even so it is an avenue to be explored.

If nothing comes of the above and the childcare is still high, she needs to assess the options - pay and thole it until free childcare starts, reduce hours, move closer to family or those who can help for free.

Really this is a very limited time period where costs are so high, so option 1 might be best.

Does anyone know if there is mediation for couples that aren’t married?

@Imogenie
> "That child is going to have mental health and all sorts of issues due to coming from a single parent family…"
the child should be fine - Mum's earning plenty and as long as she's not too bitter for too long, she, and the support network she builds, should be able to raise the child fine. (Mum currently seems to be a tad bitter which is understandable but is hopefully limited to here, not vented at the child)

> "Does anyone know if there is mediation for couples that aren’t married?"
Of course there is. You have to attempt mediation before you can take another parent to a Family court - it's infuriating if you know the mediation won't work.... but .... eventually it may well work - took 4 attempts and nearly 10 years in my case, but the hatchet is buried.

This is <almost> funny... these boards are full of women in similar situations to the OP.

We've collectively been round the block.

CMS, FIU, MPs...

There is no way to make an absent/deadbeat / disinterested parent step up. It's a tale as old as time. Realistically how could you?

What's appalling is that they can still get off the hook financially. It helps that there are entire forums dedicated to dodging cms. Propped up by complex tax systems.

What an arrogance, to imagine you would find the 'appropriate' channel. Let's hope you never have to try.

And let's hope you are actually fighting this rather than just being angry about it 😂

Use the 'excess' savings to pay a chunk off your mortgage. Bring them down under £16k and claim UC.

Sorry OP I am giving my opinion on the things I would try, seems everyone is offended by it and calling me arrogant for it. I suggest then you go with the general consensus from all the angry divorced women here: men are crap, all deadbeat dads, the system works in their favour so you might as well not try anything, just give up your career or suck it up and pay the nursery yourself. This seems to be the only acceptable comment here otherwise offering any potential solutions is just out of arrogance...

I wasn’t really asking for financial advice. I was really venting and wondering if I had missed something that this is allowed to happen?

I do understand how UC works etc and used to be a (very) high earner before I re trained. I am financially savvy and don’t need help with looking into that side of things. I have never experienced CMS before nor did I expect the father of my child to do what he’s done so this is a new area to me. My child won’t go without but it will never change the fact that it is surely entirely wrong that his dad needn’t provide half of his child’s costs.

OP I haven't read of all the replies because I couldn't believe the responses you were getting. I think some people struggle to understand that if you earn a good salary, you get NO help from the state. No rent paid, no childcare support (other than tax-free childcare top up) and no UC. I am a single mum and I was on £50k when I had my son.

I had no choice but to work full time. It wasn't a struggle on £50k but I certainly didn't have anything spare after nursery fees, mortgage, bills etc.

It isn't fair that a father can opt out of all the costs and only pay the CMS. There is nothing I can advise you to change that but I just wanted to acknowledge that I totally understand where you are coming from.

@whatnowws
It's mind blowing isn't it?!

I think it's partly to do with the enormous increases we've seen in the cost of childcare. Nurseries round here have almost doubled in the last 10 - 12 years.

Of course salaries haven't. So what may have been realistic 15 years ago just isn't

You’re not offering solutions. You’re spouting ill informed bollocks about solutions that don’t exist.

It’s not being an “angry divorced woman” to say that there is no available solution to make a disinterested parent step up.

CMS can’t. Courts can’t. Lawyers can’t. Court orders can’t. MPs can’t.

where are your actual solutions because all you’ve done so far is mock people who’ve actually been there, done that and tried all of the suggestions you’ve made so far…

Every solution given, including this one, is that OP somehow reduces something. Her working hours, her savings, her career progression, her expectations of the father of her child.

It just proves the point that it's entirely wrong that this is allowed to happen.

It should even out as more than half over time. Once you're not paying nursery fees or in receipt of 30 funded hours, it's very unlikely you'll be spending anything approaching £1460pcm.

It would be ridiculously labour intensive and invasive for family courts to look at all the expenses for each child, work out which ones are essential and which ones are considered frivolous, and then calculate half of that to charge to the NRP.

Personally, I think the govt should work out the average costs of bringing up a child per month and charge half of that as a flat rate for all NRPs, reduced for how many days they have the child. I'm not aware that children get cheaper when your ex quits his job, or get more expensive when your ex gets a promotion. Might cause certain people who happily go around knocking people up and running to pause for thought, but I think that's unlikely to happen.

I really have my fingers crossed for you that he just pays up.

Unfortunately for some women this is just the start because CMS (I worked for them briefly) can be absolutely shit at dealing with reluctant payers.

If it’s financially possible don’t rely on the maintenance. Its massively common for men to increase pension to cut the amount, and if there’s any way that his job can be made self employed/contracting definitely never rely because CMS are appalling at getting SE to pay up.

I am fortunate that he isn’t self employed and works in a job that would reflect very badly if he didn’t make the payments. He has already indicated he is worried his employer could even find out that there is a cms claim against him. I am sure he will continue to pay but as I said in my OP, the circa 700 doesn’t touch the sides when nursery is 1,700.

That is good. I was luckily with similar - it would have been viewed very dimly if my ex hadn’t paid.

If he pays up and it doesn’t get to DEO stage then his employer won’t have any need to find out so hopefully that means he will pay up promptly.

It might also prevent him just putting an extra whack into his pension as well.

I disagree. MPs can if they want to. They choose to keep the law and the system as it is so dad's don't have to pay cm.

That’s not what I said. They can’t make a disinterested parent step up and be a parent is what I said.

That poster is adamant there are ways that that can be done.

Obviously they could, and should, sort the shambles that is CMS

Having a "CMS claim against you" isn't in any way a reflection on you as a person or a parent and shouldn't be considered a cause for concern by any employer. The CMS determines the appropriate amount for a parent to pay and either parent can request for them to make this calculation.