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.

@toomanytonotice

Mum thought we should continue paying her the maintenance 🤣 ..we didn't do this but we did decide not to claim against her because the children wanted to learn be here for a number of reasons and we knew if we pushed getting maintenance that she would involve the children and pressure them to go back.

Not everyone grows up bitter and with mental health issues due their biological father's absence including their father just walking out.

It has been going on for decades and even centuries.

However people end up with issues if their mother does the same.

Simply because the social norm is that your mother doesn't abandon you as she gave birth to you so knows you are hers. There as you may not be the child of the man your mother says is your father.

The fact you are not entitled to UC is irrelevant, the problem here is you have a hefty nursery bill to pay to enable you to keep working and providing for the kids while your ex gets away with paying 1-20% of his income after taxes.

We all know that if you have the kids for most of the week and the other parent earns more (and is on route to earn even more with somebody taking off him the lion’s share of the responsibilities that come with having children) that percentage is unfair.

The fact some of us get less or nothing doesn’t remove the unfairness, and people pestering you as if you should be grateful for being in a better position than them is just mean.

I did raise my child up with very little money, I am sure that there are other women who raised theirs on even less or even much more, but the fact that I can live of thin air doesn’t mean that everyone should.

Having said that… with so little appetite in government and society to help single parents, I guess the things will stay the same for decades to come so, there are two ways to deal with the frustration of being left holding the baby: 1) You ruin your life getting bitter about the whole unfairness of it or… 2) you write the bastard off and rebuild the life you want for you and your kids with your own resources.

You’re not wrong OP, it’s an absolute piss take. There is no logical reason as to why it’s fair for two people to have a child, both work full time, but only one is responsible for paying for childcare. It’s a joke that men get to opt out, provide no parenting, but also don’t have to pay for childcare, but it won’t change until men are the ones left with the kids and are being fucked over sadly.

You are absolutely right.

The percentage of women who abandon their children like this is tiny compared to the percentage of men which is why it is such a feminist issue.

But I think that for the men it does happen to it is arguably more difficult because there isn’t that readily available community to support.

Huge shout out to your husband for raising his kids independently.

She understands how it works. She disagrees that it should work like that.

It's not hard to understand.

I read this thread with increasing sense of disbelief. It is egregious that in 2024 (!) we are discussing whether it is fair for the NRP to pay half nursery and half of child living expenses. I thought that by now it should be obvious that it is completely unfair! What is fair is NRP paying half of all childcare (i.e. 12 hours a day rather than 5 hours of the nursery) and half of child living expenses.

This, according to my calculations comes to £101.46 in child living expenses (that includes 5 hours of childcare a week, see UK living wages table on p.24 here https://livingwage.org.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/Living-Wage-briefing-note.pdf) and £7.95(127-5)= £628.05 in childcare (7.95 is funding rate of nurseries, see https://www.gov.uk/government/news/childcare-settings-receive-cash-boost-as-funding-rates-increase#:~:text=Funding%20rates%20per%20child%20paid,for%20two%2Dyear%2Dolds. )

So the total that NRP with no contact should fairly pay per WEEK is £729.51 and per month is £2918.04. The OP is asking for less than half of it and this (by some) is viewed as greedy and ungrateful -- this completely baffles me.

@curioscurio

£2918 a month - who earns the sort of money that they have the best part of £3k a month left.after paying for essential housing and bills?

How do NRP with a lower take home pay this every month?

This. I’ve been ranted at on divorce / separation threads for not being ‘supportive’ for telling the truth about how much an unmarried partner with children can expect to receive on separation (not much). Because apparently lying to a woman who wants to leave her partner about the law and therefore tricking her into making choices that mean she can’t feed her children is ‘supportive’ but being accurate about the law isn’t.

Some people can’t distinguish between ‘this is the law’ and ‘this should be the law’. The OP clearly understands the difference but thinks it’s wrong. I agree.

But I think that for the men it does happen to it is arguably more difficult because there isn’t that readily available community to support

Whilst there may be some truth in that, they also don’t get the same stigma and are treated as absolute heroes. The single dad I know, has family and female friends falling over themselves to help him out and give him a break. So I think it’s a mix.

@whatnowws

Presently you are not because you have over £16,000 in savings.

If you feel that the year or so’s obligation to pay full time fees is too much. Then it is possible to manoeuvre your finances to then make you eligible for UC towards childcare - provided you get advice on this from relevant parties to ensure it isn’t seen as Deprivation of Assets.

If you feel putting your money into your pension/home improvements/car/holiday/other material possessions/trust for your child would be too restrictive then you will have to do without the UC.

There’s always the option to reduce it by looking after your own bloody kids from time to time, but if you’re going to outsource 100% of raising your child, yeah, it’s expensive.

@NotAgainWilson

I actually disagree with your assertion that there is little appetite to help single parents.

I think the correct thing so say is there is little appetite to support single parents who own their own home and work full time getting more than the average wage. The inequality between them and couples who do the same is not acknowledged.

If however you are a single parent renting, working part time and citing disability on account of mental distress due to the break up, there is ample support.

And what about the RP who would stop there NRP seeing their kids just because they don't want a reduction in Maintenance?

There are NRP who don't see their kids or provide for them by choice this is bad but their are also RP who use their kids to punish the NRP and to get what they want. This is also bad.

But this doesn't mean genuinely decent people should be penalised to a ridiculous level.

The CM is based on a % of income meaning the more you earn the more that is paid. In most cases the NRP also provides a home and other things so needs some money left.

In the real world if our income drops we need to drop our expenditure accordingly.
If I split from DH our lifestyle would have to change because logic states that running 2 homes would need more money than 1 home.

We both need a home for the children to spend time between. We both need to clothe and provide things for these separate homes.
This means expenses increase.

Just because something did not work for you, it doesn't seem it wouldn't work for anyone else...

And what about the RP who would stop there NRP seeing their kids just because they don't want a reduction in Maintenance?

What about them? Courts already exist to deal with that, and it’s not what this thread is about. There is no good reason why men should be able to opt out of being an equally responsible parent to their child. You’re talking about having to provide a home (not this guy obviously as he has nothing to do with his child), but so does the RP, as well as paying for childcare so they can work, something the NRP takes for granted.

I don't understand a problem here. If one doesn't earn enough to pay £2918 per month for their share of childcare and maintenance, they can always opt for 50:50 arrangement (via court, if needed) and pay nothing (but be fully responsible for a child 3.5 days a week and face social services in the case of neglect, as RP currently do).

Childcare IS expensive, and 24/7 childcare is even more so, thus if one can not afford it, they should do it themselves.

And what about the RP who would stop there NRP seeing their kids just because they don't want a reduction in Maintenance?

Since the OP isn't one of them, they're irrelevant to this thread.

You know, I've just had a really great idea.

Since a vanishingly small number of RPs may abuse their situation to get money out of the NRP, let's abolish child maintenance altogether and do an experiment to see how long the children of separated parents can survive on fresh air alone.

How some of these men can eat their dinner at night knowing that their exes are struggling to provide decent nutritious food for their kids is beyond me.

Many children already have to live with no maintenance we just get on with it no other choice.

If you have children with someone who doesn’t work/lives on a pittance in very low paid job or is disabled and cannot work etc, then you wouldn’t have been much better off if you had stayed together and they remained in your household because they still wouldn’t contribute much financially. You may have had the childcare from them, but in my experience those men still don’t want to provide childcare.

Edit - It also isn’t a race to the bottom. Some children may be failed by their parent’s circumstances, or by their father’s ability to dodge paying and therefore you have to struggle on with no financial help from your ex, but it is not a race to the bottom. It has absolutely nothing to do with continuing to fight for fair maintenance payments and government legislation to ensure fairness with childcare costs. We should continue to fight for that.

Very few men don't do their share financially or in care.
The CM is set up to ensure that all provide a percentage of income to the RP.
The OP case it appears he isn't involved at all and that is awful for the child and a difficult situation for OP.
But we shouldn't punish all NRP because of this.

And no we shouldn't abolish child maintenance because some RP abuse the situation. But to state that NRP can just go to court if RP prevents contact doesn't take into consideration the financial and emotional strain on the adults or most importantly the children. It also isn't instant and can take years of back and forth. Their is no /limited punishment when RP break the court order and each breach requires NRP to go back to court with further financial strain (taking even more funds from the children).

So let's not pretend that only men are at fault. Both males and females are capable of being shit. Let's not throw one gender under the bus just because of a minority.

What we can do is ensure that not being involved in your children's lives is seen as wrong and that those who do this are either supported to ensure they can be involved (flexible working for both sexes, and RP not being able to stop contact happening) or penalised if they opt out.

Equal responsibility is not a punishment.

Many of these men are working but hiding their income! Not disabled simply found ways to avoid paying maintenance 🤷‍♀️ since there are so many loopholes. My point still stands anyway if they got rid of the cms people would cope just like the rest of us have to we haven't put our kids in care we just get on with it. My ex should be paying £500 a month but has managed to hide his income believe it or not this is a common issue so we get £7 a week which he doesn't even pay.

What has your post got to do with the topic being discussed?

Expecting the dad to pay out more than they earn in maintenance (which was the posts I have been responding to that stated each dad should pay £3k a month regardless of if they earn that figure) is not equal anything.