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.

If your ex moves in with a woman and her 5 kids, CMS will consider them his dependents and cut your maintenance even further, even if the woman is in receipt of CMS herself!

‘Want to work full time’.

Maybe she needs to because you know, she’s now a single parent and responsible for all the household bills?

Im not sure part time work will help much, as any reduction in childcare cost will be offset by the reduction in salary + any ‘profit’ made.

OP how old is the child? Are you entitled to funded hours? Mas others have said it is shit in the nursery era (please know I’ve been there on far far less CMS for two!) but once they finish the maintenance should more than cover half hopefully ?

I’m sorry it might not be fair but I got nothing through the CMS for 18 years. I know it’s tough but at least you are getting something.

Op doesn’t sound like she’s disputing that she also has to contribute to their child just the amount. He doesn’t see the child or even pay 50% of the child’s nursery and daily costs.

@whatnowws no help to you now but this is the kind of ‘gap’ that needs resolving. Times have changed and if both parents want to work then the rules should change so the calculation includes childcare. Is it worth starting a petition on changeDOTorg or 38degrees that says something like ‘change maintenance payment calculation where both parents work to include half of childcare payments’?

I also think that both parents should have to pay towards childcare costs so both parents can work, not just the parents who has custody on working days. And also pay towards the child's support as well.

CMS needs a massive re-vamp and wake up call. It is grossly unfair to the parent who stays with the children and tries to do the right thing by them.

It's totally unfair. The system is shite and needs revamping.

Tbh this attitude is part of the problem.

That other people got nothing, or less, doesn’t make the OP lucky.

That so many men get away with paying hardly anything, or nothing at all, totally skews people’s thinking so that in cases like the OPs the numbers blur the fact that this assessment doesn’t even cover half of the childcare bill, let alone anything else.

(Plus she’s not actually getting anything yet - CMS have made the calculation but he’s not paying as of yet and they don’t have a great reputation for actually getting money out of people)

Doesn't make it right though.

Of course he should be paying half of all expenses, including half of nursery costs. Yes other women get even less, but that doesn't mean that they're not getting screwed over too!

It's an awful system which allows men to dump their responsibilities, as the system is based on mothers always being there to pick up the pieces.

I just can't understand the number of women telling her to be grateful for what she has.

We heard you the third time when you said he left.

Respectfully, it doesn't matter who left. He's gone and that's the calculation. You'll have to either negotiate with him or try to find a higher paying job/same pay less hours.

Child maintenance is pitiful these days, my ex husband earns 60K, swans around to his Spanish holidays but I only get a measley £ 400. It's a joke!

CMS stays the same regardless of what you pay out for nursery. £790 is a huge amount of money and as others have commented, way more than most people get. It's 12% of his pre-tax income.

Sorry but £1700pm is ridiculous. That works out at £80 a day, and as you should be claiming the 20% tax-free top-up, you're paying £100 a day which is way above average. I'd be looking at a childminder or alternative provision.

I don't know how old DS is but unless he's literally a newborn baby you don't have long to go before you can claim funded hours anyway.

My partner earns 75k and cms take 1300 for two kids.

There is a rule that the paying parent has to be left with 60% of income so he could have doubled up on pensions/savings etc

The responses here are insane. The father should pay half of the costs, including half the nursery bill.

So that she can earn money to support the child that he has abandoned?

There are lots of things wrong with CMS, but who left should never be a factor in the calculation. Presumably you wouldn’t want to see an RP awarded less because they left, either?

I get £850 for 3 kids and he earns 65k a year nothing extra as he walked away and won’t see them

CMS is hilarious. My ex has our daughter and doesn't work so I'd have to pay him more per month even though our son lives with me because I work. Crazy. I'm hoping he never looks into calculations as it would really Piss me off to give him money when I'd get £7 a week off him.

And her nursery fees are a massive amount !
come on, it’s proportional.

I'm shocked on your behalf OP, and at the number of replies suggesting that its a reasonable amount.
I can only suggest moving your DC to alternative provision. It sounds that if he is not communicating with you, thats an added bonus and I would use the fact that you have total control of your DC's activities and up bringing to your full advantage.

I think circumstances should be accounted for. One partner walks away from the child, they should pay accordingly. One partner leaves the other but takes the child because it was a bad situation, they should be awarded accordingly.

Someone takes the child away from the other parent to be vindictive, maybe they should be awarded less.

A % of a salary is not the right way to work things out.

Her point is that HE also gets to work and he is also a parent, so it shouldn't be a case that the mother either pays ALL childcare costs otherwise be unemployed, whereas he gets to work with no childcare cost consequences. Why is it the resident parent that has to lose out when they have to bear a heavier burden of costs.

The whole system is shit and completely against working mothers who require childcare. Surely you can see that.

Thankfully not the case.