To think he’s not doing anything wrong by stopping maintenance?

[GumdropsAndLollipops]

My DB “Jack” has two kids with his ex “Anne”, DS8 and DD10.

Up until a year ago, Jack had the children 3 nights a week and Anne had them 4 nights a week. Jack is also a high earner and has always paid child maintenance to Anne above CM rate (as it should be).

Last year, Anne was due to have her second child with her DP and asked Jack to swap the schedule so he had their children 4 nights and she had them 3 nights instead. The court order was updated and means Jack has been the resident parent for the last year however he carried on paying maintenance to Anne at the same rate due to the fact she was on maternity leave (this was due to stop when she returned to work).

Fast forward to now and Jack recently cashed in an investment which has allowed him to pay off his mortgage and become financially secure. With this in mind, Jack has decided he would like to quit his job to spend more time with the kids and to just generally live a less busy and hectic life as without the commitment of a mortgage payment, he can live comfortably on freelance work while the kids are in school or at their mum’s.

Jack didn’t foresee any of this being a problem for Anne as the maintenance payments were due to stop anyway but she has hit the roof; saying he needs to continue the payments as not doing so would put her household into financial hardship.

Jack has it made clear that he will not be requesting any maintenance from her and that he will carry on paying for everything as before (clothes, uniform, trips, hobbies, sports etc) and has offered to have their children more, do pick ups / drop off on her days, cover all sickness absences as he won’t have a work schedule but all hell has broken loose.

As per my title, I don’t think Jack is wrong (but I’m biased as I don’t like Anne) so I thought I’d ask here in case there’s something I’m missing or have not thought about.

So, is Jack being unreasonable to quit his job and stop the voluntary maintenance payments?

Knowing her as I do and based on a few things she’s said, I very much suspect that instead of returning to work, she was hoping all along to become a SAHM and was going to pitch it to Jack as it being beneficial to their children as well (on the days she has them) and to have him continue the maintenance.

It sounds like Anne feels he's stolen her dream - a dream which was based on manipulating Jack. So mean.

I love Jack btw.

Pfft. She's just pissed that her golden goose is about to stop laying eggs. Eight weeks notice for these already grabby payments is sufficient time. Why should his cheating ex get money for nothing? I'd let Anne tantrum away until she gets tired.

He's been incredibly generous. Anne needs to accept that and stop expecting that generosity to continue. He gets to make his decisions about his life, and he is the resident parent so doing the bulk of the work. Anne sounds a piece of work.

It was nice of him to continue paying and he's paid when he doesn't have to she now needs to stop taking the piss and let her current partner support her.

I think jack deserves a medal, supporting Anne through maternity leave with someone else’s child!!

Have I understood this correctly? He has children 4 nights per week and she has them 3 nights but she expects ex to still pay her maintenance? That doesn’t make any sense - if anything she would owe him maintenance as he has the children more - she is no longer the resident parent.

Anne is in the wrong and now all the family will hear how grabby she is. He’s supposed to be paying for the kids, not her - although he has been very very generous in supporting her up to this point!

Hes been more than fair.

He would be paying her to prop up her household, including her new man. They had children they planned badly for because they didn't realise that they can't afford them. But that's their problem to fix.

As it is he's already funded her maternity leave and it wasn't even his baby! More than fair.

He should not have to fund a second family. He didn't create it. It's a sad situation. If he's feeling charitable he could send them a little money, or cover the full cost of certain things for his kids eg uniforms, clothes etc.

But even then, he can't know whether they're genuinely skint, or just milking him. And she sounds like a CF so could very well be trying to milk him.

I agree in this particular situation, @HowardTJMoon , it’ll only create animosity and waste money on legal fees-for a tiny amount of CMS that Jack doesn’t really need for the children.

If she takes him back to court to change the current 60/40 split, she still won’t end up getting what she wants, because he won’t be a high earner anymore. 🤷

As @Ejvd says, he can help out by fully covering the cost of his children’s clothes, uniforms, etc., but that’s for them, not the rest of Anne’s family. They’ve got their own parents!

He needs to cut her off. What’s that saying? “Your failure to plan properly isn’t my emergency.”

I'd suggest thinking about it differently. Rather than about who is right or wrong if you can reframe it from the childs perspectives. If what the ex is saying is true - that without the maintenance their household goes into financial hardship.... this will be hard for the chidren. The contrast could become quite stark between the two households. How will this affect the children? Was notce given of the change? If not that would be a huge financial shock for the ex and could be considered unreasonable. In terms of a resolution.. maybe a furhter period could be arranged for lower maintenance to phase the ex into adjustments and allow them to plan. Another solution is putting it through the CMS to resolve. These situations are always tricky. Best of luck with resolving it.

The cms would make Anne pay?

He did give her plenty of notice also. And the kids could stay with him more if she can afford all 4 of her children I guess? It's not for him to pay more because she's had additional children.

@Wooky073 With a 60/40 split, CMS would award maintenance to Jack as the RP.

Jack can certainly help out by paying for most of his children’s expenses, He can also help Anne reduce her household bills by doing all his children’s washing at his house, for example. Actually subsidizing Anne, her DP and their two children is ridiculous though.

From what I gather from the OP's posts, Jack has done that from the beginning. Clothes, uniforms, hobbies, sports, trips has always been paid for by Jack.

I am betting the CM that Jack paid was a lot more than it cost to feed two young children, wash their clothes and buy them toothpaste, etc.

It doesn't seem like she ever needed to buy anything else, and got used to the income. They figured they could have another child because Jack's CM would cover it. Now they are finding out that Jack isn't paying for her household expenses. Good for Jack!

As for the prattle about his children suffering when at Mom's because of lack of money. How will they suffer? Is she planning to starve them? Jack already pays ALL the expenses for the children outside of food and toiletries, and I am sure, he will buy them toiletries if Mommy Dearest needs to keep her and her DP's money for them and their "new children". If she cannot afford food for them, then Jack should have full custody, and they can see Mommy Dearest EOW.
Mommy and her DP need to do better, MUCH better.

As to taking Jack back to court. That's funny. What reason will she give? "I didn't want them full-time when I was on ML as I had a "new child", even though I would have also been home more for the "old children", but now that I am back to work full-time, I want my children back because..........my household without Jack's money means I cannot have the lifestyle I think I deserve, even though I cheated on him. For the three days my children are with me, I can't afford their toiletries and food, because I need the money for me, DP and our "new children", so I need them back for the money, Your Honor."

Then Jack can explain how he has the time and money to take the children to school, pick them up, take them anywhere they need/want to go. Let her take Jack back to court. She'll lose and have to come up with the money for a lawyer.

Clearly she was warned as they had amended the court order and she was told the payments would stop after her maternity. He didn't have to continue paying them after that this has been an agreement they made. If he is the resident parent she should be paying him a d he's been more than reasonable not to ask that she does. He's paying for everything they need and helped her out during her maternity which really is down to the new DH not him. But he did it. She asked to swap the times over from 3 to 4 days so she would have been advised dby the court where she stood. Clearly she took him for a mug and expected him to carry on paying regardless which he isn't going too.

Utter bullshit all those saying “did he warn her in advance” “did he give her a gentle reminder” etc etc. WTAF he has resident parent status and has zero obligation to pay her anything!
OP YANBU Jack should be commended for changing his life work balance which benefits his child/children.
For what it’s worth I say this a a mother of 3 children who has solely spent tens of thousand pounds on childcare with fuck all contribution.

Could not agree more.

Yanbu. I'm surprised he paid her anything if he had his children for days and she had them for three. Who's the dad to the baby. Surely he paying for that baby. Why she having more children if can't afford it.

YANBU - she has had way over and beyond what it has cost to take care of her children which is shown by the fact she is using it for other things- the children who aren’t his for one thing. My husband and I went through this he was paying over and above for years for his son But he didn’t have him half of the time. He does now and he stopped maintenance because it wasn’t going to his son it was going on her holidays lip fillers and botox. She got plenty of warning but kicked off. If you look at csa If you’re 50/50 you don’t have to pay. She should be paying him as he will now be earning less and having the kids more. He’s very generous paying for all of the extra stuff because that is expensive but he shouldn’t have to subsidise her new family.

They live with dad more frequently than mum…. Plus she has a new partner who should be funding the new children, and her own work should support the children the 3 days a week she has them! She can’t expect her ex to support her new partner and family!!

What you brother does for work is absolutely non of his ex’s business!!
Any of our ex’s could take a lesser paid job and lower our maintenance and we don’t have any right to question that…. In your brothers case though as the main parent, I think she’s been bloody lucky that he’s agreed to be so reasonable up until now! He didn’t have to pay above the CM recommendation or pay towards extras… most fathers pay the bare minimum… (wrong I know) but your brother has clearly been very generous to his cheating ex wife!!!
is the second baby definitely his?? If she was sleeping around just before she was pregnant with his second child?!
She sounds awful and if I were your brother I wouldn’t put up with her crap a moment longer… he needs to tell her she has no control over his future career choices !!

Some women (and men to make it fair) give others a bad name!! My EH pays me the same amount, 4 weekly and has done since we
split. His income has gone up loads but I chose consistency over requesting more. Don’t get me wrong, I have asked him to help out with our daughter for random one off things….like I was skint at Halloween and she wanted to go trick or treating. So I asked him (nicely) if he wouldn’t mind sending me £10 to buy her an outfit… he sent £30 and told me to get my (new) baby one as well!!! He’s now in a financial pickle and had messaged to say he might have to reduce money or possibly stop it for a bit…. I said “that’s fine, Thankyou for giving me the heads up!! I appreciate it!”. And I genuinely did. If only we could all be like this, the world would be easier. But it isn’t. I don’t think the OPs brother should apply for CMS against his ex (even though he’s perfectly entitled to) as that would surely make things harder for his children the 3 days they are with her. Surely that’s a way of easing the financial strain she’s under? He sounds like an amazing and committed father and she should be thankful. As that’s worth than any bit of money he may give her.

I know a mum who expected to still get maintenance when the children moved in with Dad full time. She wouldn't have the children at all and still expected maintenance to continue. never paid a penny of maintenance to the Dad

This sounds fine to me. Why should he be funding his ex partners new life? Unless this is part of a spousal maintenance agreement. The child maintenance money was for the children and he has them 4x days a week.