To think this child maintenance benefits loophole is ridiculous ?

[Strawberrrrry]

I was talking to my sister today. Love my sister, don’t begrudge my nieces and nephews etc. However, I find this benefits loophole ridiculous, though I appreciate she doesn’t make the rules and is just claiming what she can. Anyway.

My sister has just broken up with her partner, they have two kids together. He is a high earner and child maintenance will be £1,200 a month (via the child maintenance service).

She earns £900 a month working part time, school time hours.

She has just put in a claim for benefits and she has been told she will receive £1,400 a month. This includes housing benefits, income support, child benefit. It doesn’t include discounts from council tax etc.

This brings her total monthly income to £3,500 and some change (I have given rounded figures). Completely tax free. I had assumed her benefits would be reduced as she gets a high amount of child maintenance. But no. They don’t count it. She admits herself that her monthly income is massive and she did first assume that the children’s maintenance would warrant some sort of deduction.

As I said, fair play to her as she is only doing what the system allows. However, I can’t help but feel this is a huge loophole, and there should be some sort of cap i.e once you are getting £500+ a month in child maintenance, it starts to affect benefits? And I realise her ex could lose his job at any point or stop paying, but if that happens surely benefits could reassess at that point…

It just seems ludicrous that someone can be getting that level of monthly income from maintenance & benefits, completely tax free. I’m sure it can’t just be my sister in this position.

AIBU?

@ jasjas3008 -

A study cited by the Joseph Rowntree foundation “found that children’s educational outcomes improved if mothers received additional money, but not if fathers did. This finding is consistent with wider evidence and with ‘purse versus wallet’ theories which predict that mothers are more likely to spend income on children than fathers are.” This doesn’t mean that every mother will - but they are more likely to.

Well, we see this in everyday life. How often have you seen a mother be willing to spend £35 on something their child needs without a thought, but she won’t spend a penny on herself?

I know it’s a sweeping generalisation but it’s something you see a lot of. You rarely hear of men having the same view (remember I’m talking in general, I’m sure there are lots of stories of men walking round with holes in their shoes so little Bobby can have a new school coat).

People really need to understand how ineffective the CMS is and how determined some exs are before they come up with plans.

My ex doesn’t pay. My ex gave his company to his children, he got rid of his car and his brother “loaned” him one, a brand new car btw. He doesn’t work, apparently his parents “help him financially”

CMS took that all fine, no query over how a grown man is able to give a company away, claim to not work at all, live off parents yet still run a house (no mortgage) they said “we have to believe what he tells us”

Point is this is only possible with all his family being complicit. The same family who encouraged him to go to court to go for 50/50 as they “are his kids too”. They assist him by every means possible to avoid paying.

Once he was assessed at £150 per year and he put in a mandatory reconsideration, which was upheld and he got £0 again.

CMS are a toothless tiger. UC are useless.
How can anyone think that the combination of these two departments against men who are utterly determined can work I don’t know.

Failing that the really determined can go bankrupt. Unsurprisingly CMS debt is not a priority debt there either.

Not really, I worked bloody hard and it was a struggle every day. I do have empathy for people who are disabled and can't work, but choosing to not work full time when there are plenty of childcare options available shouldn't be allowed.

Another good point a PP raised and I forgot.

On top of being useless at actually getting money from a father that doesn't want to pay, CMS decreases payments if the NRP moves in with someone with kids/has more children in a new relationship.

Yeah. I don’t get it.

My ex moved in with a woman with 3 children, very quickly after I left him and was over the moon that he could pay less for his own child. Even though he said her ex was paying maintenance for her children (my ex is a knob and a massive over-sharer).

I don’t see how it should make a difference to paying towards your own child.

But that needs people to want that change for everyone - including your brother whose ex apparently spends it all on nails and your mate whose ex shafted him in the divorce.

This is a lot of the problem, people want it to apply to the faceless, nameless people who are not paying the cost of raising their children and decreeing that the tax payer shouldn't be footing the bill, yet see things very differently when it's someone within their circle who is doing the same thing, the NRP then becomes the victim in the situation and don't think those rules should apply then.
The son who doesn't pay is supported to not pay, the brother is encouraged to find ways to dodge it, the mate is sympathised with at the pub. There isn't political will because there isn't social will, we can't have it all ways, those we don't know about subject to rules to save tax payers money, but then thinking those we do know, who are subject to the rules, are being treated unfairly.

@Mydogisamassivetwat

Its not a 'could'.

There are forums full of men discussing how to best manipulate the loopholes.

Cms are powerless. Getting these guys to court will take over a year. If you've got the time and will.

You must be overjoyed to have seen the back of yours.

I certainly was.

And yeah, I didn’t go through CMS. Absolutely useless and ex h had the money, resources and contacts to have pulled off all manner of scams so as not to pay anything if I had done.

The older I get, the more I dislike men to be honest. Imagine being that much of a cunt that you’d waste so much time and energy trying to get out of paying towards your own child.

Getting these guys to court will take over a year.

This is why we need societal change so that CMS can be pushed to use their powers that don’t need court.

Its quicker, it’s more effective (no time to hide money) and when used it often makes men make arrangements with their exes because they are feart if it happening again.

One of my most satisfying cases working there was pushing to be allowed to take a one off payment from a guys bank account. He had a LOT of money and had put a lot of time into dodging. He was furious. But he started paying regularly after it. It works

I agree that there's no social will. If I mention to anyone I know that my exh doesn't pay reliable maintenance, they don't care, the subject gets changed or I'm told I'm "lucky" because my exh has the dc 2 weekends a month. My best friend said it was good that my exh "helps out" by looking after the dc sometimes in school holidays even though he only works term time only! She also said that I just need to accept he won't pay, why should I accept it? Why should I just put up and shut up because it's uncomfortable for some people?

Even on MN I got told not to talk about it to people in case "they think you're asking them for money".

People don't care and won't care until it affects them. In the meantime they get to sit back and pat themselves on the back because they made better choices on who to create a family with.

Plenty of childcare options? That's hilarious. Wraparound care is.not available in all schools and where it is, gives you 7:30am - 6pm 5 oit.of 7 daus a week. Loads and loads of jobs require uou to work outside of those hours.

Disabled people should feel grateful at being allowed to exist anywhere?

Disabled people often lead much less social lives than able bodied. When you moved it is likely that you had a job, sought out social activities to meet new people, were physicallly and financially able to travel back to visit friends and family etc.

Can you not see how the experience is likely to create a lot of suffering? Advice like create a routine, get out and meet people etc just aren't possible in the same way that they are for able bodied people. Vulnerable people moved away from their support networks fall through the cracks.

That sounds good. Wonder why they stopped.

Plenty of childcare options? That's hilarious. Wraparound care is.not available in all schools and where it is, gives you 7:30am - 6pm 5 oit.of 7 daus a week. Loads and loads of jobs require uou to work outside of those hours.

Yep and in my children's school there are huge waiting lists for wraparound care. My children were on the waiting list for 2 days at after school club for 18 months - I applied for my ds2's place before his school place. It would be impossible to sort at a month's notice if for example I changed jobs.

Because it is ridiculously expensive to deliver?

Because the debt owed to the Secretary of State got so high it was decided that something needed to be done.

So they said the RP’s could just keep it… keep the money they know so many don’t pay.

That tells you all about the attitudes to maintenance and NRP’s getting away with not paying

It was because so many people owed money and didn’t pay the debt got ridiculous and something had to be done.

not implement a decent system, obviously, instead they just washed their hands of the problem.

And no government since has done differently

For reference, cms statistics show there were 280,000 “collect and pay” orders in q2 this year. There were lots more in the direct pay category (around £700k) and then there is all the private arrangements…

presumably it’s cheaper to pay benefits to single parents and not reduce it by cms amount than it would be to asses all those private arrangements and chase the men who are avoiding even the collect and pay option.

Has she got a mortgage, pension? Ultimately once the kids leave home she'll have to have something in place to continue the same lifestyle.

Ever heard of a childminder? Many many nurseries open for longer than 0730 to 1800. Some childminders do overnights. Maybe they could get one of the many hundreds of jobs that aren't shift work or out of office hours? You are being very disingenuous

Your wrong. Child Maitenance stops after your child's 18th birthday.

You are also wrong. Child maintenance can continue until 20 as long as the child stays in approved education or training.

It's not remotely disingenuous. You cannot assume that plenty of wraparound childcare is available. Have you not seen what's happened to the sector?

The person paying child maintenance has already paid income tax on that money, and had to reduce the amount of benefits they are entitled to. What you are suggesting is akin to it being taxed twice.