Ex pissed off im changing childcare arrangements. AIBU?

[Childcare101sans]

Background (I have friends on here who will guess who I am with this info - please don’t out me!)

-I left my ex husband after I had an emotional affair with a woman
-I am now live with and in a LT relationship with her
-Ex inherited a house 6-7 years ago which we sold and we bought the family home which he lives in and up for sale
-he see’s the kids 2 hours after work twice a week and every other weekend
-when we broke up, because he earns little, I asked for 50% of the house, will count that as him providing for his kids and he doesn’t need to pay maintenance

Ive just found out I have a new job, I have moved up in my career rapidly and will be getting a higher paid banding.

It means I’m less flexible and have to be in the office 9-5 M-F

We currently and have never had childcare on Fridays, so I collect our primary age son from school every Friday and either keep him if it’s my weekend with the kids or drop him to his dads later if it’s his weekend.

Ive asked my ex if he will collect him from school on his Fridays and I will have to somehow figure out my Fridays since I will be starting this new job.

He’s gone mad.
He hasn’t said yes or no.
He’s just said “so I lose out on work and money while you go to work for more money?” (He’s self employed)

I feel like I’m providing for the three kids on a day to day basis and 4 hours less a month for him isn’t that much of a hit.

I live rurally and I’ve been searching for 2 weeks for alternative options.
No after school clubs.
No friends available for that time.
No other childminders or teens of friends that could help. My older kids work/don’t drive unable to help.
Im still trying to find alternatives but failing.

Am I being unreasonable changing the goal posts to benefit the fact that I have a new and better paid job?

The inheritance didn’t wholly finance their house. Both were named on the deeds and OP paid the mortgage. Of course she was entitled to 50% - the house is a joint marital asset.if her ex wanted to protect his inheritance he should have kept it separate to joint finances.

Will have to disagree sorry.

Maintenance yes of course. Half equity no if the bulk came from his inheritance relatively recently. The fact that he was/is a low earner could actually work against her.

Why do people keep incorrectly saying this?

If the arrangement mutually agreed that his time started when she dropped the child off after work, then the Friday until the agreed drop off time is her time, not his. She wasn't "doing him a favour", she was looking after her child on her mutually agreed time.

She wants to change the arrangement to suit her. He doesn't have to change his plans or agree to take the children during the time that is currently hers.

OP should not have taken on a job over her hours without having sorted out her childcare first.

I didn’t say she had. I said it takes an average of five years to pluck up the courage to leave - longer if you’ve been in an abusive relationship. I didn’t say the OP had been abused.

The accusation of lack of morals isn't warranted? She cheated. I'd say the accusation was very warranted.

What PP said is that her ex inherited a house which he sold, and with the proceeds, bought a family home with her on the deeds. It sounds like there was no mortgage to pay?

Inheritance is a red herring in divorce cases. They had a long marriage and it paid for the joint family home, so it might be seen indeed as a joint asset. However, the date it was bought vs date of separation could influence the outcome.

A short time between the purchase of the house and separation could very well see a judge decide that it was money intended for him, and it isn't being used as a family home. He did the right thing by staying there. Of OP only lived there a short time, it might not be as straight forward as she thinks. And that's without taking her potential pension into consideration.

But the only reason he doesn't pay maintenance is because the house was split 50/50 - that was their agreement.

OP says it was an emotional affair. It may have started out as friendship and developed, ending up as the thing that made her realise she was gay, and the catalyst for leaving. Probably a lot more nuanced than if she’d just had an affair with another man. But even assuming the marriage had no other problems, once the realisation that she was gay dawned, the marriage was likely doomed anyway.

Which is why 50/50 is not unreasonable in my view. OP has 90% of the responsibility for the children so why should she not have 50% of the joint marital assets to house herself and her children.

OP clearly said in her updates that the inheritance didn’t pay for all of the joint marital property. There is a mortgage which she pays. She said that once everything is paid off they will each get around £200,000.

It depends on what time his custody day runs. If it technically starts at the end of the school day, then you are perfectly fine to stop covering his time.

if it’s unclear what time his time starts, I would count backwards from when his time ends in 24 hour increments.

OP says it was an emotional affair with a woman. That could easily have been a friendship which spilled over and ended up being the thing that made her realise she was gay, and may well have been the catalyst for her to leave. No point in continuing the marriage if your spouse isn’t the sex you want. Nothing to do with lack of morals and everything to do with the discovery that you’re gay and coming to terms with the implications and consequences of that discovery. And a world apart from just going out and having an affair with another man.

What? Who dictates that his time has to be in 24 hour blocks? Or that it "technically" starts at any other time than the agreed start date (when she drops the children off at his after work)

His time starts at the the mutually agreed drop of time (after he finishes work) and ends at whatever the mutually agreed time is for him to drop them back to her.

Therefore, as per their agreement, it is her responsibility to look after the child/ren from the end of school on a Friday until she drops them to him after work. That is her time, as per their prior agreement.

This cannot be unilaterally changed. It's reasonable to ask him if he is able to change arrangements. It's unreasonable for OP to make herself unavailable on her agreed time without having arranged suitable childcare and expect him to rearrange/reduce his working hours to cover time that it was agreed was her time.

Nothing else is relevant to the question the OP asked.

OK so an affair not great and you acknowledge that.
However op is asking if she is unreasonable to ask ex to collect his children from school on his custody days or organise childcare.
I don't understand why people don't think he is responsible for that on his days?
Yes he hasn't had to so far as op has managed to.cover it. But that is no longer possible so he now needs to be responsible for his days.
Op will organise childcare for the 2 Fridays a week she has custody the ex needs to organise his 2 weeks

It could be argued that the ex has had extra help from the op for those 2 Fridays.

Regardless of when, how or why they split parents are responsible for the chn on their custody days. If that means they collect from school or organise suitable childcare then that's what they need to do.

Questioning op about how assets were/are being divided in her divorce case is neither here nor there, this is purely about whether her ex should be responsible for his kids on his custody days

Probably because it doesn’t seem that Friday the whole day is dad’s time. It’s been for a long time dad’s time once dad’s finished work.

His contact time though actions has set it as the evening. Mum drops off Friday morning, mum picks up Friday afternoon, dad finished work and then child arrives to dads. Dad doesn’t even fetch child from mums so make it seem more favour ish.

If the child is hurt during the day on a Friday, which parent would be the first contact and collect them that’s whose time it is tbh.

Again, they are not "his custody days". Why do people keep saying this?

The arrangement they have made is that his period of custody starts from after he gets back from work on alternate Fridays. The period of time in question is OPs custody time as per their existing arrangement, not his custody time.

OP has made herself unavailable on her custody time and is now expecting him to drop hours to cover her time. It is unreasonable for her to have done this unilaterally without explicitly asking for his agreement first.

Perhaps she wishes she'd never agreed to provide custody up until he finished work, but she did. So it is her responsibility to cover that period.

I think we can all agree that it would be nice if he was willing and able to do more. But he isn't. So it is up to OP to arrange childcare or make herself available to cover her agreed custody time.

It’s a custody day of 24 hours because that is how child maintenance would be calculated. It is based on overnights, but presumes responsibility for adjacent daytime as justification for the cost calculation. A sleeping child is relatively cheap, it’s when they are awake and need to be fed, clothed, transported, and watched every moment that they are truly expensive.

I disagree. The op said she would cover those hours for him because she could, but now she no longer can. So dad can step up and sort himself out

If it was his responsibility wouldn’t he also be responsible for getting the kids to school on Fridays?

There is no child maintenance arrangement, so irrelevant how it would be calculated if they did.

The mutually agreed ongoing arrangement is that OP has custody until after his work every other Friday and he takes custody when the child his dropped to him after work. This is arrangement and it puts OP responsible for the period from school pick up on those Fridays until she drops them to him after work. This is the status quo and cannot be unilaterally changed by one party without the other party agreeing to it.

OP has a responsibly to her child up until the agreed drop off time after her ex gets home from work. Therefore she needs to be available and look after her child for that period or arrange other suitable alternative childcare.

Where do you get that from? Why are they "his hours"? They are her hours because she agreed she'd cover them (making them hers) and because by custom she has always done them (making them hers). He's never done them, he's never agreed to do them, they're not his hours.

The ongoing arrangement is that OP has the child until after his work on every other Friday. Her custody ends at the agreed hand over time, not before.

Should he do more? Probably yes. But that's not and has never been the mutually agreed arrangement that is in place.

You left him for someone else. Of course he isn't going to do you any favours.

What’s that got to do with anything ? They are his children as well. In scenarios where the husband has an affair and leaves, the woman is still expected to step up with childcare - in many cases with little or no input from the ex who’s off and enjoying himself with his fling. OP isn’t doing that - she’s taken responsibility for 90% of the childcare. He could step up with a bit more if he really wanted to.

If this were true, then given op gets them up and to school on that morning then surely they should be her responsibility for those 24hours?