Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To ask why EXH doesn’t have to pay maintenance?

27 replies

whyisthisthecase · 15/05/2025 09:58

NC’d as recently started a thread with the same info and don’t want it to be outing.

This is more me asking the world than CMS as I know they have a formula they use to calculate it.

I have 2DC with EXH. They live with me and DH and go to ExH EOW and some nights during school holidays (maybe 8 in the summer broken up, 3/4 over Xmas period and a longer weekend in half term).

DH and I do everything practical and financial for DC. Everything. EXH wouldn’t know the names of their teachers, even their school would be a stretch, contributes nothing financially, doesn’t know or care what clubs (that we pay for and take them to) they do etc. Obviously that’s just parent stuff that you do as standard, but he does none of it. I’ve never stopped ExH with anything but he’s just not interested, he wants to pick them up and have them 2 nights a fortnight and that’s all. Fine. But how is it possible in this country that he doesn’t have to pay any maintenance? CMS have said that he doesn’t need to. Okay, so he, as their father, doesn’t need to but then as a result, I have to pay for everything? Obviously I do and I don’t resent paying for my kids, they’re everything to me but it’s the principle! How can a father who’s on the birth certificates not be legally responsible to pay anything?

So as to not drip feed, EXH doesn’t work, claims UC and gets daily living PIP. He lied heavily during the PIP interview 6 years ago when we were together, it was shocking. He lives with his family and they happily let him sponge/sub him. He left us in the shit financially when we were still together by quitting his job one day because he didn’t want to do it anymore, couldn’t be bothered, and hasn’t worked since- that was 7 years ago, I had to scramble and find a job, we had no savings. Anyway, the point is, how can he not be legally responsible for paying anything towards his two children? Why do the government/CMS not take money from his benefits before they’re paid to him for CMS?

OP posts:
2024onwardsandup · 15/05/2025 09:59

Because men can abandon their children and no one cares

Original poster
whyisthisthecase · 15/05/2025 10:04

@2024onwardsandupbut this is the thing, he hasn’t, he still wants to see them, just not contribute in any way financially to their upbringing. It’d make more sense in my head if he just didn’t want to see them so felt he didn’t need to pay, but he does want to see them but still doesn’t think he is responsible financially!! Of course, them having a relationship with their dad is more important than money any day of the week, but how can he look them in the face knowing he doesn’t provide for them at all??

OP posts:
PussInBin20 · 15/05/2025 10:19

It’s a fair question. I don’t know the answer but I agree with you totally.

It’s like if both parents work but the woman is the RP, she is responsible for paying ALL of the childcare, that allows her to work. But the exH just carries on, doing his job with no responsibility whatsoever.

I wonder what would happen if more men were the RP with the ex-wives just parenting when they like. Most likely the kids would suffer.

What it boils down to is a lot of men are just not bothered about being a parent.

NImumconfused · 15/05/2025 10:40

I absolutely agree it's unfair, but I assume the government's logic behind it is that benefits for a single person are only supposed to be enough for them to just about survive on (and that's debatable), therefore there isn't anything spare to pay CMS? Presumably he can't claim any child related benefits.

HaudYerWheeshtYaWeeBellend · 15/05/2025 10:43

Hopefully with the new PIP rules , he won’t qualify for help and will be forced to work.

ARichtGoodDram · 15/05/2025 10:48

He must have a priority debt like forward payment or council tax or something already coming off his benefits.

There's only a certain amount they're allowed to take and, disgustingly, CMS isn't a priority payment.

You should ask CMS why he doesn't have to pay the flat rate for those on benefits though and they should explain why they can't take it. He should be paying £7 a week.

TeenLifeMum · 15/05/2025 10:56

I think there should be a minimum amount regardless and not paying should be classed as criminal with fines attached. Sorry op, it sucks.

AnotherNightOwl · 15/05/2025 10:56

You said in your previous Christmas thread, that the £7 a week isn’t worth it.

Obviously, morally he should be paying for his children but he’s clearly deadbeat Dad. Your children will see that when they get older.

AndorTheRelentless · 15/05/2025 10:57

Why do the government/CMS not take money from his benefits before they’re paid to him for CMS?

Because the benefits paid are paid at the lowest level you need to survive, so they cannot take money away as that will indicate there are surplus funds - unless he claims for having dc.

ARichtGoodDram · 15/05/2025 11:00

AndorTheRelentless · 15/05/2025 10:57

Why do the government/CMS not take money from his benefits before they’re paid to him for CMS?

Because the benefits paid are paid at the lowest level you need to survive, so they cannot take money away as that will indicate there are surplus funds - unless he claims for having dc.

They would normally take the £7 a week from his benefits.

He must have priority debts for them not to do so.

ARichtGoodDram · 15/05/2025 11:02

TeenLifeMum · 15/05/2025 10:56

I think there should be a minimum amount regardless and not paying should be classed as criminal with fines attached. Sorry op, it sucks.

There is a minimum amount that people on benefits have to pay - £7 a week - but they can only take so much from benefits.

So if he's got an overpayment, or owes council tax, or anything else that involves owing the government money that is classed as a priority debt and comes off before CMS payments are considered.

Original poster
whyisthisthecase · 15/05/2025 11:13

@ARichtGoodDram he definitely doesn’t pay council tax. I know I have no way of knowing re debt but he’s not had to pay anything since I opened this claim 3 years ago.

OP posts:
Original poster
whyisthisthecase · 15/05/2025 11:18

@AndorTheRelentlessthank you, I didn’t think of that to be honest so I appreciate your response massively.

OP posts:
ARichtGoodDram · 15/05/2025 11:20

whyisthisthecase · 15/05/2025 11:13

@ARichtGoodDram he definitely doesn’t pay council tax. I know I have no way of knowing re debt but he’s not had to pay anything since I opened this claim 3 years ago.

You should chase CMS then, on benefits he should be paying £7 a week.

Depending on your MP some are worth getting involved.

It was a thing when I (thankfully briefly) worked for CMS for difficult NRPs on benefits to deliberately have a debt so they didn't have to pay. A lot of them grudged that £7 to a disgusting level.

ARichtGoodDram · 15/05/2025 11:24

The most they can take from a single UC claim is around £60 a minth. So if he's paying more than £32 for debts (I'm trying to think of all the things it could be - overpayments, council tax and court fines were the most common) then they won't be able to take anything for CMS

They also don't take part payments - he's either deemed able to afford the £7 a week or he's not at all.

KT1113 · 15/05/2025 12:01

As someone else said, he should be on a flat rate of £7/week. There is a list of things UC can deduct 'at source' from benefits (annoyingly I can't find it now) but CMS is fairly low down in the priority list which is daft.

Croquembouchiere · 15/05/2025 12:04

If he isn't working, why does he only see them EOW? He should be able to do a lot more for them

Changeissmall · 15/05/2025 12:09

Many men have abandoned their children though all of history. Hence the saying ‘left holding the baby’.
With the benefits system and women’s right to work the moral side got clouded and many men see children as a responsibility of women or the state.
Women used to be terrified of getting pregnant outside marriage and chose husbands carefully! Now we just get on with it.

femfemlicious · 15/05/2025 12:09

I would rather have nothing than £7 a week.

cadburyegg · 15/05/2025 12:17

It’ll be because he has them EOW. The £7 a week only applies if he doesn’t have them at all. CMS have told me that my exh doesn’t have to pay maintenance either because some of his income is from benefits and because he will have them EOW and a bit more in the holidays.

So similar situation. It’s shit. Suddenly my exh decides to go self employed and claim benefits and doesn’t understand why I’ve told him I can’t pay for everything on my own.

Wonderberry · 15/05/2025 12:25

I thought you would be entitled to a small amount of CMS from his benefits, is that not correct?

TerrifiedPassenger · 15/05/2025 13:43

I'm just in the throes of applying for student finance for my daughter. It flashes up on the screen 5 messages along the lines of We will debit your wages as soon a you're earning over £x .

If student finance can do this, then surely there can be some sort of lifelong IOU that triggers funds to come straight from absent and not-paying parents via their national insurance number/tax records right up to pension age and beyond?

Blondeshavemorefun · 15/05/2025 13:48

If he doesn’t work then on benefits , cms have a set standard rate

for me with one child it’s £7 a week

whoop

so i get £28 a month

pathetic amount 🙄

so sounds uou will get similar

Blondeshavemorefun · 15/05/2025 13:52

cadburyegg · 15/05/2025 12:17

It’ll be because he has them EOW. The £7 a week only applies if he doesn’t have them at all. CMS have told me that my exh doesn’t have to pay maintenance either because some of his income is from benefits and because he will have them EOW and a bit more in the holidays.

So similar situation. It’s shit. Suddenly my exh decides to go self employed and claim benefits and doesn’t understand why I’ve told him I can’t pay for everything on my own.

That’s not true

dd was staying 2 nights a week with her dad

isn’t currently due to circumstances

but 2 nights meant I got £7 a week

if he didn’t pay it they would take from his uc before he gets it and cost him a% more like £32 a month instead of £28 - but I would get think £26 so 2 less for me

Dweetfidilove · 15/05/2025 13:56

It is shit @whyisthisthecase , but children are the responsibility of women for many reasons:

*You chose a shit man to have kids with.
*You'll get benefits to help maintain the kids.
*You should get off your lazy ass and work all the hours God sends to feed your children.
*Your husband should share the responsibility of raising Mr Deadbeat's kids.
*He has himself and in some cases other/people's children to maintain.
*The government (some feckless fathers themselves or married to feckless fathers) have no will to effectively chase maintenance or hold men accountable.

All excuses you see thrown around when it comes to holding men accountable. As for priority debts - imagine what would happen of you decided to clear your debts before feeding your children 🤔.

As I said - it's shit and I'm sorry you're dealing with this useless lump.

Swipe left for the next trending thread