AIBU about paying CMS on maternity leave

[Odellio]

Are we (DH and I) being unreasonable in thinking that CMS should still be paid even if non-resident parent is on maternity leave?

SC live with us, their Mum pays DH via CMS, collect and pay method because of history of non-payment. It looks like CMS have decided payments to continue on weekly basis now she is down to SMP. She has applied for reconsideration of their decision to not pay.

DH never stopped providing financially for SC when we had another child, so we don’t see why she should have to stop paying CMS. Surely if you can’t provide for your existing children, don’t have more?

We are expecting another child and again, SC will not go without from DH financially because of this. She is having full year off on maternity leave whilst I’ve had/having to keep mine to 9 months both times for us to manage financially as a family. So maybe I’m just resentful of this fact.

CMS goes on non-resident parent earnings so regardless of why their earnings have dropped the amount due will drop.

If they return part time that will impact you too unfortunately.

How can she pay when she has a reduced income or no income. Surely what she pays is based on earnings.

I agree with you morally and where I live she would still be expected to pay, but I’m not in the UK.

Your DH needs to stop having children! If you’re so reliant on CMS (I know very well that it’s not just about receiving it but about the NRP paying it, however it sounds like you ARE reliant on it) then it’s incredibly irresponsible to have another DC. They’re not accessories!

To clarify the CMS calculation has been done on her reduced income and she is challenging to pay nothing.

Yanbu to expect her to pay the reduced amount just as an NRP would if on any form of benefits.

However, if she is off for a year, presumably there will be 3 months of zero pay so CMS would have nothing to collect then.

Do Not get me started on this, As the resident parent and it’s never been an option for me to shrug my shoulders and say sorry I can’t afford to feed you this week kiddo
You just have to find the bloody money whether it goes on your credit card whether you borrow it.
You simply have to find it.

We are not reliant on CMS payments, as I said SC have not gone without financially from DH even with a reduced household income from my maternity leave/s.

We’ve also had many years of non-payment of CMS, and provided just fine for SC without her contributions.

This is more of a moral question of should she pay for her existing children.

She shouldn’t have had another child if she couldn’t afford to keep supporting the one she has already that lives with you.

YANBU

@ButteredRadish no, the mother needs to pay for her child. The DH in this scenario is paying for his children and has every right to have more.

Yes I agree with you morally. Sadly that’s not how it works and it sucks for the rp when decisions are made that affect you financially without your input or control

@Profpudding This is exactly my thoughts. DH would never opt out of providing for them, but you literally can’t as the resident parent, you have to find a way to make it work.

Then she needs to pay the amount calculated by the cms

I do understand that with the method she pays that it’s based on earnings, and during this time period her earnings have dropped.

However, many couples save up for their parental leave to ensure they can pay their mortgages, bills and financial commitments. So why should this be any different. I would never dream of taking 3 months unpaid if it meant I could contribute nothing towards supporting my children.

I get that’s not how the system works, but feels unfair she can opt out.

Many (or perhaps most) non resident parents do what they can to pay as little as possible. Mostly that applies to self-employed men.

The UK system is flawed and doesn’t use the teeth it does have available to it.

When men have another child and reduce their payments they are arseholes and should carry on paying

when men go part time or have a pay cut and reduce their payments they are arseholes and should carry on paying

Why is the child not living with mother?

Yes she should but her smp will count income so it will be done on that amount

plus the cms will prob go down to her child who lives with you . as she has had another child

this is obv unfair but legal

You’d have to ask her for a deeper answer, but on the face of it - she had an affair and moved away to be with him.

Not really any closer to knowing whether IABU as vote is reasonably split. Surprised that so many people think it’s okay to not plan to financially provided for your child for an expected and planned period of leave as you would with everything else on mat leave.

Of course she should, if she was the resident parent she wouldn’t (well hopefully) decide not to feed, clothe her children etc during maternity leave.

It’s an unfair system. Morally she shouldn’t have more children and then stop financially supporting the ones she has but many do including resident parents. I have a half sister who is 11 years younger than me and when she was born us older kids went without coats, were hungry etc. Children are so expensive that I personally think you shouldn’t have more if you can’t afford it but people are allowed to and they do. The parents rights seem to trump what is best for the existing children.

She should be paying based on her earnings as is the rules so if she is earning nothing then she’ll pay nothing. I did think that deductions weren’t allowed from stat maternity pay but I’m not sure on that. It would be the same on long term sick etc. just one of those things. You can’t force her to do anything unfortunately

I’m not sure many people think it is OK; most posts are saying “yes, this is technically correct” rather than “yes, this is morally right”