AIBU to think my ex should pay more child maintenance when he earns £720k a year?

[Pashpash24]

I’ll try to keep this as short as possible while giving some back story.

I was with my ex-partner for four years. We had a son together, but he walked out before he was born. He saw him a few times as a newborn, but I had asked that he didn’t bring his new partner. My son was six weeks old when he turned up at my door with her, even though I’d said it was too soon.

He took me to court saying she should be allowed to meet him. The court agreed it was too soon and suggested maybe when the baby was older.

Because of that, he told me he would never see his son again. I was devastated and said fine, she can meet him, because I didn’t want him to walk away. But he still refused and never saw him again.

For six years, he had no contact — no visits, no messages, nothing. The only thing he did was pay child maintenance. It was a decent amount (£1,277.50 a month), and I never asked for more.

He went on to have three more children with his now wife. I just got on with life until one day my son came out of school and asked, “I must have a dad, right?” I’d never told him about his father because I didn’t want him to feel abandoned.

When he started asking more questions, I texted his dad to say I was going to tell him the truth — I wasn’t going to raise him on a lie. I’d messaged over the years, even sent photos, and he’d read them on WhatsApp but never replied. So I didn’t expect a response this time either.

Surprisingly, he replied and said maybe it was time to meet. This was when my son was six (he’s now nearly nine). In the last three years, he’s probably met him in person about 10 times. He calls roughly once every 10 days, which I think is poor — it should’ve progressed a lot more by now.

Anyway, to the point. I recently logged into my Child Maintenance account after receiving an unusual notification. It showed his salary: £720,000 a year.

I’ve always been paid £1,277.50 a month because that’s what CMS caps it at. He could earn £1 million a week and I’d still receive that same amount — you have to go to court for any increase.

Would he be able to afford more? Absolutely. I know it’s a decent amount, but he only pays it because that’s the legal minimum CMS tells him to.

I’m self-employed and work part-time so my son can do after-school activities — he’s football mad and trains/plays four times a week. I’m essentially raising him alone; my dad moved 40 miles away, and I have no relationship with my mum. I rarely get a break, but that’s been the reality since the start.

I’ve never asked for an increase, but life is much more expensive now. £1,277 doesn’t go as far as it did six years ago, and £720,000 a year is a huge income.

To put it into perspective — CMS only calculates maintenance on a maximum salary of £156,000 a year. My ex earns over four times that, but I still only get the amount they’d set for £156k — just over 2% of his actual income. Unless I go to court for a “top-up order”, that’s all I’ll ever get.

AIBU to ask for more?

I'd say he was paying a decent amount to be honest, no kid costs more than that a month, and if they do, you need to get a grip.

What does that mean? 'To run a 9-year-old'? To what standard? To the standard he has just enough to eat and no more? That he has outings and clubs once a month? Twice? Which should he do? Who decides that?

What if he's into an expensive hobby? Should he stop doing it? Or skip a meal to pay for it? How many holidays is 'enough' - or 'too many'?

What about 'running' a 10-year-old? Or 14? THEN would you decree that the dad should contribute more? They eat more, their clothes and tastes are often more expensive.

People are very shortsighted if they think that putting food on his plate today is the only concern for a child. Saving for high school, uni, help with deposits and opportunities in life need money. And his father is in a position to do that, this isn't just about the next Asda run and an equal share of the electric bill.

OP isn't asking for half his salary, or for him to buy her Northamptonshire. She's simply asking for a fair portion of his salary. If he earned less, she'd get less - but that's not the situation here.

Its irrelevant how much a child may cost to cover living costs and who are you comparing to

the child/children are expected to live to a similar standard as their nrp of high earners and the nrp should be paying maintenance to this sort of level

its disappointing that so many woman on MN of all places set the bar so low for men to support their children

YANBU.

Why on earth is CM capped?!

Crikey, the bitterness from some of you… I can taste it through the screen.

Whether the father ‘wanted’ the child is irrelevant. He’s here now and by the sounds of it thriving thanks to his mum’s care and hard work, and with help from the financial contribution from the father. That 2% financial contribution that the law requires him to pay. Except, he’s actually paying 0.2% because his earnings are substantially higher than the CMS system accounts for. Not unreasonable then to expect him to pay 2% of his actual earnings. He’ll still have plenty left.

We should all want children to have the best start in life they can, because that benefits us all in the long run. I don’t understand the race to the bottom where, because some of you had children with men with no money, OP must work all hours and have her son in childcare before and after school just so a man came keep even more of the 33k a month he already has. Stupid.

OP I’d investigate this with a family law solicitor and make a decision, and don’t tell anyone whatever you choose because there are some venal mothers out there who’d rather tear you down than see you or your son succeed. Honestly baffling but there you go.

I’d ask him, you’re not gonna lose anything. Of course he should be paying more.

The father is the father, regardless of whether he wants to be or not. It is just a biological fact and a responsibility.

You need to focus on what's best for your son. The single best thing your ex can do is foster a strong relationship with him, and that's what you should be encouraging. If you start trying to get more money there's a good chance your relationship with your ex will deteriorate and that could well have a knock on effect on how often he speaks to or sees your son. (I'm not saying it's fair but it is a fact.) Don't let that happen.
You've actually got plenty of money, as far as I can see. So swallow your fury and accept that yes it's not fair but life's not fair.
Sorry to sound harsh but I've been there and asked for more (seeing my ex's second lot of kids go to posh schools/have lovely holidays when we were really struggling) and I know how it ends.

I haven't read all of OP. Just skimmed through. I usually would agree with you but I think OP is being unreasonable. She gets a huge amount and you would think she would have a mortgage not renting with that CMS per month. Or have saved a good deposit for a house.

Life isn't fair and it's really shit it falls on the mother. However OP needs to take the positives from her situation. It could be worse!.

Don't know what the part time comments are about. Irrelevant I'm part time too.

Pointless having an opinion if you don’t know the facts.

or maybe just doesn't fit your narrative..

😆,👍

I think you need to instruct a good solicitor who is experienced in higher net worth individuals. £720k per annum is a huge salary and that is without pension contributions. He could be earning another £1M per annum and putting that into his pension. Any decent father would surely be wanting his child to be having the best possible child hood and should be funding this according to his financial needs. IE £1200 pcm is literally nothing. It is less than nursery fees
for A month (to put it into context of a HNWI)

good luck x

Your situation has played on my mind all day @Pashpash24, and I’m just appalled that a man earning that much hasn’t just bought a house for you and his son to live in so you don’t have to pay rent. He could easily afford it. It’s disgusting that all he’s paying is the govt mandated minimum. The bar is set so low.

I’m not sure why he should buy the OP a house. Can you explain further?

Just wanted to come on here to tell you, that you don’t deserve some of the slandering and unkind comments you've received on here. Youre well in your right to look into this - Life's expensive, and it takes two people to make a child last time i checked.

Because he left her with a baby to care for single handed, he earns over £700,000 a year and can afford it. @Pashpash24 is raising his child, whilst he and his new wife & family are living in luxury. It’s incredibly difficult to work/earn enough to live on when you are a lone parent with no family/practical support, so to compensate her, and provide for his child he should buy a two bedroom house for them to live in, so she at least hasn’t got to worry about paying rent, meaning she can focus on making sure their son healthy, happy and well cared for.

I don't know why you're getting so much hate.

Although You're getting more money that most people get for CMS, I think that the fact that he makes that much money and he rarely sees his son, he should try to be more fair to him, to give him a similar quality of life to his other children. That could be setting a trust fund for when he's older, paying private education, etc. He's already at disadvantage compared to his other children.

I would discuss it with a lawyer and act depending on my chances of success.

OP you would likely get more if you took it to court. Look at Kyle Walker for an example. Is he likely to be playing for some years yet, or near to retirement?

And there we have it. I was wondering why you were being so bitter and so overinvested in defending your opinion - you couldn’t have the number of children you would’ve ‘loved’, so you’re projecting all that onto the OP because in your eyes, she chose to have a baby she couldn’t afford regardless, whereas you’re such a morally superior, strong, independent woman, you didn’t make that choice. Well done you. We’re all very proud.

OP, ignore all these women hating women on here. It isn’t a race to the bottom. Raise the bar higher. The child should receive more money from his incredibly wealthy father. The suggestions of a trust fund in his name are very sensible and entirely reasonable.

Lmao

"Because you aren't a faux victim after someone else's cash, you must be bitter about those that are"

What a crock of shit 😁. I also want a Bentley Bentayga, but we can't afford one until we've finished the house. I mean we could get one because fuck the consequences of debt and then blame anyone else that we've got no money, but then that would just make me "bitter and projecting". If only we could all fake not being able to work and pay for our own children because "there's a swimming class at 4.30pm"

Pointing out someone has simply got everything they asked for (a kid with no dad because she banked on that being the way to keep the dad attached to her, but turns out no) is now getting exactly what she signed up for. Making it dad's fault that her child was unwanted but she chose to have it because it's now biting her on the arse.

Maybe not such a brilliant idea to decide you're having a kid when the other parent doesn't want it, if you can't be accountable for your choice.

God you sound really horrible. Calling the child ‘unwanted’ and ‘it’. Really nasty. He’s clearly very much wanted and loved by his mum and has had an on off relationship with the dad. OP was with the man for four years and he walked out when she was pregnant, yet somehow you’re making her out to be some opportunist.

Is it only women who can decide a conception is unwanted? An unwanted pregnancy isn't "nasty". Ask the millions of women each year who decide just that.

"It" is simply gender neutral. A generic baby. Him. Her. It. Them. Take your pick. Somewhat clutching at straws to find things to be outraged by now... Although seemingly not at choosing to have a child with someone who states from the start they won't be involved, then crying "abandonment" because turns out it's shit for the child...

Edit because she decided to continue with a pregnancy knowing that he didn't want the child. The child wasn't even born when they split

If he was to buy a house it should be for the son only, maybe in some kind of trust that the mum can live in until son 18.

You’re actually making this posters’ point for them.