AIBU to think my ex DH is being reasonably generous, or am I being taken for a ride, as a friend is telling me

[Writer034]

This is a money one (apologies for length, I don't want to drip feed). I'd really like some thoughts around whether my ex DH is doing enough. I usually think he is, but there's someone in my life who thinks he's really not, and sometimes I feel conflicted.

I split up with ex DH in 2017, we share DD (15) and DS (13) on a 50/50 basis. Since the split, my ex DH has been paying £500pm in child support, which about 6 months ago was increased to £600pm to account for cost of living increase.

(I realise some will say 50/50 should mean no child support, but I have actually sought legal advice on this and apparently this isn't necessarily true. If you want to know more about what I was adviced, drop me a DM)

There were no assets to divide at the time of the divorce. We didn't use solicitors, there is no maintenance, only this - completely voluntary - child support. When we did consent order for finances, for reasons I won't go into I didn't seek legal advice and I didn't ask anything from him, he has a small pension from having been in the army for 6 years when he was young, and a business which we started and ran for some years together, but realistically it only became really profitable in 2021. I didn't ask for anything, only for child support to continue. His business has for at least 2-3 years now been bringing about £350k per annum (and the two years before that definitely over £100k). He drives a Porche, has now bought a nice detached house for 450k, etc. Takes his new DP to 5* spa hotels every other weekend so I know money is abundant his end. I earn £53k in my main job and have for the last few years earned £7-10k on top from some additional work; I also receive Child Benefit (I had to pay some of that back, when I went over the threshold, although now threshold is £60k and I've dropped my extra work because, on 40% tax, it's not really worth it)

On top of this £600pm, ex DH pays £180 per month for the coach my DD takes to school (it's a grammer school in another town with its own transport), a few expensive things for the DC (my DS got a £900 mountain bike as this is his passion, my DD got some £750 concert tickets (don't ask!!!!), she's also got two school trips - one ski trip £1500 and one to the US costing over £2500, he has paid / is paying for all of that). Also, DD has recently needed some physio so he's paying £80 per appointment. He paid for one year of her having a tutor to help her get into grammar school, I think that was £50 per week.

He is more or less funding my son's expensive mountain biking hobby which has a lot of costs associated with it.

We usually split birthdays and Xmas presents. He will usually contribute something towards school uniforms. At times he has contributed a bit towards their clothing like winter jackets. He gives them each £25pm pocket money.

I give them also £25 each pocket money per month, I pay for dentists, hairdressers, almost all of their clothing and shoes (phenomenally expensive for teenagers nowadays!), buy all birthday presents for their friends, I pay for all the smaller school trips (this amounts to at least a few hundred per child per year, or double that if there's a residential), and I generally do loads more with the kids: I take them on holidays abroad (he takes them on one hol abroad that business pays for, and one caravan week in the UK), theatre and concert trips to London, theatre and cinema locally, out for meals and days out. He doesn't really do any of that. I realise that between us the kids have a good life (believe it or not, my kids are still just about average, in schools they go to).

The issue is this: with all that he does which might sound generous, ex DH probably still contributes a maximum of around £1000 per month in total, against his income of £30,000 per month, and the fact he definitely spends more on his romantic life in a month than he does on his DC.

Is 1/30th of your income, towards your kids, enough?

I know some men pay nothing, but I also know some women whose ex DH earn well and the women don't even have a job, they get maintenance of £5k a month or more, whereas I work full time (and have for a few years had extra work on the side, for purely financial reasons). I'm not saying I would want to not work. I'm just wondering, prompted by this friend of mine, whether my ex should be paying more. (The CMS calculation, by the way, would only work for half of his income, it doesn't go above that. I could go to court, but absolutely don't want to do that, it would ruin so many other things.)

Please tell me how you'd feel, if this was you. Would you feel fortunate, or not quite?

Ok but do you think CMS would award more than £600 PCM? Do you think you need more than this really given everything else he contributes towards? If I were him and you went through CMS for more I’d be difficult and say well fine, you can start paying half towards DC’s hobby and school transport then.

I think your arrangement sounds good. I wouldn’t ruin it just because of your friend. It may backfire on you completely and ruin your relationship. Don’t be greedy! I’ve head of women having a good arrangement, but pushing for more. Only to end up with less and a soured relationship. Don’t listen to your friend, she’s making trouble when there weren’t any issues before.

I can see why from the post you might think I'm a bit 'grabby' and who knows - maybe I am - I've always said to myself I am not because I signed away all rights to the business, which we both worked on, without a single question about it even though I knew at the time that it had picked up significantly (this was why he raised the issue of finances with me, suddenly, 4 years after the split. We had never bothered with the consent order until then).

I don't think of myself as materially motivated nor do I own anything expensive or extravagant, but I am quite invested in the idea of a good quality of life for my DC.

I guess these issues are, at the end of the day, emotional as much as practical. Thank you for your vote, because I'm really seeking to find out other people's perspectives.

Look forwards: the Uni support years. His amicable voluntary support will be importsnt then.

This is very true. I think most mums in your situation would be seriously delighted. Lots of crap dads out there don’t see their children at all or barely and pay fuck all.

I don’t think he’s making £350k / year, it wouldn’t make sense to buy a place for £450k if that was the case. Sometimes those bitter friends talking in your ear can be the worst! Sounds like everyone’s needs are met and if he has them 50% of the time then giving £1500/monyh sounds ok. If he is a business owner is “income” is likely lower. You may be referring to turnover figure which is completely different?

I'm totally with you - the answer is, what he pays in basic monthly terms (without the one off items) is appropriate for an annual income of around £165k, which is also pretty much the ceiling for CMS calculation.

Obviously, my ex earns twice that, but it doesn't necessarily follow that he should just be paying double, because of a) the extra one-off items b) he's self employed and his money is structured in weird ways c) it would be at the court's discretion.

My question to MN isn't really "should I try to force him to give more" (I'm not looking to do that), but only "should I make peace with this and accept that it's okay"

Thank you.

but when you're saying 'he only spends £1000 a month on his kids' that's not including things like food and all the other expenses that come under the 50% of time he has them.

Your DH's situation is unusual in that he appears to have only become very wealthy very recently, and well after you divorced. In other situations you mention where the ex-wife gets more money it's often linked to the fact that he only managed to build a high flying career because they were a SAHP and so fairly that contribution is recognised.

If I were going to argue for more money at all, it wouldn't be 'You paid £500 when you were poor so you should pay more now you're rich' but 'You paid £500 when the kids were 3 and 5 and now they are 13 and 15 they are a lot more expensive PLUS cost of living.'

but tbh if you are otherwise doing okay, which it sounds like you are, I'd keep the powder dry for now and wait until something like uni fees, which I would expect him to contribute the vast majority of if his income continues as it is. That would be the opportunity to point out 'Hang on, you've spent more on your girlfriend than your kids for the last 5 years and now you want to saddle them with debt when you earn 35 x more than their course fees every year?' With the added benefit that his contributions to you will likely decrease/end anyway at that point so you've got nothing to lose from a falling out.

I don't think of myself as materially motivated nor do I own anything expensive or extravagant, but I am quite invested in the idea of a good quality of life for my DC.

Which by the sounds of it, they really do have a good quality life.

And as another poster has just pointed out....when they hit 18 (most likely, as I assume you'll want them to go to university) he doesn't have to pay a single penny. It can all stop.

It seems like as it is, he would continue to support them - so why would you risk destroying the amicability for a little bit more money now (if you were to get anything).

This
Ex husband's income and lifestyle is irrelevant.
You share the kids 50/50 so imo he need not give you anything.
U are doing very well OP

I get that, but also it makes me sad that we set the bar so low, comparing to the worst examples. But I totally get why we do, those dads are so numerous you just can't ignore them

I think it’s fair to be a bit aggrieved, but you made the decisions you did with the knowledge you had at the time. Getting the consent order done would have been important any way to allow you both financial freedom from each other. I don’t think it’s grabby to recognise it didn’t work in your favour, but you also don’t know how things would have been if you’d held off or fought it. He could have decided to do and pay the minimum, hide his income and not support the kids hobbies etc and you couldn’t really have stopped him.

Is this a reverse? I can’t think a partner is paying for their kids to this degree would say it is unreasonable.

Does this work out as £1500 per month though? It's effectively only £600 per month in pure child support. The rest is costs and expenses (like the coach) and voluntary one off things.
Should I be factoring those in to the monthly amount somehow, to get a truer picture?

Rather than speculate on his contribution, in your shoes I’d retrench the household spending so that you stop going into overdraft and are building up some savings. That would reflect the lifestyle you can actually finance.

There will be fewer fun things, eating out is an obvious place to cut down even if you are eating in ‘ordinary’ restaurants

From there, you could set out his children’s standard of living and decide whether it’s fair in them. It might not feel it, but that is where you are in life.

constantly ending up in overdraft is really not the right way forward.

His business has for at least 2-3 years now been bringing in about £350k per year

And is this figure what you’ve deduced his £30k a month take home salary from? Because that doesn’t sound right at all. You’ve not even considered income tax for a start.

Very, very smart words. Thank you. There are different hills to die on.

What's your plan, if he pulls back and says he's not paying for all the extras? How are you going to cover the shortfall that you've caused?

HRTFT and I'm rubbish at linking posts, but there was a long running thread on here a while ago. The OP was in a fairly similar situation. She was advised not to rock the boat, ignored advice and (if it was true), she went on to moan for months that her ex cut everything off, including getting one DC's child benefit despite the fact he couldn't claim the money because he earned over the threshold.
There's a lot to be said for an amicable co-parenting relationship.

I would see this as money for the kids benefit and leave it at that. He's income could change at anytime and then you could be in a real situation.
So what if he spends more on his p that's his business, this comes over as grabby on your part. Your kids are covered financially so what are you worrying about? He has then 50/50, it sounds like a good set up for all of you.

Hi, thanks for your comment - what does it mean, is this a reverse? Is this MN speak I'm not familiar with?

I totally agree with this. I think you should quit while you’re ahead!

The rest is costs and expenses and voluntary one off things

Costs and expenses, and one offs, would generally be considered covered by the child maintenance though. I mean that if someone went through CMS, got a monthly maintenance amount, their ex wouldn’t be expected to also cover additional costs.

(That’s leaving aside the morals of only paying the CMS minimum)

Honest answer, no idea. But as I explained (maybe it's not clear from my post), I'm not looking to necessarily ask for me (certainly not go to court over it).

I was more trying to manage my own emotions around this, as it's a delicate issue and I sometimes don't know what to think.

His wealth has been since you separated. He pays a set amount, plus extra for the kids to ensure they have what they need. It is the responsibility of both parents to provide for their children and not his responsibility to compensate you for the 50% of parenting that you do.

Of course it will feel unfair that you are doing everything you can and still aren’t as comfortable as you’d like to be, but he is not responsible for that.

Please don’t let your “friend” create problems and ill feeling between you and your ex, it will only ruin your ability to co-parent and your kids will suffer. As another poster said, there was a thread not long ago and the woman lost not only the voluntary maintenance, but her child benefit too, and ended up paying him maintenance because both kids left and went to live with their dad over it.