Child maintenance are reducing his payments for travel even though I travel further

[looellen]

My ex lives 3 hours away. Pays child maintenance. He has contacted them to have his payments reduced because he has to travel to see his child. He travels a 3 hour round trip once a month to his sports training then a 6 hour round trip once a month to where I live. We picked a sports event near his home so he would have to do less travel, and I do a 10 hour round trip to the sports training and pay for a hotel overnight. I am fine with this. So I have a very similar amount of travel to him (actually an hour more of driving) yet child maintenance are still reducing his payments because he still has to travel. Is it just me or does this seem unfair? I pay more in travel costs than he does yet he gets his payments to me reduced?

Realistically, what is the actual figure we are talking about here that it’s dropped by? A few pounds at most I suspect

You’re choosing to make your own life harder and more expensive to accommodate an ex who does not do the same.

If ex can’t get him there then he can train closer to home, and ex can drive late on the Friday and book a hotel near you instead.

CMS don’t have the authority to get into the ins and outs of fairness.

they have a very blunt policy that they have to work within the confines of.

If the NRP spends over a set amount for travelling for contact then they’re elegantly entitled to apply to CMS to have a reduction in maintenance and if they legally qualify for it then CMS have to apply it.

Even if you’re sat there as a CMS staff member thinking “how on earth can you think that is fair?!” you don’t have a choice, you just have to follow the guidance as it’s set.

Legally entitled not elegantly entitled

If ex is having payments reduced for travel I would expect him to collect from my home and drop back to my home for his contact.

It sounds like that’s how he’s explained it to CMS, otherwise I’m not sure why he would warrant a reduction?

I guess my point was that it seems incredibly flawed that even if a court orders both parents to meet half way, for example, the paying parent still gets a reduction despite the other parent having the same costs. Appreciate all the feedback

It’s not from home. It’s travel to the agreed pick up point, which is kinda flawed in a lot of cases

If the collections are done under a child arrangements order by court then the court can also put in about the costs.

I dealt with a few very pissed off people when I worked for CMS who couldn’t claim travel expense reductions because their court order detailed the costs and who was responsible for what.

No he has an absent parent who fucked off when he was 2.5 yo.

So Ive always done it alone.

That may skew my opinion but I’ve always believe you make choices and you have to take responsibility for those choices yourself. And if they do t work for you - you have make alternative arrangements.

It’s great DS has a club by his dad’s. However you have made that decision so have to facilitate that decision.

Is CMS fair re your Ex moving away? I have no idea as never got a penny child support myself. But that still doesn’t change my stance on the fact you made your choices and you can’t ask CM to facilitate the costs of that.

Oh ok, so if they’ve agreed the sport centre that’s what this calculation will be based on.

I wish I had known this. Court was a blur to be honest. They just said that he had to do the majority of driving unless mutually decided otherwise because he had moved.

But that still doesn’t change my stance on the fact you made your choices and you can’t ask CM to facilitate the costs of that.

Surely it’s the ex who is asking CM to facilitate the costs of that?

He moved. He made the agreement with the OP. He’s now requested a reduction in the CM to pay for his choices…

The OP isn’t asking for more money. Just that there shouldn’t be a reduction based on the exes choices.

With that kind of order they’d likely expect that he could apply for a small reduction, but only when he’s doing all the travel. They could have stipulated that he did all the driving and covered the costs not from maintenance.

Its hard in the middle of that situation though to be aware of everything that you’d be entitled to ask to be included in the order.

Quire. I'm not asking CM to facilitate the costs of anything. In fact I don't think he is either. He is asking CM to facilitate a reduction in his costs. Anyway this thread had digressed a lot to focus on my choices and our setup rather than what I was asking about re peoples opinions on the way the CMS operates in these situations, so am going to thank everyone and step away for now!

He’s asking for costs for the travel to DS. As I said having no experience of CMS I can’t comment on that.

Bit the costs to travel to the sports centre was a decision the OP made and isnt court ordered. CMS don’t calculate that.

OP could ask for a variation in the court order to manage this and ask for costs to be paid by NRP. But that’s different to CMS.

CMS will calculate the reduction to their agreed collection point.

So he is asking CMS to facilitate a reduction in his costs to cover his agreed decisions.

CMS does operate in a very black and white way in many situations.

Its very frustrating when you work there as fairness and what is actually right doesn’t come into it at all.

sometimes logic doesn’t even come into it at all.

It’s a poor system on money fronts, poorly funded and poorly trained staff (I knew about several CMS powers because of my situation with my ex that the people training me had never heard of!).

It needs a total revamp but there is no political will to doing anything about maintenance issues as it doesn’t negatively impact most men.

The sports centre thing is mainly irrelevant. It's a hell of a drive but if you're happy to do that and DC enjoys it then good for you.

CMS is a pittance and a NRP who goes out of their way to claw back a couple of quid by reducing the amount they support their child is a shit.

CMS are shit and not fit for purpose. Your ex is the issue here as he has asked for a reduction. They protect shitty fathers and allow men to pay bare minimum while mothers shoulder the actual burden so am I surprised by their decision? Not at all. I would say this is on him more than anyone as he’s the crap dad who has asked for a reduction

And this was kind of my point. I have put 20k miles on my car this year driving to sporting events, one of which was in France. I buy all his equipment, his event fees, coaching, insurance, hotels etc, it costs me thousands and I work ridiculous overtime and also buy and sell to fund it all. The result is an incredibly happy, achieving child who is on his way to National and International titles, has a solid group of friends and not a screen in his life, but his dad drives for 9 hours a month (sometimes less!) and I have to partially fund him as well. It just feels backwards.

I think its absolutely disgusting that a man can move away and then CMS take money away from the child to pay for the father to come and visit them. How can that ever be fair? Why should a child essentially pay to see their own parent?

This is ridiculous!

He CHOSE to move away from his child and yet you/his son are penalised financially because of it (as well as not being able to see him as much).

Honestly I don’t know why you chose a sports venue closer to him and to make his life easier when he chose to move so far away from his own child.

I think it’s awful that he has gone to CMS to reduce his payments when you have gone out of your way to make his life easier.

Is there another venue closer to home?

Agree. For the sake for £20/30 he’s not doing what’s best for his DS.

If he’s claiming travel costs he should be getting up at 4am to down round trip to get his DS to the sports centre at 11am.

I’ve just always been of the mindset you cannot control someone’s actions - just your reaction to it.

I don’t get o to tit for tat arguments or fight people trying to fight me. It’s just my way. I grey rock and do what’s best for my situation and if anyone asks why I’m doing what I do I seek to rectify through the correct channels.

In this instance I’d ask for a variation to the court order. Either change contact to attend a centre nearer home and then go to dads who can claim his travel costs or seek to get the court order changed to get the costs covered by NRP. I would explain why ds attends that centre and explain I've facilitated it because of where his dad lives but his dad isnt facilitating attendance.

But we are all different and I think having had to manage a kid at a high level sport alone for many years I just get on with it because I know for him it’s the right thing.

I think I explained this up thread. We have a venue near home, but our child spends 1-2 weeks at a time every holiday with his dad which makes him miserable, so we found a club nearest his dad that he could join. He now has friends that way that he can do and hang out with when he is at his dads, and spirting events he can take part in with them. It has made him incredibly happy. When I finally confirmed he could join he cried. Actual tears of happiness. Might seem strange to some but for children who dont do well in school, struggle with bullying, etc, sport can be like medicine.

I get what you’re saying but it ultimately makes his dads life much easier rather than it does your sons.

One closer to home would have meant him making friends nearer and being able to see them more and attend it more etc.

I think for the sake of a week or 2 in the holidays, it would have made much more sense and been better for your son to attend one closer to home.

Obviously now it’s more tricky because he’s already made friends there.