AIBU to feel angry after my ex took the car back?

[Walkerss]

So 3 years ago my ex left me for somebody else, I have finally got to a place where I am happy, the kids are happy and all is going well.

when we were a couple we made an agreement that I would pay nursery fees and he would pay the finance on my car. Obviously since the split there have been constant threats to take the car and last night he turned up and demanded the keys. I gave them to him and instantly felt relieved that he didn’t have anything else on me. However school is quite a drive away since I moved area and I told him I wouldn’t be able to take them to school. His response was, not my problem, I can take them on my days so it’s nothing to do with him.

how can he be so evil?! At least warn me so I had time to get a car. I hate him!

My ex did exactly the same. Walked into my house unannounced, took the key and moved the car around the corner until he could get someone to give him a lift to pick it up, as he had a car himself.

I got a car on finance and he hated I just sorted it and he looked like an utter pr*ck to everyone. Sad little men do sad little things to feel in control.

@Walkersswho is the legal owner of the at (not the registers keeper)? You say he paid the finance but was the car in your name?

I guess the thing is, legally, he hasn't done anything wrong. Morally, very different story.
All you fan do now is try and sort a car, and tell yourself that he has one less thing to threaten you with.

He is a pig. My friend split with her longterm partner who we thought was a nice man, he idolised her, too much, he came back to the house to take the TV’s and children’s IPads because he paid for them, he doesn’t take the children ever, he was just being a nasty bastard, he had the receipts and they weren’t married.

Can you have refused payments if there is another child who isn’t yours in your household?

anyway it all got rejected today so I’m guessing he will be ecstatic

Well if thees another child loving with him he does get a reduction in CMS

Well why has it been rejected then?

Honestly if you read the OP again it’s clear the OP just wants to vent which is OK. She doesn’t ask in her OP if it’s legal or not or whether or not her ex had a right to do it. It seems obvious that she was just looking for a bit of empathy and acknowledgment that her ex is a bit of a shit, which he is.

(The fact that he left her following an affair is also a bit of a giveaway that he’s hardly a prince among men.)

Not sure why people feel the need to put the boot in - it’s not helping and is liable to make somebody feel worse. Or maybe that was the intention.

How would I know. But those are the rules

If they are the rules it wouldn’t have been rejected would it?

As below

It just reduces the payments to you but doesn't completely stop them.

I think it depends if he has any financial responsibilities towards the child he is living with. I don't think it's a hard and fast rule. I would guess it's been rejected as he isn't paying for school lunches, uniform ec
Sorry OP this was meant for the poster you quoted

it’s fabulous of his request for a reduction was refused. Frankly you should request an increase due to the increased cost of maintaining the children because you now have to pay for a car! That car is used to transport the children to and from school as well as other activities. He provided the car as part of his share of supporting the kids when you guys were together-that’s why he made the payments and why you guys split things the way you did with you paying for nursery and him paying for transportation. Now that he has taken the car with no warning and no notice, that is an additional expense on behalf of the children that you are incurring-so once you figured out the new car and how much of an additional expense it is, I’d go after him for it.

I more amazed that he tried to get reduced CMS at 10.18am this morning but it had been refused by 10.58am

No this isn’t correct I did this for years. My mum was the registered keeper of the car so I could get a parking permit for her road. For quotes I was asked who is the registered keeper and advised according. Not sure if it made any difference to my premiums. They also ask who is the legal owner

I think he should of let you keep the car, as you said the agreement was he paid the car and you paid the nursery fees, and the car was paid of by the time you split and he had a car.
Surely the decent thing to do would of let you have the car to ferry the kids back and forth , especially as it was his choice to leave you for someone else, a small price to pay for being a cruel twat !

I'm pretty sure that on the V5, it says that it is not proof of ownership. It just means you're the registered keeper.

If that's the case, how do you "register" a car in your name?

Anyway, OP, he's a complete shit and on that basis you ought to get your name removed as registered keeper, if he hasn't already done it, in case he gets loads of parking tickets and they come after you for payment.

Crap behaviour from him, to give you no warning and leave you without a way to transport his children.

The silver lining is he can’t hold it over you anymore, I hope you get a nice reliable motor.

The rule is children who live in the house he lives in - there’s no measure of ‘responsibility’ for them. If he submits it again and rings them and confirms all the details, it will be accepted.

What a ridiculous rule! Any children of his now partner should be supported by their parents, shouldn’t they? In my mind, those who choose to create children should be equally responsible for them. I have no skin in the game, my kids are middle aged. DSIL had children when he met DD, he was already divorced. Their mum’s second husband was never expected to pay for them. DSIL really stepped up. But he’s not a vindictive arsehole.

It’s a terrible rule.
The biological child should be the priority.

I didn’t make the rule; I agree it’s terrible. No one other than their parents should be paying for children. Stepparents should never ever be expected to contribute. Nor should they have to ‘step up’.

I know I find it completely bizarre, yes help if of the person is willing to but absolutely disagree with a biological child not receiving something on the back of a step child.

From what I've read it says they have to be contributing towards the child's upkeep.