Just checking this is fair - child maintenance

[Mitch22]

My husband usually pays £40 per week to his ex wife for one child.
When the lockdown happened we both lost both our income , both self employed, and have had to claim universal credit, which is just about covering our bills.

His ex wife is wfh, fully paid a very good wage.
At the time my husbands income stopped he spoke to his ex wife, who said they would just sort things out when he got his self employment support payment through.
As he is now on universal credit she is only due £7pw, as his income is £0.
Im pretty sure she is expecting a back payment of £40 pw.
How do we approach this? it is going to take a long time for us to get back on our feet, where as financially she hasn't been affected.
If my husband had lost his job in any other circumstances he would not be expected to pay £40 pw to her whilst on uc, so is this any different?

I understand your reluctantance here, but I think it's because you know morally, he should continue to pay. £40 per week barely covers bare minimum, but it does mean that your husband child can eat. He would still have to contribute if they were still together.

So are you expecting a lump sum through for the self employment scheme? I think it's fair to pay £7 if you are on UC, but as and when you receive more remuneration, it would not look good to drag your heels.

If she was to approach the CMS, they'd probably the 7pw is all shes legally owed

Morally is another matter. She might not be personally affected financially but it will certainly be costing a darn sight more than 7pw to be looking after their child.

Maybe try and meet somewhere in the middle if you can, its not your fault you're in this position but it's not hers either

If my husband had lost his job in any other circumstances he would not be expected to pay £40 pw to her whilst on uc, so is this any different?

If he lost his job and went on UC then no he would not be expected to pay. He is however about to be given the self employed grant which will cover his loss over earnings somewhat. For the sake of keeping good relationships if I were him i would try to pay the back money, even half tbh. What she earns shouldn't come into it. It's about doing right by his child

@Mitch22 I could call CMS to get the correct advice. Have you got no income at all? It would depend how much you have to live on for the month. If you were claiming full benefits solely and no other income in their situation I don’t think she can expect anything but a very low payment which is only fair due to the pandemic.

I wonder whether the £40 a week was a fair payment to start with or a typically low fudged payment amount?
If so, then I have little sympathy.
If a private arrangement then she won't get the extra £33 back if she went to the cms. But if she does go and he's underpaid he won't have that option moving forward.

If he's claiming the self employed government money then there's no moral reason that he wouldn't pay "fully " for his children.

If he's claiming the self employed government money then there's no moral reason that he wouldn't pay "fully " for his children.

I think that he is on UC in the interim gives a bit of leeway tbh.

Just tell the child not to eat

I hate how these threads always mention the ex's salary. It doesn't matter what she earns, she could be a millionaire but it still doesn't absolve the NRP's responsibility to provide for his child.

£7pw is fair for the moment, but when you're in a decent position again then yes it should be backdated.

Sorry but he should still pay for his child, just because CMS calculate a very low payment, it doesn't make it morally right. If a married couple both lost their jobs tomorrow they would still have to find a way to feed their child. Children don't stop needing food and other things, you are lucky in a way to know that the child will be fed and housed despite everything. It must be a really hard time for you and I am sorry you're struggling but it's very fair that you pay as soon as you have the money. Your dh's first responsibility is his child.

How is £40 a week "fair" in the first place. A price of a music lesson.

The point is that he is going to be getting more money - the self employment support grant - so the £40 back payment can come out of that

Why do you think the SEM grant shouldn’t be used for child maintenance?

What an attitude to have about his child!

As another PP said - children don’t stop needing food, clothing, etc just because there’s a pandemic. His child should be a priority, not something to ‘get out of paying for because the mum is earning enough’.

Goodness me. Why do people have children to behave like this?

Why don’t you have the child live with you since neither of you are working and the mum is? You might notice the child still. Refs to eat.

Surely £7 at the moment, but as soon as he receives the additional support it should go straight back up, and back paid the £33 a week if possible. In an ideal world he would continue to pay the 40, but if you don't have it between you and would mean you going hungry when the child will not be going without then seems silly.

these are his children. he is responsible for providing for them to the best of his ability. obviously with a tiny income on UC they will not have much and it is ok to be paying a pittance. when the self employment grant comes through then a chunk of that money obviously should go towards providing for the children. whether the chunk is enough to make up the "arrears" to top up the last few weeks back to £40pw depends on to what extent the grant brings his income for the shut-down back to his normal level. if the grant total, spread across the duration of the time until income is restored, amounts to e.g. half of normal income then it would be fine for the chunk of CM to be topping up to more like £20pw. however, a decent parent does not hesitate to disadvantage themselves to put their children's needs first, so err on the side of generosity if in doubt.

£40 a week is a small amount anyway. I am a single parent and spend £40 a week on food alone for DS. Then there's clothes, shoes, school uniforms, swimming lessons, Beavers, school trips, childcare costs, days out, birthdays, Christmas.

What she earns is not relevant.

Are you saying you don't want to make up the paltry amount you're no longer paying?

If you are ok with that, morally, how else would you approach it other than telling the mother that your husband doesn't want to make up the lost payments?

Not sure what you want to hear?

For me, it’d depend on how much he gets from the self employment support payment. If it’s basically a back payment of what he would’ve earned these months, then it makes sense to back pay the child maintenance. If it’s less than that, then the amount going forwards will be less anyway. Although I guess that depends on how they set the amount he’s paying - CMS calculations or otherwise.

But then I don’t recognise all these people saying £40 p/w is small/paltry etc too. It’s all relative, and at £170 a month, that’s a lot to me. Maybe it is to you too.

For me, it’d depend on how much he gets from the self employment support payment. If it’s basically a back payment of what he would’ve earned these months, then it makes sense to back pay the child maintenance.

He is claiming UC just now it is unlikely he will be back paid the self employed grant for the same time period.

@FishOnPillows I agree £170 is a lot of money. Depending on what you earn.

@FishOnPillows I can guarantee that the DD's mum is spending more than £170 a month on her child's upbringing.

There is a balance,to be had. You need to meet your reasonable outgoings and keep a roof over your heads. However, the child doesn’t stop needing things just because your income has changed and she is not the sole responsibility of her mother. Would love to know if £40 per week was a fudged self employment amount before commenting further, however.

Had the child's mother decided to spend only £170 / month of her good wage on the child, she'd have social services knocking on her door in a heartbeat.