Agreed £51 pw child maintenence

[Andyjakeydan]

Would i be expected to contribute to school trips/uniform on top of the agreed maintenence payments ?

Should add thats for one child

Well legally you don’t have to contribute anything on top of minimum child maintenance. But if you actually wanted to support your child you would pay half of their costs. Does £51 a week meet half of all their costs?

When you say agreed , do you mean you are paying cms minimum?

It depends on both your circumstances in my opinion. Cms is the minimum the nrp needs to pay. I was happy to buy day to day stuff and kids clubs etc but bigger costs such as school residential and secondary school uniform I asked for half towards. My ex is a reasonably high earned and takes home twice as much as I do. And they are equally his children. So I don't think I'm being unreasonable. Other will suggest cms is enough.

As others have said, the CMS figure is what you can be legally forced to pay. Whether it's too high/low, fair/unfair, is another question.
You cannot be made to pay any more; you can choose to pay more, just as the recipient could choose to receive less.

If you’re paying cms minimum then legally you aren’t required to pay anything else

However, I think it’s fair to pay half of trips and possibly other items (sports? Etc) especially if you can afford it

Well of course you will have to have several sets of school uniform for your child to wear when they are at your house. As well as their other clothes and toys.

I put twice as much into the house as she did,her pensions are worth ten times what mine are and she gave up a well paid job to start her own business (which she couldn’t have done with out me) and it was her who ended the marriage by having an affair,she has cost me about £8000 in solicitors fee’s so yes i only want to pay what i have to

Why’d you ask? a quick google will have told you your legal obligations. If you are asking what you should morally pay, why? You’ve already decided you’re only paying what you legally have to.

Take out of the equation what your wife did, she is not your child. Legally you only have to pay the CMS minimum, but if that means that your child is going to go without, would you truly be happy with that? I understand your angry but please dont drag your child into it.

You still haven’t answered if you are paying the cms minimum?

Be clear this isn’t about giving by our ex money this is about supporting your dc.

Child main stance isn't you paying her though, it's you providing your chaste of the costs of your own children. You're having to give it to her because she's the one caring for your child. The amount you halve to contribute is not based on the reason the marriage ended, it's not increased or decreased based on cheating it's based on income and the amount of time they are with you. If you have your children 50/50 then your contribution will drop to reflect that.

I'd try to separate your feelings for ex to your obligations for your children, which I know is hard and that you'll be hurting. It's not the children's fault their parents have split and child support isn't about your paying your ex but about you providing towards the living costs of your children.

Your child is innocent, please don’t allow a little person to suffer because of your anger at the situation.
You’ll need extras at your home, and if not a savings pot for college or uni. There are ways to help the child without giving the ex the additional money in hand.

OP, what is your salary?

Not expected.

It would be your choice.

“so yes i only want to pay what i have to” wow! EVERYTHING you said in that post is COMPLETELY irrelevant! Cm is for YOUR CHILD

Your CHILD didn’t cheat on you - grow up!!

Don’t be an excuse of a father be a decent one, that includes paying a decent amount of cm - £51 a week is frankly pathetic. Do better.

How can she provide for your child with her her pension if she is not retired? That's irrelevant.

Child maintenance is for your child. What your wife did or didn't do isn't relevant. Your child is an innocent in all this and if you pay the minimum and let them go without, you are a very poor father indeed.

With the CMS system he'll pay £51 a week whether the mother is on a zero income or is JK Rowling.
Or whether she now lives with a billionaire or a pauper.

Without more detail we cannot know how well the child will be provided-for. Only that the CMS is the legal figure, and in too many cases there are dispute about what it is "supposed to cover", because that's not part of the law.

Your child didn't do any of those things to you.

If your dd is at your house on school days then you'd be expected to buy uniform for your days.

Silentlysinking your ex is better father than me because he pays £150/200 a month? Well thats less than what i pay so how’d you work that out ?....i pay for some of my daughters clubs and buy her clothes...my concern is that my daughter is going on a school trip and its £600 and i am in debt up to my ears due to this marriage break up

OP - firstly I am sorry for your situation with your ex. But you will need to let go of your anger and move on. What she has or doesn’t have and what she’s “taken” from you is irrelevant.

Your talking about paying for your children here, not her. You need to step up for them and work out how to get on with your ex for their sake.

In an ideal world, each parent would be able to afford to split all child related costs 50:50. You seem to say you can’t afford this.

CMS sets the minimum amount payable to the resident parent. It is usually no where near half of the childcare costs, but paying more is a moral rather than legal obligation.

You should be paying what and when you can for your children. You might prefer to buy the kids things directly rather than hand over money to your ex, but you should be supporting them one way or another.

But I think looking for ways to pay less for your children is absolutely disgusting (if that is what you are doing). You need to grow up and put the kids first. You’ll have to work out how to get on to co-parent sooner or later - why not make it sooner and try to find an amicable solution ?