Child Maintenance - Debate for DullardMullard

[BetterFuture1985]

Right @DullardMullard. You wanted a debate on my attitudes to child maintenance so I have created a thread to do so. Please keep it civil. I will start with all of the facts that I can without being too outing and then I will outline my position. I look forward to your response.

1. Prior to the marriage breakdown, we were both working. She worked part time including most weekends and I worked full time weekdays but three of those days a week were from home. I was responsible for drop offs and pick ups twice during the week and tended to have the children on my own every Saturday and most Sundays because of my ex-wife's work schedule. This was close to a 55/45 split.

2. My ex-wife's solicitor encouraged her to push for a 70/30 split of childcare in order to get more money from the financial settlement and a Mesher Order. This 70/30 split was not realistic because of the number of hours my wife was working.

3. In the end I felt forced into a 65/35 split of childcare to avoid a lengthy and expensive court battle but managed to negotiate away the Mesher Order and a frivolous claim for open ended spousal maintenance.

4. The 65/35 split put her in an advantageous negotiating position and she demanded 75% of all of the assets that my solicitor advised I would have to accept. Compared to a 55/45 split my solicitor reckoned she'd bagged £30k.

5. Within just days of the consent order being finalised she was on my case demanding I have the children more because 65/35 was not compatible with her working hours. By that point I'd agreed to start going into the office three days a week and said it was impossible to fully meet her demands but I would happily have the children more at weekends.

6. In order to effect compensation for the fact I have the children more than on a 65/35 split and my share of the assets was also negatively affected, I feel entitled to put 30% of my gross income in a pension rather than 10% as it was before the divorce. This reduces CM by £160 a month. By the time my youngest is 18, I will have clawed back about £20k of the £30k my ex-wife negotiated through deception. The other £10k will be compensated by the fact that she will be hoisted on her own petard, having claimed to have done more childcare than she did. I'm just making her lies come true.

7. We're not talking about severe financial hardship. She has a combined income of £2.5k and next year this will rise to £2.8k. This is only about £500 less than we were living on (after commuting costs) as a family just two years ago and my costs don't need to be covered by that amount. In five years time provided she maximises her earning capacity she can be on £3.2k and this has the potential to rise to around a £50k income by the time the youngest is too old and the CM stops for good.

Now, my question for DullardMullard, who took huge exception to this on another thread is this. Why was it acceptable for my ex-wife to use fraud and deception to increase her share of the assets to such an extent that it has caused me financial hardship and the inability to buy suitable accommodation for my DCs for the nearly half of their time that they are with me? But not okay for me to use the law to seek some redress? Why is it not considered the same thing, why is there a double standard?

you said in your other post you ask for receipts for the CM which by law she doesn’t have to give you, it came across as you punishing your children for your wife’s affair(s) and controlling as a fair few posters pointed out to you. this is what was taken by your post you take great pride in paying the bare minimum your words by the way. There was no mention of all the other above.

regardless it doesn’t matter if she did the whole of the black watch rugby team. You had children with her and both of you need to finance them.

as for the 65/35 split take it back to court with proof this is 2022

You can represent yourself if need be.

plus how on earth do you know so much about her earnings as they are in fact none of your business as is yours to her. Your exes for a reason and shouldn’t be privy to that information.

To clarify, she said she didn't have enough money so I said fine, prove the £660 was all spent on the children and then I will give you more. I know you can't ask for receipts for the mandated CMS amount. However, I assure you if you were married to someone who cheated on you and spent significant amounts on a secret credit card behind your back doing so, you would not willingly just hand over money because they asked for it in the same way that you wouldn't just hand over money to someone addicted to drugs or alcohol.

The reasons I pay the bare minimum are entirely separate to that and because 1) the marital assets diminished because of said credit card and 2) she lied about the childcare split and refused to budge, got more assets and then days later said she assumed I was still good to do as before. Unfortunately I can't claw the money back for when I need it (now) but I will make it up to my children because these savings are ear marked for them.

Another point which I think you don't quite fully appreciate is what "both finance them" means. It assumes we both maximise our earning capacity. I do that, she doesn't. Her decision not to do so denies our children a lot more than me keeping £160 back for them that I will hand back when I take my cash free lump sum from my pension! She could already take home another £300 a month but "doesn't want the stress." I can't tell you the profession she's in but the idea it is stressful is laughable. Think public sector, no overtime, Band 3 in terms of seniority and refusing to go up from Band 2. When she says that to me and I'm doing a job that's in London with a long commute, unpredictable hours (on days with the children I often have to log back on until midnight after they've gone to bed) and really highly strung colleagues and bosses in an industry I really don't like, I must admit I wince at my ex-wife's lack of self awareness when she refuses to do the same and use her recently acquired degree to do something for herself and the children and earn a bit more money. Ultimately it's her choice but it affects people around her and it is my belief that each and everyone around her has the right to protect their interests when she threatens them, including me.

And I know about her earnings 1) because this was only 6 months ago; 2) she's doing the same job as before we split and 3) she works in the public sector in a role whose income you can find on the internet.