Experiences of child maintenance with high earning exDH?

[User63847484848]

Just wondered about others experiences of child maintenance where their ex is a high earner? The CMS calculator has a cap of something like £157,000 and after that the monthly maintenance amount doesn’t go up. STBX Is going to be earning much more than that (£250K) but is baulking even at the figure the CMS is giving. There are 3 kids and I have them all the time apart from 2 nights every other weekend so 52 nights a year (perhaps a few more as he will take them away in the summer I think). It’s coming out as £1777pm roughly but is effectively disregarding almost £100K of his salary. I work full time and earn less than £35K.

just wondered if in general other’s high earning ex’s give more than the CMS minimum in this scenario or not.

A fairer system would be for NRP to be liable for half of the childcare fees. Maybe then they would find a way to have their children more.

This does sound fairer, @WheelsUp. The problem is, the law is written to try to be fair to everyone but if people are determined to act like arses (eg hide money, go PT), there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this.

Yeah true, he sounds a bit of a dick truth be told. I would have loved 50/50 myself but wife wanted as much cash out of me as possible sadly.

That's because CMS is a public service and in the UK all public services are unbelievably shit after a generation of underfunding. I can't even remember a country that worked, t 40 I'm too young 😂

CMS is shit because the (predominantly male) politicians don’t see child maintenance as a priority.

It’s been far longer than one generation. I remember them (well CSA as they were then) being shit when I was a child.

parents on benefits are allowed to keep CM because that was easier than actually doing something about it. When that decision was made £20 went to the RP and the rest went to the Sec of State to go toward the welfare bill. When the debt to the SoS got too high it was decided something had to be done…

So they said the RP could keep the money that they weren’t collecting

Multiple governments of various ilks and nothing has changed despite the fact CMS have a vast array of powers they could use.

I never understand the argument that children should have an equal standard of living across homes. Myself and many friends had separated parents growing up. Often one parent had the nicer home, more frequent holidays, better 'stuff" etc. One parent lived to work, one parent preferred home making. It did us no harm to understand dad has X as he works a lot. It's the merits of work = money = nicer stuff. It didn't devalue our other parent in any way and they were loved as much. If anything I'd say loved slightly more as we were aware of the value they placed on spending time with us.
Op, your ex may feel he's funding your lifestyle rather than the kids even if thats not the case. He might be able to hide income. Can you get him to pay direct for the kids activities? To school? For laptops or whatever they need etc. Might keep things friendly whilst ensuring he's providing.
I don't think 50% of childcare fees is fair in case where a resident parent is getting 85% funded. Childcare should be free for all imo. There is no fair system as rarely will 2 people fully agree.
Why is it on gross salary and not net. What is the reasoning for this? Tax, pension, NI, any student loans to come out but then 20% of the gross figure which has been reduced
I'm guessing it's very unlikely on that salary but who knows what the future holds, he could get made redundant, suddenly have ill health and not be able to work. I'd be saving some for a rainy day if you can.
I'm not sure how id make the system better but i would cancel passports. Noone should be jetting off if they're not paying for their children.
Look how many people wanted Boris for PM. A man who doesn't even admit to how many children he has and cheated on his poorly wife. Child maintenance won't be taken seriously when it isn't at government level

Sorry, I don't think it being male politicians makes a difference. There have been about 4 female Secretaries of State responsible for the CMS in recent years and over a third of MPs are women now.

I think it's more to do with it being so remote from the lived experiences of MPs of both sexes and less glamorous and headline grabbing so they don't care. That and underfunding like everything else.

You’re entitled to your opinion. As I am.

Politicians over the years have been predominantly male and their attitude to single mothers has been clear in multiple policies.

Hopefully the increase in women will help, but given I was negatively impacted as a child, a parent and then saw how shit they are when I worked there briefly nigh on 30 years later I have little faith it’ll change.

The powers they have that they could easily use are far more extensive than they ever let on.

Thank you for all the comments
to answer a few things -
there are no private school fees they’re in state schools but currently he is generous with extras - school trips, summer camps, spending money etc. I know if I were to ‘fight him’ for more that discretionary generosity would stop.

i already work full time so don’t need him to have the kids more so I can work more (although would be ncie). I pay a lot in after school club and holiday club for youngest but elder 2 are pretty self sufficient.

he wouldn’t be able to have them more with his current job really and sadly they would not want to go and at 12 and 15 my guess is that ahy court woudk taje into account the eldest twos wishes

I’ve instigated the split and he is very upset about it (no other parties involved)

in terms of split of assets he is proposing to take out of the equation some inheritance he had 10 yrs ago meaning overall the split will be about 40/60 in his favour. I haven’t agrees anything yet but am happy in principle he walks away with more due to the inheritance as long as there’s ‘enough’ to house the children and I.

You're of course welcome to an opinion but the Secretary of State in charge of CMS has been a woman for four of the last five years and nothing has actually changed. If you put your faith in something happening because less politicians are men in the future, I expect you'll be disappointed because most of the female MPs are likely going to be the wrong kind of women. MPs - both men and women - tend to be the kind of people who leave their partner in charge of the kids to further their careers. People like Angela Rayner and Stella Creasy are outliers among the female MPs in Parliament, let alone MPs as a whole.

When Amber Rudd was Secretary of State for the DWP for example, she ignored urgent recommendations for procedures and staff training. So did her successor Therese Coffey. A lot of these problems already existed when their predecessor Esther McVey was Secretary of State. Chloe Smith didn't bother doing anything about it either.

So in all honesty I find your blaming men for it a tad ridiculous in the circumstances.

Don't forget his pension. I'd definitely want to talk to a good solicitor used to dealing with wealthy men. Has he sought legal advice yet?

I am speaking to a solicitor but at the moment just getting advice in the background.
he has said (but not yet put in writing) if we agree on what he’s suggesting with the inheritance then he’s happy to share pensions and get them valued properly, it’s a bit complicated as mine is public sector and his isn’t.

He has said he has had legal advice but I don’t know the details and am dubious as he said the person he spoke to said his inheritance wouldn’t be seen as in the matrimonial pot (when I have had more than one solicitor say the contrary).
the facts are it was more than 10 years ago, it has been a long marriage (17 yrs) and it was entwined with family finances, primary put into the mortgage.
however regardless of that I do see his moral point and am happy for him to end up with more because of it but it’s annoying me he doesn’t believe/appreciate in being incredibly reasonable if I agree to that and could play it very differently!

The answer about the inheritance is "it depends." If there are enough assets to meet the needs of both spouses without recourse to the inheritance, then his solicitors are right and it won't be considered a matrimonial asset. If there are not enough assets to do that, your solicitors are right.

Inheritances can actually be dealt with quite unfairly in divorce and I respect your moral stance, I think it is a fair one to take. If one spouses' parents are dead and the inheritance has already been received whilst the other spouses' parents are alive, in a needs case the inheritance already received can be shared. The spouse whose parents are still alive can then go and get their full inheritance later on without having to share it. It is an area of law (one of many) that desperately needs to be reformed in order to be fair. I think inheritances from parents ought to always be ignored in divorce because it clearly denigrates the wishes of the deceased parents. But that is not the law as it stands.

Yes it’s very difficult.
its very difficult to ‘pretend it never happened’ as lots of decisions were made on the basis of what was considered family money at the time.
eg. A property gifted to him from his parents we rented out as a holiday let but we also invested far more in it than we ever got back. So joint family money went into maintaining that house.
We also spent more on holidays one year than we ever normally would, because we had that influx of cash.

but then I take his point that it’s not his fault his parents died quite young and mine are still alive.

There’s absolutely no need to be rude when I specifically said “I have little faith it’ll change.”

Well, unfortunately if you're going to take an 'it's all men's fault' stance on something that four women have been in charge of and done nothing about then you have to expect a bit of exasperation in return.

Granted I would be more inclined to agree if you framed it as the 'patriarchy.' For example, I assume you agree that very strong arguments about how primary carers are largely excluded from politics because of the time demands and unfriendly hours for example. However, there are both men and women who think that's fine and also men and women (like me and you) who don't.