50 50 even if one earns more?

[KidsSquids]

Hello wheryone

I’m wondering what experience people have with the other parent of their kids if you have 50:50 shared care but they earn quite a bit more than you? We share the child benefit and I’m not eligible for child maintenance as, as the time of applying, that is when my ex made the claim for child benefit, and as that was in the middle of being assessed then the child maintenance dept were unable to identify a ‘payee’ and ‘payer’ in our case. And so none was awarded.
my ex insists on everything being paid 50:50 but I don’t think it’s fair!

Any thoughts?

You provide for your kids when you have them anything they NEED, if he wants to treat them to extra that's up to him. He can't expect you to contribute what you don't have. You need to live within your means and try to increase your income in the time he has them.

Yeah I work evenings when the kids are at the or dads house and I am trying my hardest to earn more.
I don’t know if it’s possible to try and put something in place so that he has to help me out financially each month or to suggest that we split kids costs (like clothes, school clubs etc) more fairly rather than 50:50, and how I’d go about doing this sort of thing.
Would it be mediation or even a solicitor? 🤷🏻‍♀️

Well of course you should be splitting 50/50 all the things the kids need. Like clubs etc.

I do get spousal maintenance from my ex husband but because he earns much more , but it isn't 50/50 care so that play a role.

How old are the kids?

Can you afford everything they need by yourself?

There is no absolute yes or no to your question. In the cases of very high earners the rules are different and child maintenance is determined based on different rules and CMS doesn’t apply. This recognises lifestyle as a component in child support. It doesn’t really apply to most normal people.

A true CMS 50:50 arrangement involves sharing time and costs. It assumes you both have certain set costs associated with being a parent that you are responsible for. Then you have additional costs associated with the time the child lives with you. It works for people with equal or equitable net costs and income. Divorce settlements will often have addressed income disparity through a larger capital share that reduces outgoings. To say something is fair means looking at the whole agreement.

It’s really hard to say whether there is a remedy for your situation that sits with your ex. The remedy may sit with you and improving your income. Simply not enough information to give you an answer in terms of entitlement or fairness.

I am going to sound harsh but it isn’t a good idea to rely on someone else for your quality of life because they might come though for you or be able to come through for you. It is always better to be the higher or equal earner if lifestyle is important to you.

I’m in the same position. I believe that the child’s costs should be split in apportionment to earnings. At the moment we are paying 50:50. When large bills come in, e.g. school trips one parent may not be able to afford it whereas the other could easily afford it. This is just how I believe it should be done but not saying it’s what everyone believes.

If he earns significantly more you can still claim CMS. Yes if 50:50 it does need to be 50% of all costs- childcare, activities, clothes, school lunches.

There’s nothing unfair about paying 50/50 for children you care for for the same amount of time.

I would hope that the parent who earns more would be more willing to be generous when it comes to big expenses like school residential trips, extra curricular things and presents, but there’s no reason why you should get extra money in your hand just because your ex earns more than you.

If he loses his job or decides to take a lower paid one, would you be happy to give him money for no reason?

He's not a high earner is .he if eligible to child benefit?
Do you both work full time?

He’s not a high earner at like 100k. I think he earns about 50k. I’m on 20-30k self employed.

I just want to make sure kids costs are split fairly, which to me would take into account the difference in our salaries. And yes, if I earned more than him I’d be happy to pay the greater amount. He knows that I am trying to earn money. It’s not like I’m sitting at home all day. He’s just in a much more lucrative industry to me.

Would CMS even consider maintenance if we share the child benefit?

maybe I should ask him for all the child benefit to make things a bit fairer..

Asking him for the child benefit could be a good compromise. But paying the kids costs 50/50 is totally fair, he's not responsible for your earnings anymore unfortunately. My ex earns more than me, he pays maintenance as he doesn't have the kids sleep at his, but if he just paid 50/50 of all their costs (clothes, clubs, childcare, half of meals etc) I'd be way better off.

In my experience, generosity tends to depend on the initial settlement plus the effort the lower earning party makes to maximise their earning capacity. Where the weaker party has had the lion's share of the marital assets or receives spousal maintenance, unsurprisingly the stronger party tends to be more reluctant to pay for extras.

Also, when the weaker party is deliberately under-earning in order to carry on receiving spousal maintenance from an ex, this tends to make things a lot more acrimonious and makes the likelihood that the payer will also fund extras extremely unlikely.

It doesn’t have to be money in ones hand. We have a joint account we both pay into. This is for all child related expenses. If one loses their job and the other becomes the higher earner then expenses would still be paid in apportionment to their earnings so the higher earner always pays in a little more. The joint accounts keeps things transparent and ensures money is there only for the child. As I said this is just how I think is should be done.

Why don't one of you apply for child benefit for one kid and one for the other?
You can try and claim child maintenance you might get some even if 50/50

Also if you were married you're far better protected

Can you get universal credit?

I'm a little unsure what you mean by 'I’m not eligible for child maintenance as, as the time of applying, that is when my ex made the claim for child benefit, and as that was in the middle of being assessed then the child maintenance dept were unable to identify a ‘payee’ and ‘payer’ in our case. And so none was awarded.'

I'm no expert but I thought being 50:50 there would be no CM. There is no unusually high earner here so I think being 50:50 there would be no CM.

Were you married? How were assets divided?

Once you are divorced/no longer together there is little or no responsibility for the other party's financial situation. If the dc are adequately catered for it is not the responsibility of either party to assist in the financial situation of the other person as you are no longer a couple.

I'm not sure why you think there is. It would be nice if he could and he did but then we don't know of his situation. He may have other responsibilities that mean he is not in a position to bank roll you as it were. This is why division of assets in a divorce should take into account lower capacity to earn if earnings were curtailed within the marriage so the lower earning person has time to build up their career

I would be very wary of people who claim they get spousal maintenance and check their circumstances. It's very unlikely someone of more modest means would pay it unless they volunteered to and often there is little sense in doing so now because it simply diminishes a recipients claim to universal credit. Even where someone of more modest means is ordered to pay it, it doesn't tend to last very long as it is seen as in most cases it is seen either as a payment to help someone achieve financial independence or as a bridge until someone can start receiving their share of the pension.

The days of being able to insist you cannot work at all because you have a child in primary school are long gone. As a rule of thumb, courts will follow similar expectations to the Department of Work and Pensions in assessing someone's capacity to earn and arguments about school holidays or child care arrangements are not likely to get much traction with modern judges who are motivated to find a settlement that will end the litigation once and for all.