CMS advice to DH

[FallenFigs]

Me again...

SthxH has kids 40%, I have made a claim to the CMS as he was paying each month, has stopped etc etc.

The amount is pro-rata'd because he has them some nights. He currently pays pocket money, a few other bits. I pay some sports clubs, all school lunches etc (even on the days they go from his house etc). He has said the CMS have told him that because he is, or will be, paying CMS, that he doesn't need to pay anything else AT ALL for the kids.

In effect, that I should pay all costs for the kids. Even things like sports clubs on the weekends he has them, lunches for school on days they go from his house. I know this isn't right, but unfortunately as they have told him this, he will now only do that.

I would understand if they were with me 100% and he paid me 100%, but it is pro-rata'd down to account for the fact he has some responsibility too. How on earth can I get him to understand this? As it's really very frustrating.

He's twisted that a bit - if indeed this discussion with CMS even took place. The most they would have said is they can't force him to pay any more than the CMS minimum, but everyone knows that kids cost far more than what CMS says.

Simplest solution is to go 50/50 custody - no CMS, but each parent pays the costs incurred during their contact time. Not easy to get him to actually do it though.

I'm sure the discussion took place. It's also quite likely he's twisted what they've said. I just wish the Gov.uk pages had info on this as we clash about it so much.

He'd still have to pay a little even with 50/50.

I can't afford to pay all the extra curricular stuff. For example they do a sports activity that is paid termly, on weekends. I just pay it, as he was paying other stuff. Now he's not going to do that, that leaves me in trouble. Why should I pay a sports activity on 'his' weekend when he will pay nothing beyond CMS? Ugh I hate this.

Obviously you don’t pay for their lunches and food when they are with him 😂

I think he’s right regarding clubs and that assuming they also attend them clubs when they are with you but if it’s just clubs he organises, he’ll have to pay.

Unfortunately he is correct. He only legally needs to pay what CMS say he has to.

Oh sorry just saw it’s school lunches. He’s right.

Unfortunately, as the children's father is taking this stance, you either pay or your children go without - ie you cancel weekly clubs and find things they can just do every other weekend (when with you) on a pay as you go basis, you tell school they will be having lunches on M, W, T (or whatever your days are) and their lunches on the other days are down to their father and you won't be paying for them.
This however puts your kids in the position of not being able to do the clubs they want, have no food on a "dad day" if he doesn't send them with a lunch or pay. And, quite rightly, you aren't going to want that.

He's not right on lunches surely? I shouldn't have to give them money if he's had them overnight, otherwise what is the point of the CMS pro-rata'ing stuff down? On the extra-curricular stuff (clubs etc) I know it's technically correct.

It's so shitty. He just stops paying things, tells the kids he can't afford it as he 'gives me all his money' (except he doesn't). I don't want to put them in the middle, so I pay it.

I know (hope) it'll all come out in the wash after, but I'm fuming about it right now.

It's not "right" but legally, he doesn't have to provide anything above and beyond CMS, that's the system.

If he doesn't want to give them money for school lunches, tell him he has to provide a packed lunch for them on the days he goes to school from his.

My SC have packed lunches all the time so it's easy enough. With my own DC they had school dinners and yes, I paid for it all out of the money my ex paid me. And school uniforms etc.

This is crazy. So, he decides he's not going to pay anything above CMS. I pay for uniforms for when they are at my house, and he has to cover for his house? Otherwise, why should I pay for uniforms for when at his house? Should I cover his electricity and the DC food at his house from the CM? Definitely not. The amount is pro-rat'd down for that. Therefore logic applies to uniforms etc too?

You can tell him to buy uniforms for his house but he can refuse. It is what it is, the CMS amount is what he’s got to pay. Do you get child benefit?

Of course he can’t refuse to buy uniforms for his house. He’s responsible for the children’s costs when they are at his, that includes their clothing.

Yes it is shitty, I would hope no one would argue it isn't.

Anotherworrier of course he can refuse - who is going to force him to do otherwise?
Eg uniforms: there aren't any at his house, he won't buy them, so the kids go in non-uniform, they get into trouble, the school contacts him (more likely you, and you tell them to contact him), he doesn't care. The kids are put in the middle and get hassle at school.

You're so wrong @Anotherworrier Of course he can refuse. Nobody can force him to!

That's exactly why it's pro-ratred. He's meant to pay for everything on "his" days.

Clubs are tricker. He could just refuse to take them on his weekends. You'll still have to pay for a whole term, and they'll miss half of it.

This is the crux of it. He has taken from the CMS that I am responsible for all their costs. That I need to buy them all clothes, pay all school trips etc. All clubs. That he needs to pay for literally nothing extra, just pay the CMS (and of course his housing, and bills).

That's the problem. I can see they've told him he doesn't have to pay anything 'extra' but they have missed the essential part of the equation - that the pro-rata down (in his 'favour') is to recognise the fact he incurs costs for them when they are with hm.

Can anyone direct me to any form of information where it explains he has costs for his days i.e. that means when they set off for school he has paid for lunch etc? That he needs to pay for the uniforms that reside at his house etc?

At the beginning, we had an agreement to split extra-curricular stuff 50/50. I have offered a 60/40 split to reflect the time they are with me. Seemed logical.

Instead, I get this. I resent the fact I will now have to unpick this.

What will he do if you don't send the children with school uniform or spare clothes?

So how can he prove he has them at all with no receipts? Exh tried to say ds lived with him. He didn't. I provided receipts for clothes /clubs /dinner money etc. He had his (dc associated) benefits stopped.. Never paid me cms because he was disabled...

It doesn't exist.

How can I send them to school with no uniform on? They wear uniform to school, they go to his house in uniform.

They are teenagers, they come and get their stuff as they please. It really would be ridiculous to get to the point of insisting they leave separate wardrobes at each house.

Another example. DS (13) school camp. it's £470. I cannot afford this solo. Who pays? I pay half and tell school to get the rest from him?

There won’t be anything official telling him what he has to pay for on his days - the government will tell him what he has to pay legally (I.e. CMS). They won’t have guidance to say what he should pay morally.

Yes, it’s shit.

The school will most likely not do that. If he won’t contribute and you can’t afford it then your child does not go.

Well surely though if it is pro-rata'd down (to account for expenses his incurs on his days) then it should be clearer why that is the case...

Well, he's right and wrong. He should pay when he has the children but equally he could just cancel all the clubs etc on his days if he doesn't want to pay for them.

Clothes: of course you can't control teenager in that way - so you end up having to pay.

Another example. DS (13) school camp. it's £470. I cannot afford this solo. Who pays? I pay half and tell school to get the rest from him?
Unfortunately you make the decision that either you scrimp to pay for it all, or DS can't go.

Again, no one is arguing it is right - but there isn't a mechanism to make him pay.

Claiming they are 100% with you and getting him to prove otherwise, so you don't get the nights decision from CMS is an interesting idea.