Joint residency?

[timehealsall]

Hello, need some info really from any Mumsnetters out there who can help.

I?m a separated Dad. I look after DS approx 35% of his time in my own place - buy clothes, nappies, etc, etc (would like 50/50, but you know?)

Anyway ex and I have now got to point of discussing her being primary carer verses joint residency.

At the moment ex seems a bit reticent over this - worried about what joint residency would mean in terms of financial arrangements which is understandable.

Unsure how relevant but ex works full time and actually earns a little more than me.

At the moment I pay CSA maintenance, though before moving to own place lived in shared house and paid more than just CSA to help with joint house mortgage. Can?t really afford extra anymore as suitable own place for DS leaves me financially quite tight after maintenance is paid (£350 a month, manageable for sure, know a lot of people are a lot worse off, not too sorry for myself!)

Joint house is almost sold now (touch wood!!!)

I, honestly, have absolutely no desire not to pay CSA maintenance or try and muscle in on the benefits she receives (CA, tax credits, etc).

My current understanding is that joint residency is an option in my case. Are there any benefits I could claim with this status beyond what ex claims. I?ve heard this might make me eligible to claim tax credits as well, is this the case?

Basically I don?t want to go back to ex and upset her further with no decent reason!

joint residency has no bearing on CSA assesments, they are 2 seperate things.

CSA assessments are calculated on how much you earn, how many dc there are in the assessment and how many nights per year your dc sleep at your home.

Child benefit is usually paid to the parent who looks after the dc the most (this is actually the number of nights btw), you need to be receiving cb in order to claim tax credits.

If you use the CSA on line calculator it will give you an idea of what they would have you pay if you go through them. It would be 15% of your salary less so much as he stays overnights with you.

Thanks CarGirl, really useful info, appreciate your time.

Actually already use CSA, though number of nights isn't accurate at this stage, but seeing as ex is paying mortgage on her own right now not going to change that until house is sold and her costs go down. Will then though.

So basically joint residency in our case would make no difference to me in terms of extra benefits becoming available to me which is important to know.

Can I ask anyone out there if they can explain what the differences really are then in terms of joint residency and primary carer?

I don't know the legal ins and outs but sole residency is only awarded (AFAIK) when the non-primary carer is an arsehole with dropping and collecting, taking without consent etc etc etc Courts much prefer joint residency as you are both taking joint responsiblity for caring, upbringing and housing children of the relationship.

Families need fathers is a very good website to help you with this sort of thing.

I would recommend perhaps seperating the maintenance you pay for your ds and then additional money as "contribution to the former home costs".Even if you just write it an email stating £x is the maintenance for ds as per the CSA guidelines (feel free to make it a little more if you can afford to) and £x is to contribute to the mortgage on the joint house etc.

I would also try very hard to be amicable with your ex (without being bullied or bullying) as it is so worth it in the long run. Phrases like "I'm not sure I need to think about it" are better than starting an argument when you thing the ex is being unreasonable etc.

Practically there isn't that much difference between shared residence and the traditional residence/contact model. Residence determines where a child should live. Sole residence is when a child lives with one parent and stays or visits the other parent (or not as the case might be). Shared residence is when a child lives with both parents although not necessarily 50:50, it can be indifferent proportions. Even when there is a court order for shared residence courts sometimes the courts will refer to the parent with the majority of care as the primary carer.

There is much information available about the positives of shared residence but there are a few negatives. Whilst there is nothing inherently wrong with shared residence it hasn't actually been established that it is better for children to spend equal time, or substantial and significant time, with each parent. What we do know is children who are secure about their parentage thrive and survive better than those who do not know or see one parent or when a parent harbours resentment against the other parent.

All too often an expectation of shared residence can be a moot point making the negotiation of practical arrangements difficult. There is concern in some quarters that children living in a shared residence arrangement may actually be those where parents are the most conflicted, and hold onto notions of their rights, equality and fairness rather than putting the welfare of children first.

Residence is about the legal position of the two parents. Joint Residence (Residency is the american term, I think) recognises in law that both parents have equal responsibility or standing in terms of making decisions for the child (even though the child may spend a majority of the time with one parent) - so maintaining the status quo from when you were married (or together). In many ways you already have Joint Residence in that neither of you have a Residence Order.

Although things have changed a little in recent years, IME I have not found what Cargirl says to be correct in term of awarding Sole Residence which often routinely goes to the mother for very little reason whatsoever, and often because Fathers do not know that they can ask for anything else. Sole residence then makes one parent a 'visitor' or person who the child 'visits', and although the RP is supposed to 'consult' on major decisions, in practice that doesn't amount to much legally.

However, it has no effect on finances through the CSA which are based on nights spent with either parent.

Tanga that's really strange ex-BIL was desperate for joint residency and it was battle despite the fact he was drinking, doing drugs, encouranging dn to jump out of the 1st floor window to go with him, just taking them away from outside the house, not feeding them, having them at the social til 11pm on a school night (they are under 7) etc etc etc

He wanted joint residency to try and get the FMH btw not cos he gives a sh*t about his dc!

It is actually parental responsibility that gives both parents equal responsibilities and rights to carry out those responsibility. As I said above residence determines where a child lives. In most cases parents will agree living and contact arrangements themselves.

The courts are only involved when parents cannot agree and there is a no order principle meaning residence and contact orders are only made when there is no other way of resolving the dispute and an order would be in the best interests of the child. Residence orders in favour of one parent are usually only made when for one reason or another the court deems it inappropriate for a child to live with the other parent. These days the outcome of many residence applications is shared residence although not 50:50 that often.

The status quo usually refers to the continuity of care which is considered an important part of a child's sense of security and the disruption to established bonds is avoided whenever possible. This means continuing the existing pattern of care tends to be preferred by courts.

There is one benefit that can be affected by joint residency - housing benefit. There was a case a few years ago where a bloke got a shared residency order from court. But his local council said that as his DCs spent more nights with their mother than him then he was only entitled to single person's housing benefit.

He took the council to court on the basis that his shared residency order effectively bound him to provide a suitable home for his DC(s). If the local council were to prevent him from renting a property that his DC(s) could use as a home then they were, effectively, forcing him to breach his residency court order. I believe he won that case, although there may have been more to it.

I heard about that case through Families Need Fathers. I second the recommendation to get in touch with them - they really are a good bunch. FNF will likely suggest to you that you don't go to court over this. You've effectively got shared res already and court can just make a fragile situation so much worse by the adversarialness (if that's a word) of it all.

I agree entirely with STIDWs post.

Thank you , mumblechum.

On the point of housing benefit raised by Snorbs I think the case being referred to was Holmes-Moorhouse when the Court of Appeal said that, in certain circumstances, a SRO might confer priority need in a homeless application. However, the House of Lords disagreed and overruled the decision.

STIDW, thanks for the correction. I didn't know it had got all the way to the House of Lords and had been overturned.

totally agree with my learned friends STIDW and Mumblechum

I found this extract relating to shared residence from the speech given to Families Need Fathers by the most senior family judge in England & Wales on Sunday which may be of interest;

"41. In my judgment, there is a limit to the value of the labels which a court
can put on any relationship. What matters is what actually happens. Separation is, of itself, a serious failure of parenting. Mutual recrimination post separation rarely achieves anything. What matters is the enduring relationships. Many parents make matters worse by their disputes over their children. They forget the loyalty children have to each party. Because they think they are right, they think that the child must
agree with them and their view of the other parent.

42. Shared residence orders are not a panacea. ...."

The paper is available to download here;

www.familylaw.co.uk/articles/Wall200910

Ooops, forgot the hyperlink...

www.familylaw.co.uk/articles/Wall200910

If only our clients would believe us if we quoted that case!

Of course, they always think they're right, which I guess at least keeps us in a job.

Speech, not case. Dur.

My ex has recently applied for jt residence order. Kids all live with me.The main issue for me is that we have v. opposing views on needs of kids e.g I have referred them with advice from school and Gp for fam therapy but he has blocked it very very effectively .Social Services may appear as every decision at education and health level he opposes me and bullies staff. He has kids ( 3 of them) every other weekend. Brief says sole residence is only option. I am finding that he has told kids not to take me seriously. It is a nightmare as I am only trying to give kids space to deal with this. If shared residence happens then my point of view will never be considered.Any thoughts? First appointment with kids next week. We cant work together but most of all he does not listen to me and ignores my input.