"Generous" child maintenance - making it watertight

[MooBalloon]

If a marriage breaks down and the H offers child maintenance above the CSA minimum, is there any way that this can this be made watertight in a consent order?

My concern is that the apparent generosity in terms of child maintenance is just a ruse to pre-empt and block discussions on any need for spousal maintenance.

Let's say the household "needs" are £1500 pcm:
Wife gets £1000 in wages/tax credits/benefits
Husband offers £500 in child maintenance (CSA level £350 + £150 extra)
Wife therefore has no "need" for more income, therefore has no claim for spousal maintenance; consent order is written up accordingly.

The following year, husband goes to CSA, reduces payment to £350.
Wife's household now runs a deficit of £150 pcm, which she has no "right" to recover.

How can this situation be avoided?

Thanks

I am not sure that you get much for spousal maintenance unless you have been married for 30 years to a multi millionaire and given up a major career to support your husband and family.

Sadly I think the ex wife is expected work whether she likes or not when a marriage breaks up, if she is working age.

You need more of the 'assets' of the relationship up front as what you have said could easily happen - or he could lose his job/leave his job and get it reduced.

So a lump sum payment from equity, the ex taking on more 'debt' from the relationship, pension - anything really.

No you can't avoid the other party being able to apply to the CSA after one year so the consent order ceases to have any effect with regard to child maintenance.

And you probably wouldn't want to go down the spousal route anyway.

For all benefit calculations inc tax credits spousal payment are means testable so get classed as income. Child maintainance does not.

This means that a decent spousal maintainance sum will reduce any benefit award

ST is right. In our consent order I pay everything. I pay school and university fees no matter who the children live with and each of us pay for the children otherwise, when they are with us (he never has them) so the order in effect means I pay 100%. However I still have the right if I chose which I have not exercised as it is not worth the hassle to go to the CSA and seek the % of his fairly low (comparatively speaking) earnings even though the court consent order sealed etc agreed by us both and our lawyers says he pays nothing.

You mentioned support for the spouse. My ex got more than half our assets so that I could buy out his maintenance for life claims and we had a clean break. If the man here wants to avoid maintenance (for the wife) in future he should make it a clean break consent order. Anyway why should adults not work to keep themselves?

it is technically possible to have a 'global' maintenance order

eg £500 per month for periodical payments for spouse and children to be set off pound for pound against any CSA award.

(so after the first year is up, if CSA award less, the balance of the £500 is all deemed to be spousal payments).

the order would have to express when the payments stop - eg child turns 18/ finishes secondary/tertiary education or whatever, and what happens to spousal maintenance after that.

I don't know how the benefit/tax issue raised by Sockreturningpixie would work out in that scenario if no CSA award was made.