Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Original poster

child support payments - weathy ex taking possibly deliberate drop in income

17 replies

earlycomputers · 05/10/2015 10:19

Does anyone know what happens re child support payments if one's ex dp takes a huge drop in salary but he has a high value asset (property)? My ex dp has decided to pay off all his mortgage on a house worth half a million from his savings and from shares from leaving his start-up company and then only having a very small monthly income (about a quarter of what he earned before) - the rationale for this is there won't be any mortgage to pay so he won't need as much money. Or it could be he is doing this to avoid high child support payments. Whilst I approve of paying off mortgages as this does seem sensible, how will this affect CSA payments if most of his capital is tied up in property and is not in the form of a monthly income? He was on his former high income for many years so he would have no problem getting this much in a different job if he were to do this. We have 3 dc's between us with a lot of monthly outgoings (private school fees etc). I wouldn't be able to afford all these fees on my own (I pay half) so the kids would have to leave their schools and we would have to massively downgrade the house I currently live in (already extremely modest). he currently lives in the ex-family home (6 bed detached house) and I moved into a 3 bed flat in a high crime area. Any advice from anyone?

OP posts:
DiscoDiva70 · 06/10/2015 13:01

I'd apply for a variation, if possible, regarding his diversion of income

wowfudge · 06/10/2015 13:28

Not legal advice, but what a shit: has anyone pointed out to him it's his children who will suffer?

Micah · 06/10/2015 13:31

Have you asked him or has he told you that he intends to drop his payments in line with his new income?

If not, ask him. Do you go through the CSA already, or is it a voluntary arrangement?

If he does plan to decrease his payments, then yes, you need to take it up with the CSA re/ diversion of income.

Original poster
earlycomputers · 06/10/2015 15:33

It was a voluntary arrangement. What can the CSA do re diversion of income cases? I guess this must happen a lot and there doesn't appear to be anything stopping the absent parent from ploughing all their capital into a property/car/antiques etc and just taking a token low income to avoid paying high child support costs...Or would the CSA look at assets?

OP posts:
Bellemere · 06/10/2015 16:25

The CMS don't include assets as far as I am aware. They calculate based on regular taxable income.

Has he quit his job and got a different, lower paid one? Is he self employed? I'll never understand people who take a lower paid job to avoid maintenance as they lose more than the person receiving the maintenance. Madness.

STIDW · 06/10/2015 22:24

Were you married and have you taken any legal advice?

DiscoDiva70 · 07/10/2015 06:45

Well he sounds like a great father, living with six bedrooms and his children in a flat Hmm
As above, get legal advice ( you can use a free half hour clinic) and also contact the csa and ask their advice as to the options available to you.

If you go down the csa route and they ask him for wage slips etc, if you don't agree with the calculation they come up with then you can dispute it and, I believe, open an appeal. It's worth knowing that the onus will be on you to prove what he earns and not him to disprove, which I think is completely wrong!

Collaborate · 07/10/2015 08:08

It's worth knowing that the onus will be on you to prove what he earns and not him to disprove, which I think is completely wrong!

Which opinion you may revise if someone ever makes a factual claim or accusation against you Hmm

Micah · 07/10/2015 08:17

Has he definitely done it to avoid cs?

We have done something similar, but purely because it was the most efficient way of budgeting our money (but we're not high income to start). Reduced our income to the bare minimum.

We still pay Csa as before, as the point wasn't to get out of it, but to shuffle money around so interest paying loans were prioritised, so long term everyone's better off.

DiscoDiva70 · 07/10/2015 10:09

Collaborate

Not sure how to take your last post but presuming it's aimed at me.

If you've been down the csa route (as I have), and you go to appeal (as I have), you will soon realise that the onus IS on the rp parent (me also) to prove that you believe the non resident parent is earning more than he's/ she's possibly declared to the csa.

I was told that the non resident parent has a right to be believed!

AnchorDownDeepBreath · 07/10/2015 10:14

I believe you can make a case that he could earn more and they will then assess the claim based on what he could earn, rather than what he is earning, but he could easily thwart that by claiming that he took the job as he's paid off the mortgage and therefore can afford a lower paid job to reduce stress etc. You'd need to prove that he took the job to reduce child support payments, for the CMS to be interested.

If it's a private arrangement is there any chance of you agreeing to him paying his half of school fees regardless of income?

Bellemere · 07/10/2015 11:00

A right to be believed - goodness, sounds like innocent until proven guilty!

DiscoDiva70 · 07/10/2015 12:22

Well in my situation Bellemere, the comment you made was very apt!

prh47bridge · 07/10/2015 12:33

DiscoDiva70 - Collaborate, as a solicitor dealing with family law, is well aware of that. The point he was making is that if you were on the receiving end of an allegation you may well take the view that it is up to your accuser to prove their claims. That is absolutely the right way to do things although you seem to think otherwise. If, for example, the parent with care alleges that the non resident parent has a secret income stream that they aren't declaring, how on earth do you expect the NRP to disprove the allegation?

DiscoDiva70 · 07/10/2015 13:42

prh47bridge

how on earth do you expect the NRP to disprove the allegation?

Well, when (as in my case) you present five seperate land registry title deeds stating that the nrp owns these properties in his sole name, yet he claims that he only earns £200 per week, it kind of makes you think he's lying about his income! yet he apparently still has a right to be believed!

I was asked to prove how much he pays on mortgages etc, which is impossible, yet he hasn't had to show how he can afford all these properties on his income!

Tbh I don't expect you to see where I'm coming from if you've not experienced what I have with the csa rules.
Also, I'm not here to argue my point, I'm here to try and advise the Op.

Collaborate · 07/10/2015 14:15

There's the legal burden of proof, and the evidential burden.

The legal burden says that whoever makes a factual claim has to prove it.

When enough evidence has been produced, the evidential burden will pass to the other party. In other words, unless the other party comes up with some evidence, the allegation is likely to be proven.

I'm not going to go in to the details of a case I know nothing about. There's a reason why there's a burden of proof. It protects us all.

babybarrister · 09/10/2015 14:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page