Child maintenance System has no regard for the fathers family

[Lsimms97]

I’m absolutely in shock at how many posts I am reading from women slating their children’s fathers who are refusing to pay maintenance through CMS. I am a woman and if I ever break up with my husband, I would never ever put in a CMS claim because I respect him. I understand that sometimes there are deadbeat fathers and CMS is the only option, but for loving fathers who actually see their children, please do not use CMS! My husband’s ex, who has a drug problem, is unemployed and takes up drug habits whilst my stepchild is at school all day, has decided that after years of a family based arrangement, that she would like to put in a CMS claim, in which she has lied about the existence of my children and the amount of nights we looks after my step child for. CMS are being extremely difficult about this and forcing us to go through tribunal courts to resolve the incorrect information whilst at the same time they are taking incorrect payments from us which is everything we have after paying rent. The result is that we are now left struggling to feed and clothe two toddlers. I love my stepchild and would never see them go without, we are a huge part in their life and have never refused to pay for school uniforms, lunch money, top ups, holidays etc, clothes, haircuts...anything which is needed! But the reality is my stepchild is walking around in a pair of £200 trainers, has all of the latest gadgets etc and we have nothing left for our children. His ex has even sent us a picture of a takeaway and said ‘cheers’ because she is getting so much money and it does not take that much money to raise one child. Do you not also think that as mothers, you should also contribute to the child’s upbringing? CMS payments mean that fathers pay for everything even though it takes two to tango. My poor husband has Had his life ruined by this woman constantly using the child as a weapon and now she’s found a new way to get to him. The sad reality is he is going to have to quit his job or we lose our home. I also work part time by the way, but we cannot cover the unrealistic payments and still support our children. CMS do not care about this, I have cried down the phone to them and they literally couldn’t care less.so please women, if you have any respect for your ex, please seek a family based arrangement. So many men have committed suicide over this, and been left in poverty. It isn’t fair. The CMS are awful!

The JL v SL case is not an authority for 50/50 splits in every case. In that case wife had an inheritance of £465k and husband a post separation windfall (non-marital) of £586k. Both were excluded from the calculation used to divide. The husband brought over £2m in to the marriage, and the judge made it clear he would have excluded that were it not needed to meet wife's needs.

The judge was very clear that the wife's share would be able to meet her needs for housing and for income. She would have £2.25m plus £650k in a pension.

VanGogh

I don’t put such details on CV, but application forms always ask for such information.

@MissedTheBoatAgain

They don't 'always' but even so, I'm very surprised that the jobs you apply for have application forms. I work in short term contracts so when I change contract I apply for dozens of jobs and I can count the application forms I have filled in over the past 10 years on my fingers.

DrCoconut

Make sure you have claimed all your entitlements. Child benefit, child tax credits and reduced council tax for being the only adult in the house. If you are working check if you qualify for working tax credits.

Assume your ex is trying to find employment?

VanGogh

It’s usually the recruiting agents that want to know.

To LifeBegins50

What is a PSO?

Child has two passports. UK and another for his Mother’s native country as he citizen of that country too.

It’s usually the recruiting agents that want to know.

Yes, of course they do - but that's a conversation and you can explain to them why you are changing direction, happy to take a reduction and understand that you won't get ex pat rates in a UK based role.

But, just admit you don't really want to. You just want to moan.

but that's a conversation and you can explain to them why you are changing direction, happy to take a reduction and understand that you won't get ex pat rates in a UK based role

Applied that logic at my most recent UK Job interview which was 2012! Employer did not buy it and Job was given to someone who lived locally. In anticipation of your question "how do you know that?". Reply is "recruiter told me"

So you don't think that children should be financially supported by their own fathers? Aren't you a peach?

So you don't think that children should be financially supported by their own fathers?

Of course fathers should contribute to the cost of raising their children. Who on this thread has said otherwise?

CMS has clear guidelines as to how Child Maintenance shall be calculated. Gripe that some on this thread seem to have is they consider the CMS calculator to be insufficient and cost of raising a child is actually higher. Maybe be a true statement, but what the moaners seem to forget is that RP's are entitled to Child Benefit and Child Tax Credits.

For one child that is £4,380 per year based on what my Ex receives. If NRP was on minimum wage they would pay £1,668 in CM assuming child stays with NRP at least one night per week. So RP would have a total of £6,048.

If NRP was on UK average salary £27,60 total CM for one child would be £2,815. So RP would have £7,195 in total.

There seems to be big difference of opinion as to what is costs to raise a child, but let's be generous and say £10,000 per year. Compare that to the amounts RP's receive in State Help and CM from NRP they are receiving a big chunk of the generous £10,000 per year.

Strange post....both parents are financially responsible for their children. It’s the law. Full stop. No matter if the see the child or they suspect the other parent is an addict 🙄.

As for the CMS. The non resident parents pays a percentage of their income. The CMS will calculate this for you. It always go to direct pay first (paid directly to parents) other than calculating the amount/ small percentage of income the CMS only get involved again if the non resident parent doesn’t pay.

If you don’t want CMS involved, pay your maintenance. If you don’t want to pay child maintenance don’t have sex.

If you don’t want CMS involved, pay your maintenance. If you don’t want to pay child maintenance don’t have sex

Spot on

both parents are financially responsible for their children. It’s the law.

So true. However this thread has degenerated in to a bun fight in which some posters seem to be ready to castigate a paying parent for not earning enough to pay beyond a certain level, whist at the same time remaining silent about the responsibility of the receiving parent to also make whatever financial contribution they can afford.

to castigate a paying parent for not earning enough to pay beyond a certain level, whist at the same time remaining silent about the responsibility of the receiving parent

Correct again.

Get the impression that some (mostly ex wives it appears) seem to think Child Maintenance should go beyond what is needed for their Children and leave a surplus for themselves?

I disagree on the logic that if there were no children then RP's would not be entitled to; Child Benefit, Child Tax Credits and Child Maintenance. Hence proving that Child Maintenance was never intended to be the RP's pension pot.

Of course child maintenance isn’t for the RP personally, it’s for them to use for the child/children.

I’ve literally never met any RP who expects their ex to fund them, I think it’s a nasty little myth propagated by bitter NRPs who think their pittance funds way more than it does.

It’s up to both parents to provide for their child/children, if one doesn’t do so adequately, they’re a fucking arsehole. Whether that’s RP or NRP.

It’s up to both parents to provide for their child/children, if one doesn’t do so adequately, they’re a fucking arsehole. Whether that’s RP or NRP.

So if one parent, be that resident or non-resident, doesn't work, or doesn't earn very much, they're a "fucking arsehole"?

Nice.

"If NRP was on UK average salary £27,60 total CM for one child would be £2,815. So RP would have £7,195 in total.

There seems to be big difference of opinion as to what is costs to raise a child, but let's be generous and say £10,000 per year. Compare that to the amounts RP's receive in State Help and CM from NRP they are receiving a big chunk of the generous £10,000 per year."

*MissedTheBoatAgain" but what you've actually shown is that the NRP only contributes just under a third of the cost of raising the child. Who do your expect to pick up the rest of the cost?

Typically it's the RP and the state. And if the RP has an average salary then the RP is picking up most of the cost.

I'm not saying that the NRP should pay more but I don't think you proved what you think you did.

So if one parent, be that resident or non-resident, doesn't work, or doesn't earn very much, they're a "fucking arsehole"?

If they’re deliberately lowering their income not to provide, yes.

If they make their children go without because of their own actions, yes.

If they put their own wants and needs above their children, yes.

What else would you call a parent who does that?

“If they’re deliberately lowering their income not to provide, yes.

If they make their children go without because of their own actions, yes.”

YES! If you can’t support your children on your income, take a second job. Don’t reduce your income. Deliberately reducing your income makes you deadbeat.

Also, if anyone is genuinely concerned about money not being spent on the children, send clothes/shoes/uniform/grocery deliveries instead.

It’s not an excuse not to pay for children. DPs XW doesn’t manage money well, and doesn’t make sure the girls have what they need, so we do. We send supermarket deliveries, update their bus passes, buy their clothes/shoes/uniform/pay for school trips, update their dinner money cards each week. It doesn’t always involve sending cash. If the electricity/gas needs topped up we put the money in DSD1s account and she does it.

Just to clear up one point above someone said the resident parent gets child benefit and tax credits. I didn't at all. Not all of us earn so little we get those benefits.

I agree that paying direct for things that are needed is a good plan once people have paid what they are required to the other spouse under the law. It works with children too - I paid university fees yesterday direct to the university and then you know the money is going right away to that particular cost. Also a non resident parent may be more likely to pay something direct eg to the school for the ski trip etc or the £10 to the football club.

Just to clear up one point above someone said the resident parent gets child benefit and tax credits. I didn't at all. Not all of us earn so little we get those benefits

Many RP's work part time around the children's school hours. Often such part time work pays the minimum. Hence they qualify.

You are an unusual case in my view. Earned 10x Ex and had to give him a £1 Million. Not many divorced women in that category I think.

Xenia fair point about what has to be paid in law. Because my DSDs are DPs DSDs rather than DDs we don’t have any obligation to pay cash, so we ensure they have what they need (over and above what CMS would be anyway) in that way rather than handing cash like we used to.

And if the RP has an average salary then the RP is picking up most of the cost

My example was based on RP working part time as opposed to full time which is often case when they have young children. If RP was on average wage working full time then yes they would not receive the Child Tax Credits, but would still be entitled to Child Benefit and CM from NRP.

Also based my example on a child costing £10,000 per year. High in my view as I know families who have 3 children and their parents don't earn £30,000 gross never mind net.

*So if one parent, be that resident or non-resident, doesn't work, or doesn't earn very much, they're a "fxxxing arsehole"?

Nice*

Spot on

Even high earners can be made redundant at any time.