Page 10 | Does my brother still have to pay children maintainer for his 17 year old working son?

Nikki037297 · 2022-02-07T07:07:10+00:00

My brother has a son who is 17 and is working part time and at college part time. His ex is demanding money as my brother is just going back to work after being on the sick after an accident at work and breaking a bone in his neck and not being able to work for around 20 months now. He’s googled it and can’t find much out and it seams a bit complicated and never mentions the child working and what would happen in those circumstances. Does anyone know ?

Toanewstart23 · 07/02/2022 19:16

cost relating to the care of my child

Aka as

Childcare costs

collieresponder88 · 07/02/2022 20:08

Yes and he should backdate it by 20 months his not paid for his son !!!

racingnowhere · 08/02/2022 09:26

@Nikki037297

I can’t believe how many very rude responses there is towards me. I asked a question about my brother. I don’t know why people are talking about me being pregnant and my boyfriend. My boyfriend is 27 (27 isn’t quite old enough for a 17 year old child but I have seen stranger things) and has always worked, he had a job interview for a lorry driver a few weeks back, he didn’t get the job so he’s staying on at his job he’s been at 4 years. That’s nothing to do with my brother.

But that’s not what I was asking. I didn’t want everyone’s opinions on my whole life. I was visiting my brother as it was his daughter’s birthday and we got talking about him going back to work. Yes he’s been on the sick he’s fortunate to have a partner who works part time and to have paid off his mortgage when he was still working before his accident.

Thank you to the people who answered my question properly instead of bitching on about my brother

Right, so your brother has no mortgage, a partner who earns enough to support him, he is now back IN WORK and he STILL is trying to wrangle out of supporting his own son.

Thanks for clearing that up OP. Its makes it absolutely clear that there are not mitigating circumstances to excuse your brother's behaviour towards his son. He really is an utterly selfish, unpleasant and indecent man.

He's a man happy to be supported by his partner but not happy to support his own child.

And you wonder why people have been ' rude'. Clue: they are not rude. They are outraged by men like your brother.

racingnowhere · 08/02/2022 09:33

And actually OP, your behaviour is just as disgusting as your brother's.
You are conniving to enable him to stop financially supporting his own child. If you had any decency yourself, you would have given him an earful about his obligations to his child, not enabled him.

If one day you find you have a child with a selfish man like your brother, who tries to wrangle out of financially supporting his own kid, I hope you will remember back to how you behaved towards your nephew and feel great shame.

ancientgran · 08/02/2022 09:46

@collieresponder88

Yes and he should backdate it by 20 months his not paid for his son !!!

Immediately or overtime? Twenty months is probably thousands and I'm not sure if many people could suddenly come up with that if they have maybe been on SSP for 20 months, obviously some people will get paid more but not many employers are going to keep paying full pay for 20 months.

ancientgran · 08/02/2022 09:51

Right, so your brother has no mortgage, a partner who earns enough to support him, he is now back IN WORK and he STILL is trying to wrangle out of supporting his own son.

She didn't say his partner earns enough to support him, she said his partner has a part time job, she'd need a good part time job to support him, herself and their child/children. He must have been getting some sick pay from somewhere but they might have been struggling, we don't know.

She didn't say he was working, she said they were talking about him going back to work.

No use discussing things if you just want to make things up.

He's a man happy to be supported by his partner but not happy to support his own child.

He broke a bone in his neck and wasn't able to work, how does that add up to him being happy about any of it. I'm sure he'd rather have been fit and well for the past 20 months.

Toanewstart23 · 08/02/2022 09:54

@ancientgran

If he was on SSP
And ot was backdated by 20 months

He would owe the princely sum of….

£140

Migrainesbythedozen · 08/02/2022 09:54

@ancientgran

Right, so your brother has no mortgage, a partner who earns enough to support him, he is now back IN WORK and he STILL is trying to wrangle out of supporting his own son.

She didn't say his partner earns enough to support him, she said his partner has a part time job, she'd need a good part time job to support him, herself and their child/children. He must have been getting some sick pay from somewhere but they might have been struggling, we don't know.

She didn't say he was working, she said they were talking about him going back to work.

No use discussing things if you just want to make things up.

He's a man happy to be supported by his partner but not happy to support his own child.

He broke a bone in his neck and wasn't able to work, how does that add up to him being happy about any of it. I'm sure he'd rather have been fit and well for the past 20 months.

But regardless of all that, he is still trying to get out of paying child support.

Lalala1 · 08/02/2022 10:10

@ancientgran

The issue with the OPs brother is he wants providing anything nothing nadda for 20months! He should have been providing the legal amount as dispicable as it is of £1 per day!! If he had paid that “huge” amount of £1 per day he would have any back pay to pay and no one would be having a go at him on here about it they would just be saying to the OP yes he still has to provide cms at 17 if his DS is in approved education with a part time job like she was asking about

racingnowhere · 08/02/2022 10:11

@ancientgran

Right, so your brother has no mortgage, a partner who earns enough to support him, he is now back IN WORK and he STILL is trying to wrangle out of supporting his own son.

She didn't say his partner earns enough to support him, she said his partner has a part time job, she'd need a good part time job to support him, herself and their child/children. He must have been getting some sick pay from somewhere but they might have been struggling, we don't know.

She didn't say he was working, she said they were talking about him going back to work.

No use discussing things if you just want to make things up.

He's a man happy to be supported by his partner but not happy to support his own child.

He broke a bone in his neck and wasn't able to work, how does that add up to him being happy about any of it. I'm sure he'd rather have been fit and well for the past 20 months.

OP says very clearly in her opening message that is he is' just going back to work' The normal meaning of this is that he is 'just going back to work'. Not looking for work. Going to work. Which OP reiterated in her update about him ' going back to work.' That's not making things up. That's a plain reading of the text. I would have to add in a hidden layer of meaning to interpret it 'going to work' as looking for work.'

And even if he is 'looking' for work. He is still planning ahead to see how he can avoid starting to pay again for
his son once he starts earning again. So he's still the same deadbeat dad. So whether he is 'looking' or 'going' his plans are the same.

OP also refers to her partner as ' lucky' enough to have a partner who works part-time' She would only use the phrase ' lucky' if he was being supported by her. Supported does not necessarily mean his partner covers all the costs (though she might) but is at least subsidising his living costs, so he has not been struggling on the breadline on sick pay. 'Lucky' as OP says.

So I am not making things up. I am taking the plain meaning of what OP has written.

So yes, I stand by this being a man who is happy to be supported by his partner, but not to support his own son. He has a job. (Or plans to get a job if he is 'looking') and is planning to find ways to avoid paying for his son from his salary. Yep, definitely a man happy to be supported but not to support his own child.

thevassal · 08/02/2022 10:16

Lots of 16-18 year olds have part time jobs, it forest mean they are completely able to support themselves.

If it had been your nephews mum who hadn't been able to work for 2 years I assume your brother would have happily paid double his maintenance or more to cover everything his (then 15 year old?) son needed ? If not he probably needs to backdate 2 years of payments as well as keeping on paying!

ancientgran · 08/02/2022 11:42

[quote Toanewstart23]@ancientgran

If he was on SSP
And ot was backdated by 20 months

He would owe the princely sum of….

£140[/quote]
I assumed when people talk of paying back what he owes in support they weren't thinking of the minimum on benefits, I thought they meant what his share of costs would be. Obviously if they mean £140 it wouldn't take long to find that.

ancientgran · 08/02/2022 11:44

But regardless of all that, he is still trying to get out of paying child support.

Of course he should pay and hopefully he will be back at work and earning but people making stuff up like him being happy to be injured and off work for 20 months doesn't reinforce that argument.

ancientgran · 08/02/2022 11:45

OP says very clearly in her opening message that is he is' just going back to work' The normal meaning of this is that he is 'just going back to work'. Not looking for work. Going to work. Which OP reiterated in her update about him ' going back to work.' That's not making things up. That's a plain reading of the text. I would have to add in a hidden layer of meaning to interpret it 'going to work' as looking for work.'

If he has gone back to work I'd say he's gone back to work, if someone was due back at work I'd say they are going back to work.

Toanewstart23 · 08/02/2022 11:51

* Obviously if they mean £140 it wouldn't take long to find that.*

Chances are that he will try to wriggle out of it

Lalala1 · 08/02/2022 11:51

@ancientgran

Where has anyone said “he his happy to be off work and Injured for 20 months” I might have missed it? I think it’s more about he’s been happy to be not providing anything for 20 months because he’s off work and injured not that people think he’s happy to be injured

Toanewstart23 · 08/02/2022 11:52

Being injured
Being off work and on SSP

Doesn’t excuse him in the eyes of CMS (thankfully) for contributing during that entire time. A pitiful £7 a week. But he even dodged that.

whiteworldgettingwhiter · 08/02/2022 12:00

Bloody hell, he's been off work for 20 months - how has his ex been coping with paying everything for your brother's child? That must have been very stressful for her.

And she's demanding, is she??

Jeez, with women like you, we don't need men to knock us down.

Don't you think men should pay for their own dc? Even though he's working, he's still living at home and a roof over his head, food, clothes, etc.

You don't sound very empathetic.