Child Maintenance

[BluebellsandTulips]

My Ex took voluntary early retirement (age 58) from a long term high paying career in March 22, he has now told me that he is going to reduce the monthly child maintenance payments as he is now on a reduced income. We have a consent order signed by the family course in 2020 which clearly stipulates his monthly financial obligations for our two children who are still dependents (17 & 14) He said he is going to the CMS. Can he do this? Or is the consent order a legally binding contract?
I would be grateful for any advice! Thanks

It depends on the wording of the consent order. I would imagine its based on his actual income, as if his income was to reduce eg if he was made redundant, had a serious accident and was physically unable to work, or as he has done is due to retirement than he couldn’t actually pay a high amount.

My first suggestion would be speak to a solicitor. In some cases there can be an application to change a consent order e.g if circumstances drastically change (reduced income etc...)

CMS will work out payments based on earnings. If he is retired and assuming his income has dropped . Your payments will go down. He could potentially take this back to court as a reason to change the consent order.

Yes, he can. The orders can be revised due to change of financial circumstances after 1 year.

Cms will review based on incoming monies. That includes pension.

If he's taken a lumpsum of money as well, you can try and pursue this is taken into account. But it won't be as a matter of course.

its the 12 month rule, after 12 months consent orders if they mention maintenance can be overruled by the CMS. V surprised your solicitor didn’t warn you of it.

www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/children-and-young-people/child-maintenance1/agreeing-maintenance-between-you

Yes he can. My ex similarly stopped working in his role in investment management several years ago, and although he can afford to live in a house which costs him c.£4K a month, take holidays, privately educate his child from his current marriage, and generally live the life he lived while still employed, somehow he gets a nil assessment from CMS as he has no income. As his wife doesn't work either, it's a mystery how they afford their lifestyle! CMS have never been remotely interested in investigating any of this.

Fortunately after several years of paying nothing he has at least given DS some financial support at uni, but very much on his terms.

Also, a consent order can be effectively cancelled by a CMS assessment (in so far as the order relates to child maintenance) if the order is more than 12 months old.

I had an email off him in April explaining his budgeting plan for the children since his retirement and there was no mention of him reducing the payments, he even broke it down including amounts and dates!

The first two replies on this thread are wrong. The consent order is more than 12 months old, so he is entitled to go to the CMS. The wording of the consent order is irrelevant. You cannot ask for the court to change the child maintenance provisions in the consent order. He does not need to go to court to get the consent order changed. If he goes to the CMS, their calculation will replace the consent order. Sorry.

This is irrelevant and could be best of intentions and then realisation of the impact of this decision over the next 30 years. If he was paying based on old income and that's now significantly lower he' legitimately had reasons to reduce this. In the current environment most households are trying to do the same.
Anyone receiving cm has to be be aware that this amount could increase, reduce or stop, so shouldn't be be reliant upon this for survival.
Do you work?
What will be the potential drop in income for you?

Has he explained to the children what will happen as he refuses to pay? Maybe they would like to move to live with him and you pay the maintenance instead?

I don't think there's much legally you can do after 12 months (of course, check) so what's the position on moral blackmail? Does he want his kids to cut back on x y z?

Bear in mind he probably has a great lump sum as well
So annoying!!

I work full time and have no chance doing the same and retiring early like him, he doesn’t have the children at his house as his new wife doesn’t want them in her life, so other than him seeing them for an hour or two on a Wednesday and Sunday they are with me full time. I get working and child tax credit, so with what I earn and the child maintenance he pays we just about make ends meet.

That's very sad. Sounds like he has just lost all interest and just wants to spend on himself/new wife. How crap for you all.

Sadly, your only options are:
1.find higher paying work
2.cut your outgoings
3.look at migrating to universal credit to see if you'd be entitled to more - some people with multiple children are.
4.move to a cheaper area

Being reliant on the cm to make ends meet is always a bad idea, as I said before and making yourself more financially independent is obviously best for you both now and moving to the future when your children leave home...

My consent order specifically mentions the CMS and that if an application is made to them, any payments will be deducted from what is owed in the consent order - but it is specified in the consent order is still owed. You have to apply to the Court to vary an ongoing consent order. If he just changes it without getting a variation he could be liable to pay back what is owed. You need to speak to a lawyer.

A lawyer will tell you that he doesn't need to apply to the court for a variation. He will not be liable to pay back anything provided he applies to the CMS as the OP says he intends.

Twelve months after a consent order either party can apply to the CMS. As soon as they apply, any provisions in the Consent Order relating to child maintenance become null and void. The CMS calculation replaces anything in the Consent Order.

Unfortunately, you have false security with that consent order.
You cannot remove someone's rights. And after one year, if a change of circumstances, a paying parent has the right to go to the cms. So regardless of what's in your order, you'll never see any difference between the two sums, even if you tried to pursue this... Which would be futile.

Common sense says of course if someone has a reduced income they can pay maintenance according to CMS. Can't get money out of someone if it means them not eating.

My order was a global maintenance order it covered both spousal and child, so perhaps that makes a difference. Anyway its long behind me now so please don't worry about my sense of security. OP I suggest you speak to the barrister who was involved in creating your order.

It won't change things. This is well documented on the internet. There is nothing any lawyer can do about it. The OP's ex is entitled apply to the CMS. When he does, their calculation replaces any provisions in the consent order regarding child maintenance. The courts are not allowed to intervene except in very limited circumstances which do not appear to apply here.

My global maintenance order specified that if either party made a claim to the CMS after a year, that amount would simply be deducted from the global maintenance award.

And actually it appears to be well documented that a global maintenance order does indeed apply regardless of an award by the CMS.

As I said OP speak to a barrister who has good understanding of high net worth cases.

becket-chambers.co.uk/2018/01/31/global-maintenance-orders-now-mainstream/#:~:text=Global%20maintenance%20is%20the%20mechanism,under%20the%20statutory%20CMS%20system.

www.stowefamilylaw.co.uk/blog/2017/12/11/just-within-bounds-global-maintenance-orders-and-child-support/

From your reference to high net worth, you are presumably talking about cases where the paying parent's income was more than £3,000 per week. In that situation the courts have can order child maintenance. However, it is highly unlikely that the OP's husband will have that high an income when he retires, so the courts cannot intervene.

It is too late for the OP to get a global maintenance order since she has a consent order. That will have barred her from seeking any further financial orders against her ex. She cannot therefore make a claim for spousal maintenance, which in turn means she cannot get a global maintenance order.

My friend has a Financial Order that says she will not make an application to CMS on the basis that there is a trust fund for the benefit of the children. However, this trust fund is only for the children to claim for housing or education once they reach the age of 18.
It goes on to say "The parties further agree that they will each indemnify and keep indemnified the other in respect of any CMS assessments which may be undertaken."
Does anyone know exactly what this means? She has called the CMS but they can't respond until the court order is a year old so she has no idea where she stands at the moment and can't plan her future finances for the children.
Grateful for any advice

It means that, if the CMS calculation is higher than any amount she currently receives in child maintenance, she will have to refund the difference to him. Equally, if it is lower, he will have to pay the difference to her. In other words, if she does apply to the CMS it won't make any difference.

Hi, I am looking for some advice regarding child maintenance. I had to go through the Child Maintenance Service 5 years ago as my ex-husband was barely providing for my 2 sons. He does now but reluctantly and only because it goes through the CMS. My eldest son is turning 18 at the end of the month and my ex has already messaged me about monthly payment being reduced (he did not waste time !) However in the consent order from the divorce my solicitor made a point to include maintenance until the end of tertiary education (university) - I did find the section in the consent order. My question is: if the CMS can't make him pay after the child is 18, how can I make sure he will provide for his eldest son? I am kind of preparing myself that unless I go through court or solicitor, (very pricey!) he won't.