Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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

High earning, asset-rich partner has cut maintenance

71 replies

AnotherNaCha · 30/09/2025 21:01

So my ex has been paying £xxx amount of maintenance which is agreed between us and has been long-standing, but not made official or through CMS etc.

But he was made redundant (and is unlikely to work again) and has suddenly halved the amount. He has gradually upped his days with our DC so now it’s almost 50/50 so says he owes me no maintenance. He is worth millions in assets.

Can this be right?

I work part time on a low wage without much hope for ever increasing that.

OP posts:
winter8090 · 04/10/2025 06:20

He has no income. How do you expect him to pay?

How much is half?

winter8090 · 04/10/2025 06:24

HRchatter · 04/10/2025 06:04

Sell one of these bloody assets like every mother in the world would do if that’s what they needed to do to survive and look after their child
It’s not fucking optional

Show quote history

You don’t know how much half is.
Maybe that’s enough to reasonably support his child especially since he has 50% custody.
Every mother could also work full time to support their child. The OP quite possibly gets state support as well.

Clonakilla · 04/10/2025 06:35

You need a solicitor.

But you also need a plan to support yourself in the future, presumably you could go back to the established career you gave up?

Connebert · 04/10/2025 06:55

FOR GOODNESS SAKE. How can people still not understand that in most cases it's the woman who has had to give up her financial independence and earning potential in the early years and that re-entry into the workplace at a decent level becomes extremely difficult or impossible? And that if you're working and not there physically you need a ton of money to pay for childcare?

Catsknowbest · 04/10/2025 06:59

Are you in the UK OP?

SugarPlumpFairyCakes · 04/10/2025 07:00

Connebert · 04/10/2025 06:55

FOR GOODNESS SAKE. How can people still not understand that in most cases it's the woman who has had to give up her financial independence and earning potential in the early years and that re-entry into the workplace at a decent level becomes extremely difficult or impossible? And that if you're working and not there physically you need a ton of money to pay for childcare?

This with bells on.

redemptionwoes · 04/10/2025 07:05

Connebert · 04/10/2025 06:55

FOR GOODNESS SAKE. How can people still not understand that in most cases it's the woman who has had to give up her financial independence and earning potential in the early years and that re-entry into the workplace at a decent level becomes extremely difficult or impossible? And that if you're working and not there physically you need a ton of money to pay for childcare?

no that’s a woman’s CHOICE. Lots of women can and do return to the workplace after maternity leave - accepting that they (as in the parents) have to have childcare in place whether or not it exceeds the cost of the lowest earners income. It’s a CHOICE to say you know what childcare is expensive so I’ll stay home with the kids not appreciating (caring) of the impact on future career/pension/financial independence.

in my situation the situation was reversed - their dad earnt barely above minimum wage and having twins childcare was twice his income. He went back to work….why….so that he had his own financial independence and no lasting impact on his earnings/career (not that there was much of one).

Connebert · 04/10/2025 07:14

I disagree. It most certainly is NOT mostly a woman's personal choice AT ALL but a pragmatic decision for the good - or bad - of all concerned.

Connebert · 04/10/2025 07:15

So, OP, I sincerely hope it can't be right, and I wish I could be of more practical help.

OnlyMabelInTheBuilding · 04/10/2025 07:18

Connebert · 04/10/2025 06:55

FOR GOODNESS SAKE. How can people still not understand that in most cases it's the woman who has had to give up her financial independence and earning potential in the early years and that re-entry into the workplace at a decent level becomes extremely difficult or impossible? And that if you're working and not there physically you need a ton of money to pay for childcare?

There are protections for this - marriage.

If you choose your give up work when you’re unmarried, you’ve chosen to live with this risk.

Connebert · 04/10/2025 07:27

This is - very unfortunately - true. Moral duty should be legally enforced.

Snorlaxo · 04/10/2025 07:27

CMS use income not assets to calculate how much CM is owed and a deduction is made for overnights. I suspect that he has (or will) use accounting tricks to make his income look as low as possible on paper. For example if he rents out a property then he can have the property remain empty so there’s no income. Self employment accounts are a legal loophole that can be used to minimise CM payments.

If he was made redundant then he wasn’t unreasonable to reduce CM because it’s based on income not assets. He’s also right about 50/50 meaning zero CM. This is why many women marry before kids - some of his assets may be your now depending on when the assets became his and how long you were together. Realistically your son may only see some of his dad’s wealth if his dad passes away or gives him some as a gift.

babyproblems · 04/10/2025 07:28

I HATE the single mum shaming culture on mumsnet. Every single time there is a post from a single mum who is struggling to balance everything; we see these sorts of shitty replies about not being married / not working FULL TIME and grafting yourself to the bone. It’s insane. I do not understand why this is still some people’s perspective! Success in life is not working a crappy corporate job on the edge of burnout just to appease social standards and pay some bills. There are many walks of life and not everyone is obliged to comply with this one miserable average approach and certainly not if you find yourself alone with a small child. The other parent of OPs child has plenty of resources; there’s no reason why they shouldn’t support their child as much as they can; and op is looking for ways to ensure that happens.

winter8090 · 04/10/2025 07:30

DrowningInSyrup · 30/09/2025 21:35

Wow, that's a bit harsh when we don't know her circumstances. I sincerely hope she isn't on the streets. Seems to be a bit of a nasty post.

Show quote history

This isn’t harsh. This is the reality.

The OP needs to find a way of supporting herself before the child grows up or life will become very very tough.

It may not be what the OP wants to hear but it’s the best advice anyone could have given her.

Whyherewego · 04/10/2025 07:37

Connebert · 04/10/2025 07:27

This is - very unfortunately - true. Moral duty should be legally enforced.

Exactly this, it's a moral duty not a legal one. So OP all you can do is shame or guilt him into increasing the maintenance because if he's doing 50 50 there's not much else you can do I am afraid. Make sure he's paying half of everything though, uniforms, clubs etc.

OnlyInsomniaInTheBuilding · 04/10/2025 07:37

redemptionwoes · 04/10/2025 07:05

no that’s a woman’s CHOICE. Lots of women can and do return to the workplace after maternity leave - accepting that they (as in the parents) have to have childcare in place whether or not it exceeds the cost of the lowest earners income. It’s a CHOICE to say you know what childcare is expensive so I’ll stay home with the kids not appreciating (caring) of the impact on future career/pension/financial independence.

in my situation the situation was reversed - their dad earnt barely above minimum wage and having twins childcare was twice his income. He went back to work….why….so that he had his own financial independence and no lasting impact on his earnings/career (not that there was much of one).

Show quote history

Yes but the glaring difference between your situation and the OP's is that there were two of you. OP is clearly a single parent. So how could it possibly work for her to "have childcare in place even if it exceeds her income"? Surely it's not that hard to grasp that if she earns £1500 a month working fulltime, and fulltime childcare costs £1200 or even £800 thats not going to work!
Or perhaps she could use some of her free time to build a time machine, go to the past, and decide not to reduce her working hours (a "choice" that over 30% of mothers make) in order to maximise the household income.

nearlylovemyusername · 04/10/2025 07:45

Darkershadeofpink · 03/10/2025 22:03

I will post to support you, op. I am in a similar scenarios but without the potential millions. It is very hard to know where to turn. I would get some good free legal advice or pay for it. Some women cannot work or cannot get back to earning what they used to. I know a friend in this scenario and he had to pay to house the child in a decent rental. He sounds financially abusive. I would get the advice and you are not alone. Please consider other ways he may be abusive.

In what way he's financially abusive? OP doesn't give much details re child's age or amounts involved. I'm under impression that he paid considerable amounts which allowed OP to work part time, but now halved it, despite having child 50/50 or close to.
If anything it sounds that he was very generous, more than legally required.

As to having both houses financially equal... OMG, I hope this never comes to the UK

HRchatter · 04/10/2025 07:49

Whyherewego · 04/10/2025 07:37

Exactly this, it's a moral duty not a legal one. So OP all you can do is shame or guilt him into increasing the maintenance because if he's doing 50 50 there's not much else you can do I am afraid. Make sure he's paying half of everything though, uniforms, clubs etc.

Show quote history

Actually, as we discussed earlier it is a Legal one too but it’s getting it in front of a judge that understands section one of the children’s act that is the tricky part.

nearlylovemyusername · 04/10/2025 07:52

Whyherewego · 04/10/2025 07:37

Exactly this, it's a moral duty not a legal one. So OP all you can do is shame or guilt him into increasing the maintenance because if he's doing 50 50 there's not much else you can do I am afraid. Make sure he's paying half of everything though, uniforms, clubs etc.

Show quote history

Where did OP say that he's not paying for uniforms, clubs etc.

Based on OP's posts it might well be that he used to pay e.g. £2k/month and is now "only" paying £1k. There might not be any childcare involved depends on child's age.

There are 2 very different scenarios:

  • DC in 1yo, farther used to pay 150/month and is now paying 75
  • DC is 14yo, EX used to pay 3000 and halved it to 1500

OP doesn't give sufficient details but I suspect it's towards the second scenario

CancelTheTableAlan · 04/10/2025 08:05

Bear in mind 5050 is calculated on nights not days OP. If ex has "upped his days" with your child is he also having him at home overnight, feeding him, does he have clothes and other stuff? If he's just picking him up more often and taking him out that doesn't count.

Clockface222 · 04/10/2025 08:17

If the assets produce income (e.g dividends, rental income etc) then it may be possible to enforce maintenance through CMS. A private court order would however be more likely to order a higher payment.

Whyherewego · 04/10/2025 08:33

nearlylovemyusername · 04/10/2025 07:52

Where did OP say that he's not paying for uniforms, clubs etc.

Based on OP's posts it might well be that he used to pay e.g. £2k/month and is now "only" paying £1k. There might not be any childcare involved depends on child's age.

There are 2 very different scenarios:

  • DC in 1yo, farther used to pay 150/month and is now paying 75
  • DC is 14yo, EX used to pay 3000 and halved it to 1500

OP doesn't give sufficient details but I suspect it's towards the second scenario

Edited
Show quote history

OP didn't say hence I said "make sure" in case he didn't. I've seen lots of examples on MN of mums who end up paying for more than half when you include all the extras.

tramtracks · 04/10/2025 08:43

Connebert · 04/10/2025 07:14

I disagree. It most certainly is NOT mostly a woman's personal choice AT ALL but a pragmatic decision for the good - or bad - of all concerned.

For some women it’s not a choice - but also in some cases it is. In my case I had to work - that was not a choice either - It would have been nice to have a high earning partner to support the children when they were young but mine wasn’t a high earner. I do think that choice is a luxury in terms of providing for your children. Most of us compromise, wing it a little and hope we can keep our jobs/careers going until childcare is no longer needed.

Nsky62 · 04/10/2025 08:59

Soontobe60 · 30/09/2025 21:02

Well you could work full time for a start?

Maybe she has other children or health issues

tramtracks · 04/10/2025 09:04

Connebert · 04/10/2025 06:55

FOR GOODNESS SAKE. How can people still not understand that in most cases it's the woman who has had to give up her financial independence and earning potential in the early years and that re-entry into the workplace at a decent level becomes extremely difficult or impossible? And that if you're working and not there physically you need a ton of money to pay for childcare?

We all understand this. Which is why having children and then relying on a partners income is a huge risk.