CSA and their stupid rules

[makemineamalibuandpineapple]

No doubt this has been done to death, there is nothing anyone on here can do about it but I just feel I need a rant!!

My ex-husband was made redundant 5 months ago and got approx £60k. He now no longer has to pay maintenance as he is unemployed. However, he lives with a woman who has three children who he is obviously supporting.

It makes me so cross that he is happy to support someone elses children when he won't give even a small amount to his biological child. Just because the law says he doesn't have to, you would have thought he might have felt a moral obligation.

I know people will say "oh but that money will have to last him until he finds a job". But I have heard him on the phone to DS telling him about all the things he is spending it on so he is hardly being careful with it.

Phew, rant over Has anyone else had a similar experience that they would like to have a good old moan about?

[Traveller123]

To SteamGirl. CSA excludes savings below 65K when calculating CM. Even then it is the income arising from savings and assets. As interest rates are low NRP would need a substantial sum to exceed the £2,500 per year limit for unearned income. Assets that do not generate income at all are excluded by law that was introduced a few years ago. There was a recent case in which NRP had pension pot of over £5 Million. However, as pension pot was not producing any income it was excluded by law. NRP paid £7 per week as assessed by CSA.

[user1497582089]

Why is it that ex-wifes think they are entitled to all of ex-husbands earnings and savings? Can none of them work out that ex-husbands have needs too? ie they need somewhere to live, something to eat, clothes to wear, etc.

All maintenance, whether it is CM or SM, is based on needs and the ability of the paying partner to pay. Greed, revenge, anger, wants and wishes are not taken into account.

[user1497582089]

Savings and assets can not be depleted to provide maintenance. It is only the income, if any, that arises from the savings or assets. For example. Interest on savings in Bank or Rental Profit from Property.

My ex-wife tried to dip into my redundancy money. Both CSA and Courts said no on basis that she was working and had a net income of 1200/per month and that I was paying mortgage and utilities at family home anyway

[McPheetStink]

Watching with interest, as I have the CSA calling me in the next week.

[Chandras]

That's ok if you are earning enough to pay the rent/mortgage, services, etc yourself so you can use thd whole of the child maintenance in keeping the child dressed and entertained.

There are however a huge number of parents outhere who need to use part of that child maintenance to keep a roof over their heads. Obviously you can claim that that's what housing benefit for but not everyone who needs it qualifies for it.

Unfortunately, many mothers have made the idiotic mistake to stop working to take care of the family and support their husband's career (I was ond of those) so I find it interesting that while my ex can continue with his high flying career, our son who a few years back attended private school, from one day to another qualified for free school dinners.

Obviously, I'm not going to let my son down, and have two jobs to support him the better I can, but he is nowhere near to have the quality of life my ex 's new stepson is enjoying. But as my ex rightly said... The state would take care of us, and he was right, we would be living under a bridge nowadays if it were not for the blessed tax credits :-)

[allnewtaketwo]

"I guess the CSA calculations are fair if both parents earn the same salary, otherwise is just... not enough"

That's just a silly statement to make

If, say, the nrp earns £60k, then monthly cm payments for 1 child would be about £480. In what way is this "not enough" as a contribution towards 1 child? Given that the state disregards child maintenance payments for benefits (and tax credits) purposes, it's a fairly substantial contribution I would say. My child certainly doesn't cost me anywhere near that per month.

[Chandras]

I have not yet met a woman who is perfectly happy and able to raise her children on an amount calculated by the CSA.

I guess the CSA calculations are fair if both parents earn the same salary, otherwise is just... not enough.

I have met non resident parents who continue to pay maintenance from their savings when they are out of work, the fact that he has £60,000 to survive and has stopped paying maintenance makes me think that the OP is right to be annoyed.

Even if the OP was not working that is still totally irrelevant as the resident parent is still putting the lion share of the work involved in raising a child and believe me, getting a nanny to do that work would be far more expensive than the meagre CSA calculated maintenance. If she were not working, the more the reason she needed that support. In these recession days is not as if you can go to the job centre and be at work the next day, and he should know that by now having been made redundant.

[leaharrison11]

And also he has to live of his redundancy childcare cost should be included in that

[leaharrison11]

Im in the same boat ladies

EX has quit his job after coming into pound;40k so doesnt have to pay maintenance anymore, but also lives for free with his nan and is spending his money on cars, clothes , lads hols , festivals, etc but apparently thats fine that he can do all of that but not support his son , it makes me angry because if us mothers did that we would have our children taken away not that we ever would.

And just to add to the is OP working or not discussion ... I am not working my son has a disability and needs my one to one care but please tell me how that means its ok for the dads to live the high life and for the mothers to struggle and for the record im not claiming disability for my son as i dont think i should receive money for him having a disability

[birdofthenorth]

I'm not sure you can conclude he's supporting his new partner's children, but given the lump sum I do think he would do the right thing to pay his own DC even a token amount. DH still paid his ex when took two years out of employment to retrain (essentially I paid it, but not at all grudgingly, as it seemed pretty unfair on his ex to get peanuts, even though she's not badly off).

[Fleecyslippers]

He is a nob. But as long as he's being a cash cow for some other woman and her kids, there's not a lot you can do.

[allnewtaketwo]

If he sees DS and has him in his home then he will be financially contributing to some degree.

His previous maintenance payments I would guess were very high. Hopefully the OP has kept some aside. Very highly paid positions are often volatile, particularly in the current economic climate.

[purpleroses]

I can't really understand why redundancy pay isn't included in CSA rules. After all, it's supposed to cushion you whilst you look for a new job - surely that cushion should apply also to those you support?

(£60k is a lot btw - I got £1500 when I lost my job. He must have been well paid, and/or have very generous employers)

And yes, morally, the OP's ex should contribute some of the money to her and the DCs, though she's no proof that he's "supporting" the new girlfriend and her kids, as he could just be using the £60,000 to retrain, or to pay his own way whilst he looks for a new job.

[AmberLeaf]

I suppose its just down to morals really.

Some NRPs will pay because they have to and if there are any circumstances where legally they don't, then they wont.

Then there are NRPs who will pay regardless of loopholes, because it is the right thing to do.

Irrespective of any current DP/DW and any children she may have.

[whateveritakes]

Interesting thread. Think allnewtaketwo has some good points.

It must have been a fair old amount of maintenance so I see why Op is upset. However not convinced she has right to the same amount now. I also can't see how the CSA can assess his (and others) redundancy packages. It would be like her divorcing all over again and that takes time and money.

(I'd also want to know how Op knows he got 60K. They must have had a chat about maintenance to know this much).

On the other hand makemineamalibuandpineapple have you asked him for anything/private arrangement? He should give you something even it's if by way of school trips/clothes/food shopping etc.

[allnewtaketwo]

Yes very possibly Peppa. We don't know if the OP works or not. If she doesn't, then clearly yes, it's only the state financially contributing at present.

[Theyremybiscuits]

Oh I am in exactly the same position!

Watching with interest.

My ex has spent a fortune on his new house, new car, luxury holiday etc, yet cant afford some food shopping money for our children.

It makes me really sick.

[PeppaFuckingPig]

So if the OP doesn't work then she's not contributing to her child's upkeep? What, the state are paying?

[allnewtaketwo]

It might be extremelly relevant to how the OP's ex perceives the situation. He may, if the OP does not work, feel that she should also be contributing to the childrens' upkeep. Who knows.

[PeppaFuckingPig]

Whether she works or not shouldn't be relevant to how the OP perceives the situation. The non resident parent should provide for their child. Whether they're working or not, whether they have redundancy money - whatever. The fact that he's not offering some of that money for the upkeep of his child says a lot about him as a person.

OP - you have my sympathies.

[allnewtaketwo]

I wasn't giving my opinion, I was asking a question.

And you don't actually know if the OP is making any financial contribution to the children or not at present.

[AmberLeaf]

What gives you the impression I think it's about me ?

Im giving my opinion, you're giving yours.

But whether the OP works or not takes nothing away from the fact that they are both responsible for their child.

If he isn't making any financial contribution, then it is all falling on the OP.

[allnewtaketwo]

It might be very relevant to how the OP's ex perceives the situation though. So might various other facts that we have no knowledge of. Who got the marital home, financial settlement, who was lumbered with debt etc etc etc etc. None of this might be relevant to YOU, but this isn't about you, it's about the OP and her ex. There could well be factors influencing his decisions that we do not know. So whether or not you think these facts are relevant or not is itself irrelevant

[AmberLeaf]

Yes, of course you can.

But I can also point out that IMO it isn't relevant.