CSA for step child

[helmaria]

Now my ex has a step child living with him, does this lessen my csa payments?

I just knew that someone would pick on that fact I didn't type out both scenarios. I also knew it would be by you FrogStar.

FrogStar Does it really matter? It's a hypothetical discussion.

Regardless of whether someone leaves or is kicked out the NRP still has a financial obligation to their child not to the ExP but to the child they share with ExP.

But the emotional choice to move on and have a family is different from the system that assesses the NRP as financially responsible for all his DCs/those that live with him.

The system can't be "fair" on everyone all the time - in some cases the system disadvantages NRP, in other circumstances, RP get the raw deal.

I still question the financial judgement and budgeting skills of a RP who has to miss meals in the event of a small percentage drop in CM - when the whole amount could suddenly dry up, without warning, at any time.

Clearly never had to try and cope on benefits then frogstar!

The emotional choice to move on and have a family should absoloutely take into account the needs of your existing children.

You may sneer at those parents who have had to miss meals due to the nrp reducing or stopping cm but it is the nrp who is doing that, and whats worse is they dont even care that it could be their child missing that meal!

My best friend eats lunch here 2/3 times a week and imost weeks i buy her electric. She is working 25 hours a week on minimum wage and her ex is paying zippo for their 2 dc since the summer (no reason given and he's SE so no way to get it). He left her with a mortgage she couldnt pay alone and shes just had the house reposessed so please dont give me that shite about her lack of budgetting skills. He created her situation and he is continuing to contribute to the downward spiral she is in financially. The ca would at least mean electric and food for her (as the children always get it regardless)

I think the attitude by a lot of posters on this thread towards step children and the children of new partners are quite disturbing. When my DSS's mum had a new baby, the amount of money the CSA took from her wage for the boys dropped. I personally had no great issue with it, she had a obligation to feed and clothe her child who is at the end of the day my DSS's little sibling. And the amount was tiny - I think it shook out to like 6 or 7 pound a week. It just seems logical to me - she had two children to financially contribute to, then she had three so there would be less for the older two. I'm not saying it's right or fair but in the grand scheme it's not the issue I would spend time stressing about.

And before its brought up, shes been looking and applying for full time work for 18 months now.

But frogstars is talking about the decrease in maintenance due to a new child being born - not a NRP just stopping paying maintenance. If you are in the position that a drop in maintance of a few pounds a week is the difference between you and the DC eating or not them you are in a very vulnerable position.

But the emotional choice has a knock on affect.

No your right the system can't be fair on everyone all the time which is why when NRP or their new partners moan about the fact they are struggling financially within their new family because they are paying too much child support for NRP first children I genuinely think tough, fucking shit.

Don't make an emotional selfish choice to have more kids or move in with someone who has kids if it means your first children suffer financially.

How is it so hard to understand? I'd love a nice fancy house but I can't afford a £1,500 per month rent so how stupid would it make me to sign the lease? It's maybe not a nice way to put it but the point is the same. Don't do what you can't afford.

I wasn't the one that said about missing meals but people budget for what they know they have coming in. It may not mean the kids miss out on food but it might be having to wait a couple of weeks longer for the pair of shoes the desperately need, or the RP having to go without to buy school uniform. And all at the hands of the NRP making decisions without considering the affect on their existing children.

To say the money could dry up at any time is true, but that that would surely only come about by the NRP facing unintentional financial hardship. There is a massive difference between this and making the conscious decision to extend your family whether step or biological at the expense of your existing kids.

Well yes, lots of people are in very vulnerable positions. Thats not news is it? Why does that make it better that they have to go without more because another couple decide to have a baby?

It sounds almost like some of you are saying 'well thats your own fault if a reduction in maintenance means you are hungry'

But

I also want to point out, I am all for blended family's but just not at the expense of an innocent child.

I also don't receive a single penny from my ExH so haven't been in this position but it would bloody well aggravate me if I was.

It's because maintenance is not secure income - it's just not. Relying on maintenance to the point that a few pounds of a drop will mean you and the DC starve especially when it can ultimately be stopped at anytime if the NRP is a dick is not wise. It may be unavoidable but if you're in that position then I personally would do everything in my power to get out of it.

I have often read threads about Lone Parents managing without any CM due to complete avoidance by irresponsible NRP (and quoted statistics that 'prove' how common that is).

How can I reconcile that with the claims being made on this thread that a small % reduction in CM results in missed meals?

Perhaps those LP who struggle with the latter can learn from the former?

Yes lets put the onus in the (obviously thick ) parent who is already on the bones of their arse to find a way to make up for the NRP's decision to take money from their children.

Well Frog I am one of the LP you refer too. People's circumstances are different. I rent, so I am lucky enough to be in receipt of housing benefit. What help do people with mortgages get to cover their mortgage? This is one of the main differences between the LP who manage and those who struggle week in week out.

Have you ever been in a position that you have a pile of bills in front of you that are all overdue and you have to decide which is more important not to go without if you get cut off? To say that some lone parents should take a lesson of others is ignorant and insensitive.

How about we stop making excuses for people who arent adult enough to be having any children never mond more if they cant do it without taking money from their existing children.

Or maybe we turn it on its head as it 'only a few pounds' if the NRP cant afford to pay those few pounds i would question not only their budgetting skills but their grasp on logic if they cant see that it doesnt make sense to have another child if you cant afford those 'few pounds' fro existing children.

And further to that there is also massive differences throughout the country of living costs. These aren't always taken into consideration.

There is also the fact that some LP may be having to pay off loans or debts that had been accrued prior to being a LP. You can't judge every situation as being the same.

YoureBeingASillyBilly

I agree, being put across is the RP can afford to lose what the NRP can't afford to pay... Really?

We need an eye roll emoticon.

See that's only what is happening if you refuse to grasp that I don't think the NRP should take the deduction at all because i believe that NRP should want to willingly and to the best of their ability support their children. i'm inclined to think that if the CSA is involved the NRP could well be a bit of a dick to begin with and the CSA system for sound reason allows the deduction therefore the RP has to budget accordingly. It's not fair but that's the way it is and as RP we should try and organise our finances to ensure we're not completely dependent on feckless NRPs.

BruthasTortoise - `i'm inclined to think that if the CSA is involved the NRP could well be a bit of a dick to begin with'

I have been involved in many cases a NRP has paid maintenance at an agreed rate for extended periods only to receive a letter from the CSA when they have submitted an application for contact, etc.

There are RPs out there who happily use the CSA as a weapon.

That's a fair point lost dad but I'd say there's many more cases where the NRP just hasn't wanted to pay - which makes them dicks IMO.

There absolutely is lostdad there will always be people who take their personal grievances into account where access/money are concerned. It's horrible but it is true. It should always be about what is best for the child.

However I don't believe that any child is pay per view. There is a financial obligation whether there is access or not.

"As RP we should try and organise our finances..."

Or rather the Govt should make crappy NRP's accountable and change how the whole system is managed.

The current system sends a very clear message that you children only get if you deem them worthy of your money when the message should be that your children need a minimum amount before any other commitment regardless of whether you have over committed yourself elsewhere. And that they dont start eating less because you have another baby

I do think it's right that the amount should be reduced if the nrp has other children as the child would be affected if the parents were still together. However, I wouldn't ever see my dsd go without either.
In my dhs case he's always paid cm thru the csa and we let them know when our ds was born but they made such a cock up we didn't bother when our dd was born or when my dsd started staying round more.
I've always felt bad for my dh as he's only ever seen his dsd 1 night per wk so he's missed out on so much of her life and that's down to her dm and there's no two ways about that. He asked to see her more and she's always rejected this. It wasn't til our dd was born and our dsd broke down that we eventually got to see her more.
My dh has loved seeing out dc growing up and just because he's already got a child that he's been kept away from he shouldn't be stopped from having more children.