Working out salary backwards from maintenance

[LL0015]

My ex is self employed and seems to think he should be paying me £92 a week in maintenance. He has suggested £600 a month in maintenance and is saying he is paying above and beyond.

My question is how do I work out maintenance backwards to get to the amount he therefore thinks he earns? I think he's way off the mark, bearing in mind he has submitted papers for our divorce (nisi is stamped) and stated £65k annual income.

We are bordering amicable, not going through mediation so I need to reassure myself he is playing fair. He generally is fair...but OW may be having an impact.

Why don't you use the maintenance calc with the 65k as gross? You can find it on the CSa/Cmec we page.

Is it for one child? I did a loose calc of 65k less 30% tax at 15% for 1 DC, comes out at 568/mth

Thanks for replying HRN

Don't they work it out gross now?

I think he earns about £65k, but I put £55k in, to allow for pension and what not (maybe he had a bad year) on cmoptions.org - this is the official page I think.
At £55k it comes out at £136 a week

He said he should only be paying £92. My maths isn't good enough to work it backwards.

2 children. 52 nights a year with him.

I'd email him with what CMoptions gives you for what he declared on the divorce paperwork. Does the new partner have children? Does your ex live with them?

Well if you calculator comes out with 136 a week that would be if you times by 52 and divide by 12 £589 per month so if he is offering £600.. I would just take it and ignore the semantics of the situation ..

Thanks starbright
I agree with the semantics side of things, but he is making out that he is giving me 50% more than he should. When actually, he isn't at all. If he wants to do right by his children and give them 50% up,fit, at least use the correct figure to begin with.

Ow has child but we agreed he wasn't taking that into account as the child's father pays substantially. As it should be.

So just my errant ex to deal with.

And I guess we are negotiating, but he has started very very low, yet with the statement that it's higher than it should be.

If you could end up with less by going through the CMS then I wouldn't be bothering arguing about the semantics.