Will child maintenance take inheritance into consideration?

[pebbles6]

Posted in 2 areas as wasn't sure where it was most relevant.

My ex partner (never married) pays the required maintenance by law through the child maintenance service. He has recently received inheritance of around £100-125,000 .
Will CMS take this into consideration and give me more money if I ask? Or is it just his money to do what he wants with?

Thanks.

Inheritance is not income and does not form part of the paying parent’s gross income used for calculating child maintenance. However, inheritances can be considered a source of capital for parents. This means the receiving parent can apply for a variation to take the inheritance into account if it exceeds £31,250.

@Kate9423 I saw this online but very contradictory. So does he have to be earning money from his inheritance to claim from or can I just ask them to consider the amount in their calculation?

You can ask for it to be taken into consideration as it is now capital of his. It's not an income so unless he goes and spends the entire amount now, which would change the amount of 'capital' he has, you can ask for it to be considered.

@Kate9423 thank you. If he puts this in his wife's account or spends it on a car for example, will they still look for it or not bother?

If it is spent or gifted etc, it's no longer financial capital so there'd be no claim to make. CMS generally won't go digging if he pays already via his declared income etc. The wife's income and assets aren't considered by CMS.

Thank you @Kate9423 makes sense!

it depends what he spends it on if he pays off his mortgage that would be fine hiding the inheritance or maybe regifting it may not be but i'm not an expert but time is of the essence, normally if you are on benefits it is considered reasonable to buy a property with inheritance if you don't have one already

He already pays maintenance. Are you wanting his inheritance too or just wondering?

@amiold I don't know really yet. I know he won't spend any of this on our kids together so just trying my luck I guess... moral issue probably..

I suppose for me it depends on how much matintance he already pays if its "decent" then morally it's iffy but if its pennies I get it. My ex pays a whole £27 a month for 3 kids he never sees

That’s grabby.. he’s paying maintenance already.

I agree ☝️

So immoral. This is his parents money not yours. Be independent, build up your own assets don't sponge off others.

It’s not grabby. Any man who pays the bare minimum in maintenance ( because it really is the bare minumu
) and isn't morally superior! FFS. Maintenance should really take into consideration assets. I know a dad that inherited millions after the divorce but still pays the absolute minimum he can get away a with based on his average wage. Not exactly father of the year.

It’s NOT the bare minimum. It’s a big chunk of wages actually. Are you in the paying parent position yourself? What’s actually left after bills, rent/mortgage, food, other outgoings is bugger all for the majority of NRP.

Agree. It's 12% of your wage before tax. If you pay tax at the higher rate it's actually a BIG chunk of your wage. That's 12% before you've even deducted NI, tax, pension. Handed over to the RP and not even means tested against benefits.

Interesting views here. I don't have skin in the game in the sense that I don't have pay or receive child maintenance.
However, do people really believe that the minimum amount of child maintenance really covers 50% of the costs of raising the child? In most cases it wouldn't even cover half of nursery fees. It's usually far, far less than the resident parent pays from their income.
Also, the money is not for the resident parent but for the child. I don't think you are being unreasonable asking this question at all OP. If he now has this money as capital why shouldn't it be taken into account as money of which he could contribute some to the welfare and advancement or just plain benefit of his children?

It depends on the situation. Lots of RP use it for themselves. Also, everyone would have to keep a hole whether they had children or not so to say it's all for the child and then on the other hand say it contributes towards housing and bills is somewhat contradictory.

RPs can also claim child benefit, universal credit and 85% of childcare back (if they're not high earners this is not all cases). In some situations RPs are only having the children one night more than the NRP who can't claim anything.

Generally the expectation is the NRP cannot claim anything, not entitled to housing, has to do all the pick ups and drop offs etc.

CMS however do fail both sides. Lots of RPs cannot get any maintenance from the NRP. They duck and dive, hide assets, go self employed, stop working. The Cms also hold money for long periods of time even though it's been taken from one parent and thus leaving the RP short.

I agree that everyone should pay for their kids but the disparity in the system is unbelievable. In this case, if the dad is paying maintenance I don't feel he should lose is inheritance. However if he's quit his job to avoid paying I can see the OPs point and don't think it's as grabby as it seems, if of course, the money would be spent on the kids entirely. Not a family holiday or offsetting life costs that everyone had (housing, bills, holidays, cars etc).

Ewwwww.
I get that he doesn't pay much but this is pretty disgusting. This is HIS inheritance. Let him build something from that money so he can leave your child inheritance. Grabby AF if he pays much or not.

try supporting a child properly on 12% of monies. It costs a lot to raise a child- don't bother having one if you are going to be stingy and vile when having to pay. Imagine the resident parent only paying12 % of their money on the child.

Just read this post. Being honest it seems grabby to me. In 13 years I've paid my ex partner almost 27k in child maintenance. We don't get on but beside the point, I'm always made to be the bad guy, yet always asked for help, extra school stuff. Bus money, school trips, uniform etc outside of paying maintenance. Yet I do all the pick ups an drop offs, etc so probably paid a few extra thousand over the years.
Now not everyone is the same but my ex partner will take anytning she can she's a very immoral selfish person at times an constantly puts herself and love life in front of her children.
I'm receiving inheritance soon as one of my parents passed away. Regardless of amount she has no right at all to even consider trying for a part of it. We wasn't married. Or even together long.
It was my parents money not hers, and I will be putting decent amounts in my children's account for when they're old enough an mature enough to not just waste it but my ex partner would not receive a penny. I'll never stop working regardless I wasn't raised to be a quitter or just not work so she'll always get maintenance but she has no right to even think about coming after inheritance.
I know everyones situation is different but in mine it just wouldn't happen.
Out of respect for the deceased parent do not ever got after inheritance. If they wanted you to have some it would specify in a will

@Hatty999 of course it costs a lot to raise a child .. I think child maintenance should be means tested. If we are receiving high amounts through the non resident parent then the amount of benefit should be adjusted too. It's not about being "stingy" and "vile", whatever that means. The resident parent (which I am one by the way) often declares general household costs which they'd have to pay anyways, even if they didn't have a child. Your rent doesn't go up because there is more people in the house, for example. There are some variables like you may need extra bedroom or water bill will be higher but the bulk of costs isn't directly associated

No.

And rightly so.

I'm not sure why you've tallied that up, are you thinking that it sounds impressive? £27k over 13 years is around £2k a year, or £160 odd a month. You say children, so presumably more than one. Hardly Megabucks!