Lone mum asks "Ex's new wife supports him, why not us?"

[Matrushka]

I lived with my ex for nearly three years and we have a gorgeous 5 year old son.

When we split, three years ago, things were not great but eventually he agreed to a standing order of £200 a month in child maintenance.

A year ago he married, moved 50 miles out of London and has cut the maintenance to less than half, claiming he's earning less than before and that his solicitor has advised him he doesn't need to pay as much as he has a new family to support. Recently he said, in writing, that he revised the payment as I refused him access.

You've probably guessed that none of the above is true.

I didn't refuse ex access but I did insist on meeting his then wife-to-be and her son (he introduced our son to them without telling me). Is this unreasonable? I've since met them and ML sees his father, with them, every second Sunday. His father almost never sees him alone. Fortunately ML adores his stepbrother and gets on with stepmother.

Ex's stepson's father provides more than adequately for his own son.

Ex may not be earning as much, there is a recession going on and he does work in the events and entertainment industry however his wife, when I met her, made it very clear that she soesn't like his line of work. He used to mix with a lot of pretty women... She earns £45k a year working part time. She pays for her family's holidays and ex has recently bought himself a brand new car. Between them they have three properties (his are heavily mortgaged). She doesn't want to know about his maintenance, when I approached her, she said it was sour grapes on my part.

Grapes of financial wrath more like!

Anyone out there know any law that says she in anyway responisble for ML's lost maintenance? I earn a quarter of what she does (hopefully more now ML's in school)but I'm not in any way envious. I just think the system is unfair. Tried the CSA when we first split and they awarded me £16 a month! Ex is self emplyed and has a "creative" accountant.

If you guys tell me to move on, I will - and wait for the new 2011 child maintenance act to come in. It can't be any worse. It's scary to think what kind of justice we have.

I don't understand how they can take International holidays, pay mortgages on 3 properties, buy a new car, and pay normal living expenses on £45k. Don't see how it is possible on that amount.

What is ML, btw?

The system isn't fair, but your ds is not the financial responsibility of your exh's new wife. At all.

It speaks volumes about the character of your ex that he is willing to see you/ds struggle when he is living with his new wife in relative luxury. Maybe you should tart yourself up and find a wealthy new man so you can do the same?

I totally agree with Fruitysunshine.

You and your ex had a child together, so you two share the financial responsibility for his upbringing. It's nothing to do with your ex's new partner, and how they run their relationship isn't your business either.

TBH, the feeling I get from your OP is that you're generally pissed off that she has high earning capacity and she owns several properties etc, but to be absolutely honest, that's got nothing to do with you.

I also agree that even if you had stayed with your ex, the recession would still have hit, his earnings would still have gone down, and there would always have been other people around who were better off!

£100 a month maintenance plus CB and CTC is plenty to support a child a month unless they attend private school. Your housing costs etc would all still be there even if you didnt have a child. Plus from your comment "I would never get involved with someone who is unable to support their child" I assume you earn enough to support your child anyway without assistance because of the "guilt".

He is supporting his child and his lifestyle choices are none of your business. You may meet somebody in future who is financially stable but i'm sure that would be ok as you'll be the one benefiting.

Good on his new wife for having a good job and being able to provide a good lifestyle for her children, she probably works very hard for it.

I do agree that she shouldn't be paying maintenance for your dc with your ex, believe me I know how frustrating it can be I have my own very long story.

But (and this is where it looks unfair) our ex's can all pay a little less maintanance (ok yes it is a nominal amount but still less) if they move in with women with children as the CSA take this into account so yes absolutely ex's DW should not pay for your dc as that dc is not hers yet the CSA can cut tha amount you get because your ex has chosen to live with a woman that has children that are not his.

I wondered what ML was too earlybird?

He's not working so much so can't pay you as much. The reasons behind this are actually none of your business.

Whether she is his wife or not, it is not how the system is supposed to work, that a father becomes the non-earning partner in a new marriage, and stops paying maintenance. I have been the new partner in this situation, I was very naive and didnt realise what was going on for ages (different country involved). Of course I would have paid the maintenance if I had known, in fact ex h didnt want to.

Everyone on this thread seems to agree that the money shouldn't go from the new wife's salary to fund the child of the former marriage, but I bet anything that if the new wife was a SAHM, and came on to say that her (earning) dh regarded their money as his, then everyone would be saying Nonsense, its shared money, you should have what you need to buy clothes or whatever.
So why should it be different in this case, when the shared money is being used to pay maintenance for the child from his former marriage?

I got the impression that he was paying nowt, if its 100 pounds a months, that is reasonable, though.

Of course the step mother should not have to pay the maintenance but if I were her I would want to, she is a step parent after all. My dp is a step parent and finacially supports my dd. One if the many reasons. I don't take maintenance from my ex husband is that I would rather the money went to his child with his partner after me and that child is of no connection to me at all.

Horrible situation for you Matrushka. Would be interested to hear where the law stands on this. I honestly cannot understand on this particular thread why some posters seem unable to grasp your point.

But, yes, lol at the thought of £45,000 being a large enough salary for that sort of lifestyle ...

My ex lives off his NW too. I would like him to work, sure, but I don't want her money.

I pity them, tbh, however much I struggle financially, I provide a decent role model to my dd which is worth so much more.

There are so many view points to consider in a blended family situation (hate that term but not sure what else to use) that there will always be somebody unhappy with something on a regular basis.

I am an ex and a new wife and seen both sides. However what really grates is that when the logic of a perfectly reasonable argument is tarnished by emotion and game playing. (As is so often in these situations)

I really am aghast that some people think new partners should be supporting them if their ex's are not working.

If you need more money then go and work for it like millions of others have to. If you believe it is principle that he SHOULD be paying maintenance because he is the other parent (regardless of the amount) then let him do that and not force his wife/partner.

If I earn a good salary it is because I got off my behind and worked hard for it. I never had the luxury of staying at home with my kids as I was a single parent because I was damned if it meant I would be looking to everyone else to support me in the meantime.

I understand that you may be frustrated and I have known that frustration but you have to keep focused on the person who is jointly responsible for your children and not refocus your determination on somebody else in some desperate attempt to obtain your maintenance or prove a point.

It took seven years for my maintenance to eventually come through and by that time my DH had already adopted my daughter so it stopped just as quick.

Life is not fair but you have to support yourself and whatever else comes your way is a bonus - I found that the best mantra of getting through those years.

If you met a new man and your ex had custody of your son how would you react if your ex held out his hand to your new man asking for money because you had not paid your maintenance? You may have a very honourable answer now but in the face of reality you just do not know.

Rebuild the lines of communication with your ex, as I said earlier, open honesty fares better than negativity and point scoring all the time.

I totally agree Fruity. And respect to you for getting on and supporting yourself and your child and not whinging about the situation.

The bottom line is, if people have more children than they can afford, or move into new situations which involve new partners and children, then it's going to lead to unhappiness and resentment somewhere.

If I were to split with my husband and pick up with someone else, I seriously doubt I could afford more kids. And ditto for him. We stopped at 3 because that was what we could afford, without seriously compromising the way we live, and what we can provide for our family. And once a family splits, things become even more expensive, so it's unrealistic to think there is endless money.

If the OP literally earns only a quarter of what the new woman earns, then it sounds as though she's working only part time, so maybe she could increase her hours to improve her situation.

The money is to support the child.

In this situation the money has been reduced because the exh is not working as much - but it doesn't matter to him because his new wife is supporting him.

All fine and dandy for him!

But what about his child?

Of course its unacceptable.

You can have him properly investigated by the CSA - you do have to be persistant but this is being done to my ex. He has done all the usual avoidence stuff with them and it ended up with a deduction of earnings attached to his wages. However, my ex is running another business aside from his job and is advertising on the web! So, the CSA (after a huge lot of nagging from me) have contacted asked about his other earnings and will be interviewing him under caution if he does not cooperate. It really helped that he is always really snotty with the CSA when they call.

So, there is something you can do about but it requires a huge amount of persistence from you and an even bigger helping of patience.

I am doing this on principle, the need for the money has lessened nowdays (I got much less when I really needed it)and I will keep going until I get what is right. I have honoured a great deal of debts for him he ran up in my name, he left me, went on a spending spree of massive proportion and then went bankrupt. It might be childish on my part but being a thorn in his side gives me a certain amount of pleasure.

If it makes you feel better then go for it but I think someone else said this, in the long run he will have to explain it to his child. Mind you, if he has so little pride he can live off his wife he probably wont care what his child thinks either.

bibbity - he is supporting his child, just not at the level that he was previously.

If they were still together, his earnings would still be reduced, due to the recession, so they would have had to cut back as a family, so there would be less to spend on anyone - child included!

He pays £100 per month. OK, it's not a fortune, but if the mother is also spending £100 per month on the child, then that seems reasonable. The child is at school, so we're clearly not talking about nursery costs. Just exactly how much does a child cost?! Does everyone really spend more than £200 per month per child?

If the OP isn't contributing £100 herself on her child, then she's being completely unreasonable anyway!!

bibbitybobbityhat - of course children should be supported by BOTH parents but constant repeating of the argument you state does not change the fact that life throws up endless complications which change situations and people's financial ability to meet obligations.

Something to consider is if he is not earning money NOW when he was before then you can guarantee that his lifestyle with his new wife has taken a dent somewhere.

Please do not think that all men choose to reduce their income just to spite an ex or so they don't have to pay to support their child - because it goes hand in hand that any reduction in money means a cut in your immediate home life somewhere. Also you never know for sure where money is coming from, whether it is earned or loaned so making big assumptions can be a costly mistake.

To be perfectly frank with you it shows how self-serving some women are when the first thought they jump to is "He is only doing it to spite me or so he does not have to pay" blah blah blah. Is it normal that somebody would sacrifice something of their own home life with their wife to score points with an ex?

People across the world have different standards of living, some living in real poverty whilst others live in complete luxury. Being from a broken family does not make you more priority than anyone else when it comes to money and support.

Nobody has really addressed teh point about a married couple having "shared" money, not her income and his income.

Why does this suddenly cease to be the case, when the money is being spent on maintenance?

If "his" income doesn't exist, then how is he to pay the maintenance?
If each partner gets a certain amount to spend as they like, then should the maintenance come out of that?

I suspect that in most marriages where the maintenance payer is also the wage earner, the maintenance would come out of the pot for family expenses.

His income has only been reduced due to his marriage. Why should his child receive less as a result?

I have posted a reply on here but was on my i phone and it appears to have been lost in cyberspace.

I didn't say that I thought the OP should expect her ex husband's wife to pay maintenane.

But I find it odd that she does not, if dp had biological children from a previous relationship I would not think twice about our money supporting that child. If it was actually me that earned the money it would not bother me at all.

My dd is not dp's biological child but as soon as we lived together and were as commited to each other in a married sense he took financial responsibility for dd.

bibbity: The OP says his income has been reduced due to the recession.

She goes on to say that the new woman made it clear she 'didn't like' his line of work, but we only have her word for that. Anyway, she states quite clearly that it is the recession which has caused him to earn less - and the recession would have happened anyway had the OP and the ex stayed together!

The OP also dwells very much on what the new woman is choosing to spend her money on - nice car, holidays etc - it really does suggest that the OP has issues with the new woman which are actually entirely separate from the issue of maintenance

I am taking the OPs word for it, otherwise I wouldn't bother posting on this thread!

Well she says the recession has caused him to have a reduced income, because of the sector he works in. It's happened to loads of people, sounds entirely plausible.

I still don't understand how she can seriously need more than £200 per month for one school age child anyway. They don't eat that much!

She also says she earns a quarter of what the new woman earns, so that's in the region of 11k. Let's assume the ex earns 11k. That's not a huge amount of take-home pay every month, and he's paying £100 a month for his child.

If he earns more than 11k, then maybe the OP needs to look at increasing her earning power rather than just complaining that he's not working enough!

Presumably she needs two bedroom accommodation, rather than one bedroom. That's going to cost her more than £200 in rent or mortgage alone.

Not more than £200 in difference between a one bed/two bed home though! She'd need to accommodate herself wouldn't she?!

Sorry, I still don't get the OP's argument. Her ex used to pay £200 per month; he's now cut it to £100 because his work situation has changed, which would be the case if he was still with the OP, due to the recession. There would have been less money to go around if they were still together - so why is it any different just because they're split?

He's paying maintenance for his child. If he'd only ever paid £100 per month, she wouldn't be complaining. It's only because he used to pay £200 that she feels hard done by. And while he was paying £200, that was presumably a hell of a lot more than she was spending on her son as she only seems to earn about 11k.

Seems to me that she thinks it's ok for her to earn peanuts, but not so good when her ex does!