CMS - WHAT IS THE DEAL? 50/50 SHARED CARE

[BlackSheep09]

OK. What is the deal with Child Maintenance?? I have read so many conflicting bits of information online. I have two small children, and my XP will be sharing care with me when we physically live separately. We are still sharing our house which is being sold. In the immediate aftermath of the house completing, we will move into two new homes. Our child arrangements schedule will be something like this:

Immediate aftermath: Youngest DC 70% me /30% with XP, eldest 50/50 between us

Following period 2025 onwards: 50/50 both children

My XP is a 6 figure/high earner, I earn maybe 40% of his salary. According to him, when we start the 50/50 shared 'equal' care he won't be liable for CMS. This I'm told is according to everything his friends have told him, he's read online - DAD.info! and solicitors. He's also quoted me a line from the GOV.UK website on 'how we calculate payments... is CMS required in cases of 50/50 shared care?'.

BUT, the same GOV.UK website, and THE CMS CALCULATOR on this website, when input with our agreed immediate aftermath schedule, and later 50/50 shared care schedule says that the minimum payment due for 50/50 is circa £600. I've tried all sorts of fictional scenarios, every single calculation comes back that there is CMS due, even with 50/50.

I find it difficult to believe that a government online calculator is spitting out incorrect information. A google search doesn't give any clear answers either, and a lot of sites say with 50/50 back up his stance that it isn't payable.

I am NOT asking for opinions on the moral argument of CMS being paid in shared care/don't you won't to be financially independent/why should he pay you anything if you're sharing care... etc.. I want to know, legally, who is right?

The answer ultimately is both of you & neither of you. It’s not clear cut where there is genuine 50/50, but the reality is that if you do have 50/50 and believe you are entitled to maintenance then at that point you can contact CMS directly, they can advise and facilitate payment if he chooses to be difficult about it.

Don't talk further as it's just antagonistic- file for CMS once you're in your own place

They decide

Yes, you can get CMS in a 50/50 arrangement.

However I would be careful, that will mean that school trips, uniforms, school dinners, clubs etc will all be expected to be paid out of that. If you have 50/50 with no maintenence involved then these things will have to be split.

Have a think about what will work out better financially for you.

He can't refuse anyway, if you're legally entitled then they can take it off his wages of you wish to go down that route.

If he is responsible for the children 50% of the time and taking true financial responsibility (for childcare, clothes, uniforms, school lunches) for all the time they are with him, then surely you would be responsible for those costs when they are with you?
Aren't you both technically supposed to cover half of the children costs each?
I suppose if you are still paying for childcare on his days or such then you could evidence that and try and claim?
I guess if you do claim be prepared for him to stop paying for those things and say it should be covered by the maintenance though.

This all sounds very complex OP. Do you get along?. You won't get ANY money of you do a 50/50 split it does state online.

Can your ex actually manage to do 50/50 and maintain his job? How old are your DC?

I believe you can both claim against the other. So in effect the parent who earns more ends up paying.

This whole why would you claim when it's 50/50 gets my back up. One parent earns significantly more so without maintenance the kids quality of life is vastly different. You are a parent wether your kids are with you or not- what decent parent is happy to keep maintenance back knowing the impact this has on their kids when they are not with them.

Is the child benefit in your name? If so make sure it stays that way. The parent who claims CB is entitled to maintenance even if 50:50 shared care split. Given your unequal salaries I think you are totally justified claiming. Be prepared that he may drop some of his nights though when he realises he'll need to pay. He should also morally pay for clothes, trips etc on his days but unfortunately you can't force this. But that's true even if you don't claim CM.

It was 50/50 with myself and ex for many years. True 50/50 = no maintenance due by either party. Irrelevant who earns what.
I get CB for 1/2 sons.
My ex-husband earns in excess of £100k pa and has milion pound house with swimming pool.
I earn around £18k pa and still in rented.

The example you give of the massive disparity in income with your XP is EXACTLY why it IS relevant 'who earns what'.

@BlackSheep09 Not according to the CMS. I spent months without even beds for my kids when I was first separated.
It was hell.
But CMS state in cases of true 50/50 nothing is payable by either party.
A decade on, still in privately rented despite working my arse off!

OP as you've said the CMS calculator does state you are entitled to maintenance even on 50:50 split so just put in a claim and let them handle it. Don't discuss it any more with your ex.

@GardeningForever Not on true 50/50 split; trust me, if it did I would have claimed it rather than struggling for many years.
I suppose if you think about it how could the CMS charge one parent over the other in the case of true 50/50? Who would take priority over the other and why?

@LorlieS I'm guessing it only applies then if you can show that although equal nights are spent with each parent, you are still soley responsible for things like doctors, dentists, hospital appointments etc? If so I think they still deem one parent as the main carer. Plus I know they look at who claims CB. If EVERYTHING is equally split in terms of money and responsibility then I guess I can see why no maintenance may be paid. However there is then the argument that the mother may have a lower income due to career break looking after babies/small children. If this was the case then maintenance should be paid as her future earnings potential is reduced. I should imagine this may only hold water though, rightly or wrongly, if the couple were married, although this may have been accounted for in the divorce.
I'm not surprised that your experience with the CMS hasn't been great though. I've seen a huge difference between what their policies are and what they actually do in practice.

I also wondered this and according to government website it is payable if you claim cb even in 50/50 scenarios. It is discounted by 50% and £7 per week per child if equal care. They even have a worked scenario on the website.

My ex pays nothing - not even school lunches on the days he has them. He won’t send a packed lunch. So I have to pay their lunch money so they can have lunch because that’s the alternative?! He wont buy uniform, if I don’t send they go in without. Won’t pay activities, if I don’t pay they don’t do them. He’s now saying he wants 50-50 which will mean no maintenance, I feel that there needs to be financial safeguarding in place for these scenarios tbh.

@GardeningForever I was married to my ex, I get CB for one of my sons (we share two). He has to pay his back as earns in excess of £100k pa but of course he'd rather the government have it than his own son.
@Pleasegotobed I totally agree with you. How can I pay half of a private rent, for example?
When I first left the struggle was unreal. Lost a lot of weight which colleagues incorrectly thought was through dieting; I simply didn't eat in the weeks the boys were with father.

@Pleasegotobed what a dickhead father not sending his kids in with a packed lunch! Some of these men are unbelievable.

Re 50:50 hopefully you won't give him that without a fight. Let him take you to court and tell them about the fact he doesn't pay for lunches, uniform and you are concerned for your DC that if he has them half the time he won't be providing for them properly based on current behaviour.

This is where the system is wrong.

I was a family solicitor for twenty plus years. Mainly child protection high conflict cases by end.

50-50 is a lovely scenario when parents can parent together, apart.

As soon as one is unable to see, or acknowledge such a disparity, it won't work. I would be agreeing the here and now, now.

Worry about next year, the year after, when you get there. Don't enter into promises about where children will or won't live now.

Money and contact are fundamentally two different concepts. Plenty of fathers pay for children and never see them.

We were never able to argue no maintenance as a reason for no contact.

So conversely, anyone who sees their children, but demands fifty percent in order not to pay, is not acting in that child's best interests.

Scotland. For completeness.

@hjrl I wish you would have been my solictor; I was so badly let down.
50/50 was "decided" by the courts when my sons were just 3 and 6. Up until that point I had been the primary caregiver. Literally overnight our world was torn apart.
Some of it was due to financial reasons and huge disparity (see previous posts), but it was so much more than that. So much more was lost.
As you have said, 50/50 only works if both parents work together in best interests; in cases where this doesn't happen (for whatever reason) the consequences can be devastating.
I now have a little girl with my second husband and you may (or may not, in fact) find my opinion re 50/50 to be revealing.
My husband and I have talked about what would happen if we were ever to separate (not that we are ever planning to; we're very happily married!)
We would both wish for 50/50 for our daughter, both very much respecting the fact that we would and could put her best interests before anything else; I know that we would work together to achieve this.
I firmly believe that a good father is just as important as a good mum, and my husband is certainly this.

Of course I am also financially responsible for my children. Do you think his 600 CMS payment will cover all of my childcare costs and more? There is housing, utilities, childcare, food, clothing, shoes activities etc etc etc to pay for. Childcare alone is 2.5k a month.

My understanding of CMS is it is meant to compensate the parent with more care for the additional time they have with the DC but ALSO to ensure that there isn't a vastly different lifestyle between the parents homes where there is huge disparity in income. Of course I was the one to go part time up until seperation, to look after the DC part of the week. Of course I was the one to take the years of maternity leave to care for them. Of course my earning potential was limited whilst his has been able to soar ahead. This just seems to be the way of things.

@LorlieS I'm sorry to hear that.

My work was very important to me and by the time I retired I acted mainly court appointed for children. The reason for that being that in such cases the sheriff took the view that the only way to have them represented was to appoint independently.

I could count on one hand where I saw fifty fifty work, but then the cases where it works don't really need a solicitor.

There was an ethic emerging within the system which I was unhappy with. I don't know how many times I pulled up, fell out with other agents who behaved like they were in a criminal court, taking apart the other parent, entirely losing site of the children being argued about.

Both parents pay the children's costs on their time, which means splitting shared bills. The child support is towards costs on the receiving parents time to address the difference in incomes so there is not a rich and poor household situation. It is not in place of him paying his half.

Not sure if you’ve had this response yet as not read every one, and it may be too late. CMS don’t have jurisdiction over £156k salary (you said he was high six figures) so a court order may be best for this as part of your financial settlement. His lawyers know that CMS calculation is going to be lower so of course they will push this. Been there, and out the other side. Only mistake I made was not including how uni was to be paid for as part of the agreement .

The gov guidance on maintenance in a 50/50 situation is confusing at best.

maintenance can be due depending on the circumstances. If one parent is spending more on the child’s costs and can prove this then they can apply for maintenance. The parent receiving CB is currently considered the RP for maintenance purposes. You should be aware though that if maintenance was awarded due to you being in receipt of CB, there is every chance he would contest and win. This is on the assumption that it is true50/50 care and he is taking on 50% care and paying out half of DC’s expenses. If you can prove that he isn’t then you’d probably win.

I may be wrong but I’m not aware of maintenance being in place due to a disparity in income.

Personal experience, my partner has a court order for 50/50. He voluntarily continues maintenance payments (not via cms) as ex lives on benefits and shows no signs of getting a job anytime soon, so he knows DC will suffer if he stops paying. Legally though he could stop paying and I’ve no doubt he would win the case if she contested it. He has more than enough evidence to show cms that he is paying all of DC’s costs (outside basic household costs) and does at least 50% of care, alongside taking DC to dr/dentist, extra curricular etc.

If you and your ex are able to be amicable it’ll be a lot better for all concerned if you agree up front how costs are to be shared when it’s 50/50, and avoid the hassle of going formal.

CMS recognises that sometimes, parents might have 50/50 but maintenance might still be appropriate, because one parent handles all the payments. If one parent does all the planning and admin for the children and thus pays all the childcare fees, extracurricular activities, any costs associated with medical or dental care, buys all the child's clothes and so on, maintenance might still be awarded.

If both parents are splitting costs equally and have the children an equal amount of time, there's no maintenance to be paid.