Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Is it really "shared" custody if he doesn't provide a bedroom for dd?

152 replies

GuiltyAsAGirlCanBe · 16/10/2014 23:28

I am attempting to seperate amicably with my partner, with whom I have a 3 yo.

He has always been a very hands on father. He will be doing pick ups mid week, and 2 over nights, this fits with both our work schedules. He earns about 2/3 what I do.

I need to have her 5 nights/week as I need to do drop offs to preschool. One of the nights he has her will be midweek. He has announced that when he moves out he will be getting a one bed place or sharing a 2 bed place with a friend as this is all he can afford. Dd will have to just have a camp bed or be in with him. Although she often still ends up in our bed at night, I think once she is at proper school next year she will need her own bed and room.

It would never be an option for me to get a one bed place or share with someone, I have no choice I feel but to provide a proper home for dd. we agreed to shared custody so no maintenance was payable either way, but is it acceptable that he is not providing a proper "home" environment for dd or paying maintenance just because he earns less than I do?

OP posts:
OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 13:49

OP How about if he gets a two bed and has her 7 night a week? He can drop her off at yours on his way to work or find childcare that starts earlier. Plus he'll still be picking her up and doing the afternoon/evenings as well. You'll have to pay maintenance because you earn more than him. Plus he should get CB and maybe WTC etc.

You can then live with your best friend or in a one-bed and just have DD on the one weekend day, plus the mornings.

Would that make you happier?

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 13:49

I know that was a response to Castle, and I haven't personally mentioned strangers, but men have mates and they have women... unless you think said flatmate is a friendless monk...

Castlemilk · 17/10/2014 13:57

Apologies for only reading first half of thread.

However, it seems as if my comments are still relevant - amazingly :)

Outraged:

1. She has said several times he has her 50% of the time. Not 50% of the time she's asleep, true, but 50% of the time. I don't know about your children, but with mine the 'awake' shift is actually harder work than the 'sleeping' shift.

  • it makes no difference what's harder work, the point I was making is that residence, and thus maintenance due, is calculated legally by the number of overnights. A non-resident parent can apply to have maintenance reduced if they can prove that the child sleeps at their home a certain number of nights. Nothing to do with spending 50% of the time, it's calculated by overnights.

I remember one thread where the OP was furious that her Ex was, I think, demanding that she ferry the child over after dinner to sleep and pick up before breakfast so that she could feed the child and do the school run, enough times a week so that (she'd worked it out) he could claim shared residency. I think - hope - she told him where to go. Point was, he'd have got his maintenance reduced!

YonicScrewdriver · 17/10/2014 13:59

Well, they aren't going to law, but if she starts vetoing his overnight arrangements I expect that is where it'll end up.

I can guarantee you that no male friend I share with would do drugs, so I'm not sure why you responded so sarcastically on that point.

As they are doing pick up and drop offs at pre school, if they don't keep living near each other, this is likely to become harder. Seems a fair thing to say. Unless of course they both move to the same cheaper area.

Viviennemary · 17/10/2014 14:03

If he genuinely can't afford a two bedroomed house or flat on the money he has then of course he has to compromise. it doesn't seem to me that you are very understanding or sympathetic to his difficult situation.

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 14:04

Twinkle I don't think the best friend, the DP or the OP are friendless monks. I expect all of them will bring other people into the DD's life occasionally. But the OP has said she is happy with the best friend and that he is trustworthy. Trustworthy covers not bringing home random women/drug dealers/people with dangerous dogs etc. There is no value in people here who don't know the friend chiming in with 'but what about the strangers/the women/the drugs' etc.

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 14:09

It's not about you and your friends Yonic, but a putative friend of a bloke we've never met and his friends and his gf and her friends etc...

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 14:11

Castle I think the OP wants a moral judgement as well as a legal one as they're trying to remain amicable. Morally, it does matter how much actual time he spends. It's not overnights, but it's 50% of the actual time the DD needs to be cared for. That does matter when trying to remain amicable/evaluating whether he is doing his fair share.

From what I can gather the OP has the DD from the evening, overnight and then for an hour or two in the morning 5 nights a week and one weekend day. He has the DD from after pre-school everyday, plus 2 overnights, plus one weekend day. Practically he is doing a fair share regardless of the legal technicalities. Really the OP is like the Ex in your example...technically she has residency based on the overnights, but in terms of actually caring for the child he is doing at least 50%.

YonicScrewdriver · 17/10/2014 14:15

Of course not, but it is about a specific friend that the OP hasn't worried about so the "he might do drugs" concern seems undue.

We aren't going to agree and we aren't helping the OP so I'll leave it there.

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 14:17

Castle What you actually said was 'He is not sharing custody - practically, legally, financially.'

I agree with you on the legally bit. It was the practically bit I was arguing with. If you'd read the thread you'd know, practically he is sharing the load.

Letitbee · 17/10/2014 14:17

They both earn way to much for tax credits according to the op and if she really wants to start paying for that level of childcare and claim maintenance at 15% - plus covering for when child or she is ill then she needs to listen to all those saying how harsh we are on her ;).

Castlemilk · 17/10/2014 14:22

But the point is the same as the one I made in my first post. The actual biggest COST of raising the child is providing the 'family home' for the child - renting/buying that place with the extra bedroom, heating it, lighting, council tax. The fact that he is doing 'his share' when it comes to spending time with the child is MORE than offset by the fact that whereas the OP is not able to cut her living costs substantially because she has the child to consider, he is in the position of being able to downsize to just a room, sharing council tax, sharing bills etc with other employed adults. He in that sense is able to act as if he doesn't have the child to consider.

I believe that appreciating that distinction is the major reason why maintenance is calculated using the overnights as a benchmark. In that sense, he is very much not 'sharing' responsibility.

Now it sounds as if that makes sense for both of them. He earns less, etc. However - I'd be very surprised if, after the extra living costs incurred by OP as a result of her being absolutely the resident parent are taken into account, she still has more free cash than him. Therefore, the starting point for their discussions on how to do this fairly should absolutely start by recognising that he is NOT resident parent, he is not intending to budget for a room for his daughter in his house etc., and therefore maintenance should be due.

There is no reason why this should affect an amicable discussion and hopefully fair discussion on fair maintenance. Because they are the facts!

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 14:25

Castle I think your points are entirely sensible.

m0therofdragons · 17/10/2014 14:37

Only read the first page but I presume this is a short term arrangement (couple of years but not a 10 year plan). How he houses his dc is only your business I'd she is in danger. A 3 year old doesn't need her own space and my 6 year old loved having a mattress on our bedroom floor for 2 months in the summer (we had guests in her room). I don't think you can dictate what kind of house he should live in. Would you prefer a horrible damp 2 bed flat in a bad area or a house share in a nice house in a nice area? Either way, not your choice anymore I'm afraid and it's more important dd has time with both of you in a positive way.

m0therofdragons · 17/10/2014 14:42

But technically op could rent dd's room and have dd in her room? Op will only be paying half childcare and not need food for dd. By not moving from family home she is saving on things like deposit, new furniture and general moving costs.
If ex can't afford a bigger house why would you want to take more money from him to make him poorer when he can't afford it? How does that benefit dd?

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 14:42

Outraged 'Trustworthy' does not have any kind of definition in this context.

To you it means 'not bringing home random women/drug dealers/people with dangerous dogs', how do you know what it means to the guy in question? He may be a perfectly nice guy but the OP has no control over who he hangs out with...

Does he have gf? If he doesn't, do you really believe he'll never bring a woman home? Is never going to get drunk? Is he going to agree never to have any mates around on the days the ex has the child? He brings back a bunch of mates, how do can you guarantee none will drink or have a spliff etc...

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 14:43

'But the point is the same as the one I made in my first post'

No, you separated the three points in your first post. This is what you said ''He is not sharing custody - practically, legally, financially'.

I'm responding to the 'practically' issue. He IS sharing at least 50/50 on the practically issue. He is also sharing on the financial issue, maybe not 50/50, but then he earns less. Legally she is the resident parent, that we agree on.

I think the OP needs to do her sums.

'I'd be very surprised if, after the extra living costs incurred by OP as a result of her being absolutely the resident parent are taken into account, she still has more free cash than him'.

I disagree with this. I think they'll end up about the same taking into account the fact the she earns 33% more than him and he does the majority of the childcare. Neither of us actually know though. The OP will, if she works it out.

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 14:46

Twinkle It's got nothing to do with what trustworthy means to the best friend! He hasn't described himself as trustworthy. The OP has said she is happy. He is trustworthy. She is fine with him living with her DD. It doesn't matter what I think or you think because we don't know him. The OP is ok with it, let it lie!

YonicScrewdriver · 17/10/2014 14:48

I'm sure plenty of parents have long term guests, lodgers etc who sometimes "bring women/men home"

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 15:03

Outraged The OP has asked for responses to her situation, I'm giving mine. I would be grateful if you don't tell me how to post, as I certainly would not tell you.

The OP may think the friend is 'trustworthy' but unless she's lived with him she's no idea what his personal habits are, his relationships with women etc. Being a nice guy may not, to this guy, preclude bringing random women home, and it's very unlikely to preclude him bringing friends home who are strangers to the daughter...

The OP is not actually happy with this situation at all, that's why she's started the thread. She's not happy with her ex living a 'student' type life while she has the responsibility and outlay of a 2bed for her daughter. I agree with her.

Another poster and I have flagged that personally we think that the flat-share issue is more of an issue than the 1 bed. The OP is at perfect liberty to make of that what she will.

This is an open forum, why not just accept that other people have different opinions to you?

Twinklestein · 17/10/2014 15:09

Yonic I've no doubt they do and that's rather the point. That's not acceptable to me, if it is to you that's up to you.

I actually think a lodger situation is preferable because you can lay down ground rules. I had the son of a friend stay about a year ago, and the deal was he could do anything he liked, but he couldn't bring anyone home because we have kids. But you can't tell a mate how to live his life...

OutragedFromLeeds · 17/10/2014 15:13

I accept that you have a different opinion.

I don't accept that it is helpful or relevant for you to express it in the way that you have.

We're not going to agree though, so let's leave it there.

sanfairyanne · 17/10/2014 15:25

concentrate on other battles
this is only the situation 2x a week
i know quite a few men who have to do this. it is ok imo at her little age.
how do you feel about only seeing her at bedtimes and one day per weekend? that doesnt sound 50:50 to me

MushroomSoup · 17/10/2014 19:40

ExH and I have our children literally 50-50 hours wise.
He however had them for four nights and I have them three (like you, this means we can both work).
He is classed as the resident parent and I have to pay maintenance, even though I bought a house big enough to give them all a bedroom. I pay for food and clothes at my house.
I am classed as non-RP because in a typical week he has them more nights than me.

Rebecca2014 · 17/10/2014 19:51

My sbeh has recently moved out and can only afford a one bedroom flat, he will soon be having our 2 year for overnight visits and I don't see a problem with this.

Long as your child cared and loved for, what is the problem here?