CMS - Am I being greedy

[essieestherson]

I have been split from my ex for over 3 years, we have 3 dc who live with me and stay at his (at most) 1 night a week.

When we were together he was very abusive and slept with prostitutes, hence why we're divorced..

He has never paid the full amount of CMS due, always saying he can't afford it and then turning up in a new car, expensive new watch etc.. Every year I get an annual review from the CMS and I ask him to pay more, then he will bully and threaten me with going to the courts for 50-50 custody, or say he'll quit his job etc. So I always settle with whatever figure he suggests as I can't handle the stress of it all.

I have just had this years annual review which states that he has had another pay rise (now earning £85,000pa) and should now be paying me over £1200 a month, he currently pays £580. He has offered to up it to £680 but says anymore will bankrupt him. He has sent many abusive messages and refuses to talk anymore about it.

Yet he turned up to pick the kids up last week in a brand new Tesla...

My parents think I should just accept the £680 he is offering to stop all the nasty texts and threats etc.

Im just not sure what to do.. I work 3 days a week, but don't earn much and every month I am short of money. The kids have many clubs etc they would love to join but can't because I don't have enough money.

I know that £680 is a lot of money and way more then many get from CMS.. so I'm not sure if I should just let him get away with paying less, or fight further and ask for CMS to take the money straight out of his pay?

Another side note is that he is very unpredictable which worries me.. if I try and take the money straight out of his account he will probably do something drastic, quit his job etc - so we will struggle further.

I am just not sure what to do.

@Hekatestorch

Rp do have to find those things but the state helps separated RP quite generously and CM doesn't really impact that unless there's spousal maintenance in play.

Are they generously helped? Funny that, I wasn't. I didn't bother with CMS either because he went self employed. But plenty of RP work and don't get generous support from the state. And I don't know anyone who gets a generous amount from the state in benefits. RP often can't work full time or put alot of time in to progress their career, if the NRP won't do their fair share of childcare

It's an amount set by CMS. They don't send a payment schedule and say here's your payments, the minimum expected amount is x but you may want to pay y. They just tell you to pay x.

That's just picking at wording. CMS is the payment they decide based in your earnings. Its what the nrp has to pay. It doesn't mean they have to opt out of supporting their children further. Either with time or money. That's what people mean by the minimum. I

No one is suggesting the CMS words it this way.

If the parents were still together yes there would be a higher standard of living for higher earners. But what your saying is the ex owns the RP a standard of living. That is where the entitlement sets in.

No, the other parent owes the child a certain standard of living. Do you really think children of high earners shouldn't benefit from that if their parents split? That it's acceptable they live in a family that's struggling, financially when they don't need to?

When often, in cases where the RP is struggling is due to the fact that both parents supported the decision for RP to be a sahp or reduce their earning potential to look after the kids? Or can't work that much because the NRP won't step up and actually care for the kids?

The RPs financial situation is often tied directly to decisions made within the relationship by both people. Why should only the RP (and therefore the kids) suffer because of those joint decisions? And when the nrp won't step up, the rp is often trapped in that situation.

I really don't see that there's large amounts of women, opting to do very little to provide for their kids themselves. But getting generous state handouts and generous CMS. Living their best life. There will be some. But the vast majority are are just trying to care for their kids, earn enough money to pay for everything and give their kids a decent life. Often with little to no practical support.

I really don't think women milking the system and their exs for their own lifestyle is a huge problem here. The much bigger problem is nrp not paying the amount the CMS would say they should AND providing no to little support.

I dated someone post separation. She showed me a website. Entitled.com or something like that. My ex in benefits and the maintenence I provided was receiving a net equivalent of a gross salary of £60 grand annually. This website showed exactly what you could claim. This was without her working. That was only 3 years ago. Perhaps universal credit is changing that a bit.

On the wording the point I object to is this idea that it's a minimum(cm). I hear it a lot on these forums. I don't agree for the reasons I've mentioned.

I'm not saying the kids deserve anything other than a good standard of living. I do object to.the idea that the ex is somehow responsible for the RP. They are responsible to the kids but not the RP. Let's be honest the RP is likely to be a woman and the relationship is usually ended by the woman.

I dated someone post separation. She showed me a website.Entitled.comor something like that. My ex in benefits and the maintenence I provided was receiving a net equivalent of a gross salary of £60 grand annually. This website showed exactly what you could claim. This was without her working. That was only 3 years ago. Perhaps universal credit is changing that a bit.

Someone you dated sat you down to show you how much benefits your ex gets? Why? That's grossly over stepping. Someone you are dating shouldn't even have your exs financial information to be able to do that. Why on earth would they get the impression that you wanted their involvement in your and your ex finances?

And unless there's a lot of kids born, probably before the 3 child rule, with some or all getting pip 60k (even 3 years ago) is not what your ex got. Or they needed a large house in an expensive area, which they lived in before the split. Do you think they should have to move areas because you split up?

With lots of kids, especially if they have disabilities it is almost impossible to work and earn a good wage.

But let's say its not. That's your ex. Not every or even most RP. If your ex genuinely got 60k, there's a very good reason. Usually lots of kids with High care needs.

On the wording the point I object to is this idea that it's a minimum(cm). I hear it a lot on these forums. I don't agree for the reasons I've mentioned.

And I maintain that, that's you picking at wording.

I'm not saying the kids deserve anything other than a good standard of living. I do objectto.theidea that the ex is somehow responsible for the RP. They are responsible to the kids but not the RP. Let's be honest the RP is likely to be a woman and the relationship is usually ended by the woman.

Wow, you don't like women at all do you? Are you a woman? does the self loathing cause alot of issues?

CMS is for the children. They are not responsible for the RP. Just the children. That's what the money is for. Its the NRPs contribution to the children's upbringing. You know, things like the house over their head? How are you proposing you can contribute to a house over the children's head, but the resident parent can't also live there?

Not sure, what who ends a relationship has to do with anything. Someone becomes a resident parent because either, they did the vast majority of child care (impacting their own earning ability) or the NRP doesn't want to be the RP.

Nrp (like yourself) seem to want the Rp to do the vast majority of childcare and carry the vast majority of financial care too.

Why would you even have kids at all, if you weren't prepared to do the bare minimum. And yes the bare minimum is to pay for them and provide care for them.

@Roblox01

If the parents were still together yes there would be a higher standard of living for higher earners. But what your saying is the ex owns the RP a standard of living. That is where the entitlement sets in.

No - read the words.

What I said as the NRP owes the children left behind the same financial contribution that they would have had if the parents had remained together.

@MaryBoBary

How old are your children? I completely agree you should be getting what your children are entitled to from him. However if you're tight for money why not get a full time job? Unless you have younger children at home that you need to look after.

As they are all school age I’d echo working full time too. Especially as you know there are activities etc they want to do. Part time work is a luxury when you have dependents to support.

I'd start a direct pay claim with the cms. You aren't being greedy at all

Most people that have high £££££ in benefits live in rented accommodation one expensive areas. They then have to pay that benefit to the landlord...

Where we lived the cheapest 3 bed would be £20k per year net.

@RandomMess

Most people that have high £££££ in benefits live in rented accommodation one expensive areas. They then have to pay that benefit to the landlord...

Where we lived the cheapest 3 bed would be £20k per year net.

A friend paid near that for her shit hole flat, the house was freezing and in winter there was condensation on the ceilings which would drip on to you.

The hallway and bathroom was full of mold despite us cleaning and cleaning the place and airing it. And the heating wouldn’t turn up much beyond tepid.

She had two littlies to bring up alone. Her abusive ex fought for contact and when she offered him 50:50 (because she couldn’t bear the thought of her kid’s having to live in the shithole affecting their health) he immediately backed down and refused it.

I don’t know any single mother living a champagne lifestyle on her benefits and CMS payments.

The poorest are single mothers.

I’d go for every penny that is owing.

@Hekatestorch

I dated someone post separation. She showed me a website.Entitled.comor something like that. My ex in benefits and the maintenence I provided was receiving a net equivalent of a gross salary of £60 grand annually. This website showed exactly what you could claim. This was without her working. That was only 3 years ago. Perhaps universal credit is changing that a bit.

Someone you dated sat you down to show you how much benefits your ex gets? Why? That's grossly over stepping. Someone you are dating shouldn't even have your exs financial information to be able to do that. Why on earth would they get the impression that you wanted their involvement in your and your ex finances?

And unless there's a lot of kids born, probably before the 3 child rule, with some or all getting pip 60k (even 3 years ago) is not what your ex got. Or they needed a large house in an expensive area, which they lived in before the split. Do you think they should have to move areas because you split up?

With lots of kids, especially if they have disabilities it is almost impossible to work and earn a good wage.

But let's say its not. That's your ex. Not every or even most RP. If your ex genuinely got 60k, there's a very good reason. Usually lots of kids with High care needs.

On the wording the point I object to is this idea that it's a minimum(cm). I hear it a lot on these forums. I don't agree for the reasons I've mentioned.

And I maintain that, that's you picking at wording.

I'm not saying the kids deserve anything other than a good standard of living. I do objectto.theidea that the ex is somehow responsible for the RP. They are responsible to the kids but not the RP. Let's be honest the RP is likely to be a woman and the relationship is usually ended by the woman.

Wow, you don't like women at all do you? Are you a woman? does the self loathing cause alot of issues?

CMS is for the children. They are not responsible for the RP. Just the children. That's what the money is for. Its the NRPs contribution to the children's upbringing. You know, things like the house over their head? How are you proposing you can contribute to a house over the children's head, but the resident parent can't also live there?

Not sure, what who ends a relationship has to do with anything. Someone becomes a resident parent because either, they did the vast majority of child care (impacting their own earning ability) or the NRP doesn't want to be the RP.

Nrp (like yourself) seem to want the Rp to do the vast majority of childcare and carry the vast majority of financial care too.

Why would you even have kids at all, if you weren't prepared to do the bare minimum. And yes the bare minimum is to pay for them and provide care for them.

No they just mentioned the website. I took a nosey myself. Its actually quite common for couples to be better off as separated, especially with lower incomes. Or at least that was the case a few years ago, as ex had friends that were in that position.

So I assume you perhaps agree with me on second point as you haven't put anything to.the contrary.

There's a lot of assumption and projection in the third point. Presumably because that's easier than dealing with the points raised

@ChequerBoard I see your point but post separation a NRP, that is often the primary earner pre separation, has to start again and has capital tied up in the old family home etc. They have to rehouse, pay their own bills and find money for the kids when they have them. It's the RP that gets the tax credits and support from the state.

I wouldn't necessarily expect it on a predominantly female board but the lack of any understanding is so evident from these threads.

Oh yeah poor menz etc. Such sophisticated arguments from the emotionally intelligent blah blah blah....

[quote Roblox01]@ChequerBoard I see your point but post separation a NRP, that is often the primary earner pre separation, has to start again and has capital tied up in the old family home etc. They have to rehouse, pay their own bills and find money for the kids when they have them. It's the RP that gets the tax credits and support from the state.

I wouldn't necessarily expect it on a predominantly female board but the lack of any understanding is so evident from these threads.

Oh yeah poor menz etc. Such sophisticated arguments from the emotionally intelligent blah blah blah....[/quote]

@Roblox01 Think you have defeated your own argument at the wnd there. CMS allocations are not generous. Someone earning a high salary will still have plenty to live on.

Read the OP. The father in this case is driving round in a new Tesla whilst only paying approx 50% of CMS minimum child maintenance. Do you think that is right?

No they just mentioned the website

She showed you and now just mentioned it. Sounds believable.

Its actually quite common for couples to be better off as separated, especially with lower incomes. Or at least that was the case a few years ago, as ex had friends that were in that position.

Not to the tune of 60k, not even 3 years ago.

So I assume you perhaps agree with me on second point as you haven't put anythingto.thecontrary.

The second point? Where I said that I maintain you are picking at wording. CMS is the amount it's decided is the legal minimum you should pay. There's nothing that says you can't pay more than that. It's lowest (minimum) payment you can make. I guess you just don't like that when people say 'minimum' you pay that and it makes you feel bad.

Your points are all made up. 'Woman end relationships first' even if that is true, and I hope it is, why do you think that is? It's not because they get 60k in benefits and never have to work again, because that's not true.

I made several points that you have ignored. Like the fact that people don't just get handed 60k a year, to not work. To get that amount there's definitely alot more to the situation.

Like, you had kids but begrudge paying for them. Like how do you expect to contribute to house for them without the resident parent living with them. Like how you think, the rp is benefitting from you paying the legal bare minimum you are told to, is benefitting the RP. Or how you can't seem to view it as 'financially supporting my kids' but see it as 'she is benefitting from my money'

If its such an issue. Have your kids more.

Plenty of people work fulltime jobs and look after their kids half the week. Or all the week.

I get it, she broke up with you. It stings. But you still have to financially support the kids.

The money isn't for your benefit - it is for the children, who are also his children. Why should the children of someone who can earn £85kpa be living in a household that is struggling to make ends meet? It's wrong. Your children come first and for their sake you need to dig your heels in and make him cough up. The minimum CSA amount is actually way LESS than what a reasonable parent would want to contribute towards the wellbeing of their own children.

He will not quit his job. He likes the lifestyle that the money brings to him too. He's not going to deliberately impoverish himself just to ensure that his children grow up poor and needy.

The NRP in my case made me sell the house, took over 60% of the equity, all the savings, and still has a flat that he owned where he now lives.

While me and the children had to move out of the home where they were born, into a rented property. We have already had to move twice since the divorce due to our landlord wanting to sell.

He is getting away with only paying 50% of the CMS that he should.

Yes I do get universal credit, but I also work 3 days a week and as soon as the hours become available I will work more.

Thanks everyone for your replies.

I have given him 3 or so days to come up with what he thinks is a reasonable figure based on his salary to pay towards the kids each month... he has either just sent messages saying that the kids will be better off with us going 50/50 custody, or he has just completely ignored me...

I think I don't really have a choice but to go to the CMS.

I think a good response now after no contact from him is a neutral one like 'I'm keen that we should take conflict out of our parenting relationship as far as possible so I'm just going to let CMS do the finances from now on so we don't have to discuss finances again'

No you're nit being greedy and yes he absolutely should be paying his 20%. It's fuck all as a percentage of what RPs spend of their salary on their kids.

However, do you have a feeling he would actually go for 50/50? Are the kids small? Is a court likely to grant this? If he's working long hours, shagging prostitutes and has never expressed an interest in having them 50/50 until money is mentioned then I'd go out on a limb and suggest 50/50 isn't in the kids interest.

I'd personally rather have less money and know that my kids were with me where they're best off.

Hopefully he'll come back with a sensible "offer" but if not I do think you need to think long and hard about the implications of pushing him. As fucking unfair as that is.

@essieestherson

Thanks everyone for your replies.

I have given him 3 or so days to come up with what he thinks is a reasonable figure based on his salary to pay towards the kids each month... he has either just sent messages saying that the kids will be better off with us going 50/50 custody, or he has just completely ignored me...

I think I don't really have a choice but to go to the CMS.

So don’t hang around Get the wheels in motion now Off mumsnet and sorting this!

Do you work op?

Would the children being 50/50 result in them having a substantially longer school journey for example?

This is the kind of thing that will hold up against him

He won't go for 50/50 - how would he do that with his working pattern? He have to employ a part time nanny or au pair to do pick ups and drops off which would cost him more money.

OP unless he is 'offering' to pay at least what CMS a will give you, I wouldn't bother negotiating with him. He has a history of cheating his children out of what they are due, he won't stop now.

Take the power away from him and go through CMS.

@biggerthehoops that's what's been holding me back from going to the CMS before, on the slight chance that he may actually go for 50/50 custody.. and then the even slighter chance that he would be granted it.

I doubt he would ever want it going to court, he's refused mediation many times. The main worry I have is the impact it will have on the kids if I upset him. I just have no idea how he will react or what he will do.

It may be better just take less money... it just upsets me so much knowing that the kids would have so much more if he would pay what he is due to pay.

It's bloody horrible isn't it. My ex should be paying £400 but he's worn me down over several hundred bloody grovelling phone calls pleading poverty and although I'm not worried about him going for more contact (she's 15 and wouldn't be interested) I worry about the impact on her when he puts the guilt trip on so I accept less. They're bloody bullies.

@Marni83 I work 3 days a week at the moment and looking to do more as soon as it comes up.

He lives about the same distance from the schools as I do, but has a demanding job so I assume would struggle with the school runs, which take me about and hour every drop off and pick up. (My mum helps me on the days I work) Plus he has to work away a lot... from what he says.

Do not go up until this sorted!!!!

You are the primary carer.
Stay like thag