Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

Original poster

What should maintenance cover?

90 replies

careerwoman · 07/02/2011 14:02

Quick q regarding what should be reasonably covered by maintenance?

DSS is 18 and learning to drive. DH's ex just changed her car, admittedly to a smaller one so DSS could drive it, but its much newer and more expensive than her previous car, and she used money from her payments to fund it. (We know this as there was a discrepancy in DH's payments, purely accidently on his part, which meant she got a lump sum. The new car turned up 7 days after the cheque was given...) However, she has then asked DSS to pay for his own insurance - nearly £2k a year.

DH's ex gets over 1k a month (for 2 DSS only - it was a clean break settlement, so no maintenance for her). Is it unreasonable to think she should be able to fund the car insurance for DSS from this? DSS got a reasonable amount of money for his 18th birthday from us and DH's relatives, but this was not to pass onto his mother...

Clearly, this could all be a trick to ensure that DH coughs up more money to pay for this too! Clearly, we will pay, but, given she also has new partner and additional child, makes you wonder what the money is funding...

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
SecondMrsS · 09/02/2011 14:35

I guess there's no easy answer is there. But, this is why I beleive the decision for only one person to work is a bad one.
Unless the working partner earns an awful lot of money, they will be pushed to run two households in the event of a split. And the only person who will suffer is the child.

Each to their own as other people's decisions don't affect me but this is my sole reason for working.

lateatwork · 09/02/2011 15:38

OR the alternative (which happens with us...) is that the new partner (ie me) pays for everything for the 'new family' as DP earns a pittance (ie doesnt cover child care costs- even if he did contribute...) but needs to feel independent (fair enough! agree with secondmrs s there..). All his wage goes on travel costs to get to DBS, maintenance and extras for DBS with some spare cash for his personal stuff.

of course its frustrating at times (ex has brand spanking new house and anything nice we supply to dbs we never ever ever see again...(maybe she is ebaying it all!!!!)) but hey ho he has a son. he should and does support him. this of course means i am effectively the sole breadwinner in our household. is it fair? um no.

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 15:47

Second I actually think that was a very fair point and (despite digressing :) ) I agree with you entirely!!

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 15:49

lateatwork - thats how it works here too and christ it sucks.

Petal02 · 09/02/2011 15:55

So what you're saying ladies, is that by the time your partners have contributed to their 'first' family, there's so little left that you end up being the ones who support the 'second' family?

That's not right at all.

lateatwork · 09/02/2011 16:01

my deepest sympathy prettyfly1.

Blushhave never posted so much on here. having bad day...

earwicga · 09/02/2011 16:02

Or looking at it another way, it IS better that the 18 year old (who is an adult) pays for their own insurance. It will be 'looked' after then.

mjloveswineoclock · 09/02/2011 16:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

lateatwork · 09/02/2011 16:02

that is correct petal02

mjloveswineoclock · 09/02/2011 16:04

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 16:07

very addictive - have had a truly shit day today and mn is saving me.

Sympathies right back at ya. And the best bit is that the ex likes to complain about what a workaholic witch I am who isnt there for her kids.

lateatwork · 09/02/2011 16:14

mj my DP too has been branded 'tight'... also that he favours DD. Which is rubbish.

lateatwork · 09/02/2011 16:20

oh one of my favourites... ex was quite angry that DP left DBS in daycare until (shock horror...) 1700!!!! She normally insists that he is collected at 1500 as he doesnt like staying there long.... (DP had a job that day and was working..)

I laughed at that one. DD is in daycare until 1730 everyday.... (quietly sobs...)

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 16:22

us too. Apparently he prefers ds2 because ds2 gets to go to rugby and dss doesnt. Its actually because it is mid year, the next age up is on the other side of a massive set of fields and ds2 has adhd so cant be left and ds2's name was on the list for this club since he was 2 its so popular whereas dss only decided he wanted to play six months after ds2 started. DSS has an activity nearly every day for god sake but apparently he feels left out, of something I arrange and pay for so now I am also supposed to pay for that. ARRRRGHHHHHHH.

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 16:27

actually to be fair though the rugby thing isnt entirely her fault. DP was playing disney dad and hasnt told her the truth about why dss cant play after saying he could. I love my partner but there are times I could literally shoot them both with no compassion.

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 16:27

sorry op for hijack Blush

LadySanders · 09/02/2011 16:30

"by the time your partners have contributed to their 'first' family, there's so little left that you end up being the ones who support the 'second' family?"

but presumably when you got together with your partner you knew they had financial and other responsibilities for another child?

i'm not being argumentative, i'm genuinely interested, because my exh's partner complains about both the financial burden of supporting my ds1 and the fact that once every 2 weeks her partner (my ex) has to drive over and collect ds1 etc etc. and i find myself lacking in sympathy, because she made a decision to be with him knowing exactly what the longstanding financial and administrative arrangements with me were. (i hasten to add they happen to be rolling in money, but even if they weren't, the principle remains the same?)

Petal02 · 09/02/2011 16:35

Lateatwork - you leave a child at nursery til 5.30pm? You wicked woman !!!!!! (Not).

That one made me smile, as DH's ex always insists that DH collects SS at 4pm on 'access Fridays.' Apparently routine and consistency are important to make SS feel secure. (He's nearly 17). Like most people who work, DH doesn't finish that early, (and as he's collecting him from his mother's house, does it really matter if it's 5pm or 5.30pm??) but DH obediently leaves work early, collects SS at 4pm, takes him back to our house, and then returns to work ..... I get REALLY annoyed about that it's just the ex being awkward, and for the sake of it. And DH always plays ball. Mind you, DH has promised that the access rota will cease at the end of May, so it will make his life a lot easier when we're on a flexi-arrangement.

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 16:44

Petal has he finally conceded on the access rota - well done!!!!! Its about time it got a bit more flexible.

Petal02 · 09/02/2011 16:54

Thanks Prettyfly - funnily enough, I think DH was struggling with the rota too, and decided that when SS finishes his exams at the end of May, and leaves mainstream school, that it would be an appropriate time to review the arrangements. Apparently he's already told this to SS, who was fine about it (!!!!). Just before Christmas, DH decided that he and SS should start playing squash, but mentioned it would be hard to play regularly given the access rota. I chipped in, and innocently suggested that if we didn't operate via a rota, he could have a regular squash arrangement ...... obviously the seeds were sown!!!

mjloveswineoclock · 09/02/2011 17:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Petal02 · 09/02/2011 17:05

Excellent post MJ.

LadySanders · 09/02/2011 17:24

mj i absolutely agree, my dh is step dad to ds1 and i am in awe of him and others who take it on.

in an ideal world the relationship between the parents remains amicable enough to allow flexibility in financial arrangements as each partner's circumstances change - i am lucky enough to have finally reached this point, just about, with my exh.

however - i still think that there is a bit of 'buyer beware' for want of a better expression. for example, my exh agreed when we split to pay me, in annual installments, a large lump sum, on the basis that he had cleaned out our savings before we split. 7 years on, we are both with other people and both have more children. a large balance remains outstanding on the lump sum, and exh's gf thinks it ought to be written off because i now live in a "nice big house" with my dh and don't "need" it. whereas as far as i'm concerned, that was my money, he owes it to me, and can afford to pay it, so why should i not get it? surely that's something she should have factored in when she thought about getting together with him? just as she should have thought about the fact that, yes, it IS somewhat disruptive to your social life if you have a 10 year old turning up at your house for 24 hours once a fortnight.

prettyfly1 · 09/02/2011 17:37

I can see your point totally lady but I dont think she saw how hard it would be to start with. SHE didnt lend you the money but SHE is feeling the pinch so of course she feels a bit shit about it. YOU agreed with your partner and YOU have every right to it but that is between you and him - after years of the arrangement going on she must be a bit fed up of it. Twenty four hours every other week isnt a lot though so that one I am afraid just has to be sucked up.

LadySanders · 09/02/2011 17:46

yup, i should think she is fed up of it, but then my dh thinks it's unfair that i will have to wait years to get back the money that i should have had sitting in the bank all this time...

i suppose what i'm saying in a round about way is that everyone in my situation, at least, has a perfectly valid point looked at from their own perspective... and in the end i think you just have to grin and bear it wherever you are in the scenario