What should the maintenance DP pays to ex-wife cover?

[Raptor]

DP took his three children back to their mum this evening, and she asked him to pay for school uniforms for the older two.

He felt a bit put on the spot, and has left things open-ended, and meanwhile, we're looking online for some clarification with regard to what his maintenance should cover.

He has shared residency with his ex-wife, and they have almost 50:50 care. He has all three children six nights out of 14, and on a seventh night, the children take turns having one-to-one time with Dad. This is the theory. In practice, he has the oldest child more.

DP is a devoted dad. He's always paid child support, initially over the odds until his ex-wife went through the CSA, and his payments have since dropped a little. His ex-wife also gets child benefit for all three. DP pays for clothes/food/outings for the children during his time with them, and contributes towards extras like school trips and birthday parties, and a relative buys all school shoes. So DP feels that 'basics' like school uniform should come out of his maintenance payments; otherwise, with it being essentially a 50:50 residency arrangement, and with both parents having equal opportunity to work (in time covered by the other parent), what else is the nearly £5,000 his ex-wife receives each year in relation to the children actually intended for?

So, in DP's particular situation, what stance should he take with regard to paying for two lots of uniforms? Money's tight, but of course, if it's the right/fair thing to do, he'll find a way.

Personally I feel the maintenance should cover the uniform, but I guess if your DP is a huge earner and the ex isn't, perhaps that isn't entirely fair, but I'd be over the moon to have an ex who paid maintenance of any sort of decent amount let alone any extras, so maybe I'm not the best person to ask! [winlk]

Depends on what his ex wife's financial situation is. Also, I am guessing the fact that your partner is paying £400 a month means he is earning well over 30k a year so really £100 for two uniforms isn't that big a deal.

In your case I'd say she should pay. to shut her up as a good will gesture your dh could maybe offer to buy one specific thing?

Thanks for posts. It seems it's a bit of a grey area.

DP isn't a huge earner - the £5,000 includes his maintenance and child benefit.

DP's ex-wife chooses not to work, despite DP covering childcare for half the working week; she has said that she intends to live off the state/family. If she makes this choice, surely it's not DP's responsibility to fund any shortfall? (The children don't go without by the way, since she has very few outgoings - no car, no household bills as she lives with a family member, subsidised groceries, etc.)

Anyway, I think the suggestion of buying one lot of uniform is a good compromise for now.

Thanks.

The financial arrangements along side 50:50 care are fraught with difficulty - because the less well off parent can't necessarily afford to split the cost of everything that the better off parent wants to buy.

DD is 50:50 and I get CM via the CSA (long story) - but I consider myself financially responsible for anything DD needs - uniform, school trips etc. This is what the CSA told me to do - although they also said that they can't enforce it!

My household finances are dire, ex is well off - so this leads to issues.

My ex hates it, and wants to dictate what I buy - for instance, I have recently picked up school uniform for DD second hand and he has blown 4 times as much on a second uniform, brand new. Theres no way I could have afforded to pay half of his purchase, which is one of the reasons the CSA arrangement is in place.

He's even asked for me to give him back some of the CSA money every month so he can go shopping with DD and pay for trips himself rather than me do it all

Providing maintenance is being paid, the father has fulfilled the legal side of his financial obligations, and the ex can't insist on him paying for anything else. However it's nice if (where financially possible) the father can help out with extras on an adhoc basis.

I don't think maint should be paid in a 50/50 situation - but each person should be responsible for what happens in their time and school expenses split.

I agree, ifiwasarichwoman. But because on the seventh night of DP's and his ex-wife's fortnightly contact arrangement, he officially has only one of the three children, he has to pay maintenance. In fact he would even if the court-ordered arrangement were exactly 50:50. In reality, he has his eldest more than half the time because he often refuses to cooperate at handovers and, other than dragging him into his mum's (which DP won't do), there's nothing he can do to make him adhere to the arrangement.

But yes, no maintenance, split child benefit and split extra costs would seem fair and reasonable. I think DP thinks that because his ex-wife gets about £450/month in maintenance and child benefit, all to go towards looking after the children only half the time, that this money should go towards these basics. That seems reasonable to me.

richwoman - that would only work if the parents had similar incomes though, surely?

Where one household is on the breadline and the other is well off - How is a decision made as to what the DCs need ?

DDs Dad already considers her neglected because I haven't bought her brand new school uniform - he would happily see me bankrupt and DD living with him rather than acknowledge that our standard of living is lower

I think the maintenance he pays should cover the essentials in this situation. However is you can afford it as a gesture of goodwill I would probably pay for one of the uniforms.

I think gestures of good will are probably lost on someone who has worked out such convoluted arrangements to ensure she only has care of her children for half the time but still gets paid maintenance as though she is their main carer.

Why does she think their father should provide their uniforms?

If she had discussed what contribution each should make, or how to split it, that would be one thing.

But she expects to be given money despite having shared care of her children, and to have things she might spend the money on given to her.

I think I would consider the maintenance dead money and buy the children what he thinks they need.

So, what do they need in terms of uniform for the coming year?

Oh for heavens sake. They BOTH had the children. They split up and the children now spend half their time with one and half their time with the other so their costs are equal. Why one of the parents should receive any money off of the other is beyond me. At least past the initial year or two if Mum didn't work during the marriage and needs time to get back on her feet.

OP there was a huge thread about this a week or two ago. Can't remember the thread title but you may be able to search for it.

notadisney mines standard of living with dad is higher, dad earns more - that's just the way it is I don't even try to keep up with him

My exH and I have a 50/50 arrangement. He works and I don't, I get child benefit and child tax for both children.

At the time we split up, 6 years ago a referral to the csa was automatic when the claim for income support and single parent benefits was made (I think, it's so long ago I've forgotten) and exH was ordered to pay csa to me even though he has the dc as much as I do. He set up a standing order into my account and I set one up straight back into his account - I didn't see why I should take his money when I got benefits as a lone parent and he couldn't afford to pay me anything especially when he was paying our joint mortgage (as I'd moved out)

When it comes to things like school trips and uniform it's generally a case of seeing who has any spare money, if he can't afford it then he will ask if I can or vice versa depending on who gets the letter from the school bookbag. If they are at mine and I see they need new shoes and I have money I will get them and he does the same. We've never had an official who pays for things rule just depends on circumstances at the time.

I haven't bought any school uniform yet, I don't know if he has either. I will pick up a few bits from asda, cheap polo shirts and trousers, and he will do the same so they will have plenty, he will probably get shoes, I'll get trainers.

He pays for food, days out, clothes, etc whilst they are there and I pay when they're at mine.

I do not think that a father is by default the provider.

Personally I think he shouldn't pay for school uniforms because care is 50/50. each situation is different but sounds like she is taking the p

Mammytomany - what a lovely grown up arrangement. The children will reap the reward of such sensiblness. Very refreshing.

richwoman I agree - my problem is that because my ex won't accept anything but the best for DD, there was constant friction when we tried to split expenses 50:50.
He refused to accept that I couldn't keep up. As far as he is concerned, DD deserves the best he can afford, and I am shirking my responsibilities if I don't match his financial contribution.

Hence, I went back to the CSA and consider myself solely financially responsible for DD. If he chooses to spend over and above his CM (and believe me, he does) then that's his choice.

The 50:50 couldn't work for us because he expected me to match his 50%, regardless of my income.

Really interesting to read further posts. I'm glad someone else said she's taking the p*ss, because it's saved me having to.

I think Mammytomany's arrangement is great; responsible, reasonable and sensible. And DP would do this in a heartbeat if ex-wife would cooperate. But everything he's tried to sort calmly and informally between them, has amounted to nothing; she gets Legal Aid, and so just enlists her solicitor each time, which cripples DP (who has to represent himself). He would rather they hadn't had to sort contact through court, because now as the children develop and their needs change, he has to go back to court to make any changes. Very frustrating. So much of our time and emotional energy goes into dealing with the fall-out that stems from dealing with an unreasonable person! But that's another story.

It's interesting some posters saying about one parent living in poverty and favouring cheaper/second-hand uniform and the higher earner expecting the kids to be kitted out in more expensive clothes. DP works, and his salary is decent enough, but not what I think most people would consider huge/well-off. I've seen how his net income breaks down in a spreadsheet: pension, maintenance, childcare, running the car, his share of the bills at my house, food ... and very little else left. He would happily buy second-hand, cheap uniform, and he is the earner. His ex-wife, however, who lives with a family member, is removed from the reality of what it costs to run a home, pays no bills, only buys some of the food, receives maintenance and child benefit, plus other benefits related to her not working (I don't know how that works either, because she isn't actually looking for work, so how is this not being picked up?) ... well, she is the one who buys the children Boden and will get them more expensive uniforms, and their shoes are from Russell & Bromley (although a relative pays for these too). She's the non-worker, non-earner, and she's the one with the expensive taste! So it works the other way too.

I'm not sounding very forgiving tonight. I'm hormonal, but also, while I'm hugely sympathetic to those people in genuine need getting support from the state (my sister needs it and always will and I think it's right she gets it), I have no sympathy or respect for someone who sees it as a meal ticket and actually chooses to make no economic contribution to society/the raising of her children because it's easier to just be lazy and do f*ck all.

Can you tell we've had a particularly tough time dealing with her of late?!

Anyway, thanks for posts.

Raptor She sounds like my DPs ex. You have my sympathies!

She sounds entitled and disgusting :)

Sinister - have you applied for the child benefit? Surely if you apply, she will lose it?

Sinister, it is actually fraud for her to be claiming CB when she's not the main carer. Your DP should put a claim in.