Reducing maintenance after new DC

[SeaRoom]

Hi all

Have NCd for this. I'd really appreciate your views/advice on a delicate issue...

Just wondering if anyone had experience of reducing maintenance to a dsc in line with CSA guidelines once another child is born?

DSD is 10 and DH is NRP. Maintenance is private arrangement but figures based on CSA guidelines. His Ex works full time and earns well (higher rate tax payer). However, she recently stopped paying her share of school fees saying she could not afford them (despite being very keen for DSS to go private and being very clear on the financial commitment before he went to the school).

DH has been very patient and asked if she could contribute anything at all to which he was given a flat 'no'. She then bought a car and took DSS on holiday abroad.

CSA calculator shows DH could cut maintenance by around £250 a month since the arrival of our DD three months ago.

I am not pushing it as I think it's a sensitive issue and don't want DSD to get negative message. DH thinks ex will go totally ballistic, start messing around with contact and the stress she will cause if we reduce the maintenance won't make it worthwhile.

If she was still contributing to school fees I'd probably be much more relaxed about leaving maintenance as it is but we are shouldering a lot of expense and the extra money would make a real difference to us.

Would welcome any thoughts/views please...

RPs are very shabbily treated in this country. I would be very irritated at being accused of taking the piss by people who really don't know the full circumstances.

As a RP, I could not disagree more. I know that the law, and social opinion, supports me to decide, dictate and accuse. I am entitled to CM despite my DD spending as much time with her Dad as with me. I am entitled to CB, tax credits and protected living arrangements because of the words "resident parent" on a piece of paper. I can dictate the quality of life my DD has, irrespective of the monies I have available. And I am entitled to unilaterally decide how and when my DD spends time with her Dad and all he can do is seek recourse through the family court system if he disagrees.

Shabbily treated by society and the system, I am definitely not.

Why should a step child be exempt from normal family economics

because it's not 'normal family economics', is it? A decision made in one household has an immediate and very real impact on the income of another. That's not how a non-separated family works.

At least RP's have a level of maintenance prescribed by law and a mechanism by which to enforce it

It's not enforceable in all cases. I haven't had any maintenance from my ex in 6 years. I am not an isolated or uncommon case.

Is it possible the PWC in this case has had a change in circumstances she hasn't told you about? Has she been demoted at work, perhaps so has less income? Has she gone part-time? Or even has she lost her job? Is she ill? It might be worth some gentle 'digging' with the daughter to see if anything untoward has happened. I know I am so far removed from my ex now that there is no way on earth I would discuss my finances with him - positive or negative. But my children would be aware I was suddenly picking them up from school more or was having hushed phone conversations with person/persons unknown. You would need to be careful but it might be worth it? There's a world of difference between 'can't pay' and 'won't pay'.

there are instances where the NRP does not choose to have more children. I am a SM who for nearly 2 decades was told that i could not conceive a child without medical intervention and donated eggs. Out of the blue I discovered I was pregnant. To have continued paying maintenance without the reductions would have left us potentially homeless and reliant on hand outs inspite of DP's very good wage.

OP - I think your best course of action is for your DH to offer the following options to DSD's mum.

option 1 - reduce maintenance by the £250 and continue paying her fees
option 2 - DSD leaves private school and attends state school and maintenance payments remain at current level
option 3 - Mum stops welching on the original agreement and returns to paying her half of the school fees and maintenance remains the same
option 4 - If the fees need to be paid in a lump sum at the start of term/year and having the ready cash is causing DSD's mum issues then DH could pay and DSD's mum pay her half in monthly installments back to DH. this could then be done as either her returning cash to him or you reduce the maintenance payments until her half of the fees are repaid at what ever rate it works out at - may find that it equals or surpasses the £250 reduction on CSA maintenance rate depending on what the cost of the fees are

Hope this helps

I know I am so far removed from my ex now that there is no way on earth I would discuss my finances with him - positive or negative.

And in which case, your ex would be perfectly entitled to assume that an agreement you previously came to (such as sharing the cost of school fees) still stands.

I am astounded that any parent would prefer their DCs to be "carefully questioned" about household circumstances by their DCs other parent, rather then swallow their pride, embarrassment or resentment to discuss the financial welfare of their joint DCs with the person they were once intimate enough with to create those children in the first place.

I'd reduce it. Your reduction will be £3k a year which actually won't be as much as half school fees would be (assuming no bursary/scholarship), so the DM is still quids in at your DH's expense.

Now is a good time to look realistically at whether your DH can afford the next 8 years of fees for DSD as she is presumably entering year 6 and applications for state secondary schools will be coming up. It would be the best time to switch to the state sector if necessary.

Magpiemystery it wasn't a gripe simply an example of how different circumstances in different homes can lead to a resident parent paying a far larger proportion of their income to support their children than a non-resident parent. I think the circumstance you describe whilst of course possible will not be common; you only have to read this board to find many many women providing childcare for the children of their partners previous relationship.

Wakey - not all children with separated parents have a RP and NRP. My former husband and I have a shared parenting agreement. The children spend 50% of their time with each parent. Neither of us has any more power or say than the other.

I think any RP who would insist that the payment stays the same if the ex has more children is wrong and quite possibly bitter!
I was a single parent to my DS most of his young life (birth till 12) I didn't take a penny not 1 ever. My DS has not ever gone without not once, I'm not loaded, I wasn't even comfortable but he had what I had.
If a marriage breaks down you cut your cloth, the children NEVER go without and in my experience only start moaning/ wanting when that idea is put in their heads.
As long as the child is fed, loved, has time with both parents/families and has a roof over their head what else do they need??
Cut the maintenance OP and I'd tell the Mother that if she wants the child to go to private school she stump up the other half.
Also are your children going to go private because if not then surely they will be 'missing out' ??

Depends. Is it money that'll be missed ? Partner is still paying the same amount that he paid before he met me and had our 2 kids. In fact he's paying more than CSA recommends even without our 2 children included but we've never needed to. Of course should our financial situation change then maybe ...

And in which case, your ex would be perfectly entitled to assume that an agreement you previously came to (such as sharing the cost of school fees) still stands....rather then swallow their pride, embarrassment or resentment to discuss the financial welfare of their joint DCs with the person they were once intimate enough with to create those children in the first place

And if the ex is abusive? If the ex couldn't care less about the financial welfare of the children? If you are ill and know that your ex would attempt to use that against you in court to remove the children from you? All of the above? A person should just put up with the ridicule and abuse they know will come, ridicule and abuse which is of course all about the 'welfare of the children'? If I dare to look tired on a pickup/drop off my ex is quizing the children as to what is going on! So yes, I would personally rather my ex digs his own grave with his inanities than have him know that I was going through a bad patch he could use to beat me over the head with.

Well more fool you then needaholiday to be quite honest. No. Is a complete sentence. Unless of course you are happy to do so in which everyone wins.
Although thinking that through surely your DP has an obligation to share the increased childcare costs during holidays too? They both benefit from their daughter being at school and so should share the cost for care when she is not?

Tutt - I receive no money from my former husband, nor text credits, child benefit or any type of assistance from anyone. (Well aside from a 25% discount on my council tax bill.) And I don't think it is fair that the decision of two adults to have another child should be be allowed to impact a third. As you say it is not likely the children will suffer as the parent impacted will do their best to prevent that; the two adults who have decided to have the other child should be the ones who suffer the associated financial detriment not the adult who had no say in the matter.

frankly Caorunn i think you sound incredibly bitter.

Caorunn
But that's the point, you are the ex, the maintenance if for your child not you. Your child is still your exh's child and the % for your particular childis reduced, as it would be if you we're still together, because there is another child.

Unfortunately too many RP want to control their exes and they can't quite believe it when they start another family and begrudge it when they have to step up and contribute towards their own child more.

I'm leaving this thread now

I agree with your points completely Magpie

Caorunn why should my ex ( or any one else's) 'suffer' if the child isn't, why should other innocent children suffer because of a bitter ex?
You admitted that the child would be ok and not go without so what is this 'suffering', sounds like bitterness to me too, it also sounds a ADULT thing and nothing to do with the child.
I received no financial help with my son and I happy with that, no one 'suffered' and I was happy, the father was happy so ultimately my wonderful son was happy... win, win when parents put on their big boy pants, move on and grow up!
Maybe I should be bitter (ex had numerous affairs leaving 3 times for OW)but my own mental health is more important than carrying such shite around.

I would ask her mum to resume paying the school fees and consider those as a separate issue.

I wouldn't cut the maintenance. I don't think that is the right thing to do and would send the wrong message to your step-daughter.

I don't think that is the right thing to do and would send the wrong message to your step-daughter

FFS why would the child even know??

As WTL said, why would the child know, has our society gone completely bonkers to the point when children are involved with financial agreements between split parents?? World gone bloody mad!

not all children with separated parents have a RP and NRP. My former husband and I have a shared parenting agreement. The children spend 50% of their time with each parent. Neither of us has any more power or say than the other.

Regardless of the informal arrangements between parents, the "power" is not equally distributed in the eyes of the authorities. The parent in receipt of CHild Benefit, that is, the Resident Parent, is still the parent who receives support from society and the state and recognised as a parent, regardless of the "equality" agreed between the two parents informally. The other parent, even if equal in the eyes of the former couple and the child, is not acknowledged as a parent by the various official agencies.

Child benefit is a gateway benefit - whichever parent is in receipt of that has the greater responsibility for the child in the eyes of legislation.

The parent who receives Child Benefit has the "power" to veto an application for child tax credit by the other parent.

The parent who receives child benefit is assessed as being financially and primarily responsible for the child for the purposes of benefits and job seeking expectations.

The parent receiving child benefit is given priority when an an application is made for a school place - if two applications for the same child are received, Local Authorities are obliged to accept the one from the parent in receipt of child benefit.

And, for the vast majority of CSA cases, the parent in receipt of child benefit is entitled to child maintenance from the other parent even in cases (such as my own) of 50:50 care. At least THAT particular inequality is gradually being rectified.

Dad's money is divided amongst all his children, it is to support the child, not the ex. Mum provides a home for the child as does dad. He may have a partner bringing in money but he will also have extra costs (but that's their business, not the ex's)

And if neither parent is in receipt of child benefit Wakey? Not sure the school position holds in Scotland either to be honest.

I sound bitter because I have view on whether the father of a child should maintain the same level of financial contribution to his children should he go on and have a further child with a new partner. Eh why? It is a scenario very unlikely to affect me personally.

Magpie - indeed the money is for the child. I am not sure that many 8 year olds use it to pay board and their share of the bills however. So when it is reduced by let's sat £100 per month what should the receiving parent do? Stopping feeding the child lunch? Buy them cheaper shoes? Cancel dancing lessons? Or suck it up and try and make up the difference? So the impact is on the adult not the child.

Tutt/wheres - However the receiving adult may not be able to make up the difference in which case the the child may well become aware, more likely the older the child. What would you like the receiving parent to say?

I would agree need however my point was they it is not only the ex who is responsible for childcare over the summer break (or indeed any break) but you partner too; hence the size of the favour is not quite as large as perhaps you suggest. But regardless of the size you are quite right to say no going forward.

For example a 6 week holiday period would mean they were both responsible for 15 days of holiday care as opposed to 6 for your DP and 24 for his ex, assuming he has the children one night during the week.

Caorunn, are you a step parent? I'm guessing not