Maintenance? DH is in the right, I think?

[Whereyourtreasureis]

My DH has always paid a consistent and good sum for his DS, my DSS, since they broke up, 10yrs ago. This has always been done on a Voluntary Basis. They agreed a lot of years ago, rather than getting the CSA involved, he has always paid a decent and regular amount for DsS, plus going halves on his school uniforms, trips and new clothes when needed.
DSS is with us overnight 3 times a week, and his younger brother and sisters (my DCs with DH) love their brother being here.
What has happened is, DSS's mother exploded this Summer, saying she doesn't think it's enough. She said screamed that other mothers she knows have far more than she does, and she is going to have it done through the CSA.
Well the CSA looked at the situation, and it turns out that DH has to pay quite a lot less than he was.
Now his XP has started messaging, saying she was wrong to involve other people, she's sorry, can we forget it- and just get back to the more beneficial for her previous plan they had in place.
He's said No, and took her at her word that they will use Child Support now, as that's what she wanted.
Are we wrong? She tried to get more and realised she was entitled to less. And now we're meant to say "it doesn't matter".
Are we wrong for taking her at her word, and saying This is what you wanted?

The CSA amount is a minimum contribution but since you have dss 3 nights a week and presumably buy him what he needs when he's with you yanbu.

errr... hang on, its not about getting her back, its about what is right for the children, no? Surely every parent should contribute as much as they can towards their children? the child support recommendations are the minimum. So if DH can afford to contribute as he was, then he should continue to do that.

Hard to say. Technically you are in the right.

But for me it would depend how petty and childish she is and whether she would use it as ammunition to restrict contact?

She's a bit knobby but the money is for dss. It seems a bit silly to be like that if the one that's gonna miss out I dss.
Feels like your punishing her for involving the csa. It doesn't work like that though, punish her you punish the child.

Yes I think you are wrong. He paid what he thought was a fair amount, now he is paying significantly less, so less than he previously thought was fair. It shouldn't be about what she did or said, but what's best for his son.
Is he really happy to pay less for his son than he always thought was fair? Is HD happy for his sons standard of living to drop because his mother was an arse?

Tough one. My first reaction would be exactly that, she wanted it that way so that's what she will get, but dss is the one who will suffer.

If you have him 3 nights a week and pay half towards other costs then i dont thing you are wrong and would pay what the csa suggest as you have him not far off 50% of the time. If you took him that one extra night would your dp's ex have to start paying maintenance? Bloody doubt it somehow.

jawanna standard of living will not drop- they are quite a lot better off than we are. DH is a brilliant Dad, and we have always paid the most we can. DSS's Mum contacted CSA because she thought it wasn't enough. They assessed it, and decided that we were actually paying over, not under.

Depends, I think you should try and take the emotion out of it. Obviously DSS's mum has behaved badly but try and think only about DSS for a minute. If you reduce the payment will his standard of living drop? Does he want for nothing/is he living on the edge of poverty? The answer to those questions would determine my actions in this case I think.

Tbh the csa rates of paying are really shit. If I was an nrp id not use that as my guide.

I think for me the test would be whether I could honestly tell myself that I had done the best that I could for my ds.

Paying the bare minimum when I could afford more, purely for the satisfaction of telling the boy's mother "This is what you wanted" sounds incredibly petty. It's the child who will ultimately be bearing the brunt of this decision.

I completely understand you feel the way you do, I would too. However, who will lose out by you paying less? XP or your DSS? If it's DSS then he should pay the higher amount.

I can't imagine a decent father reducing his maintenance just to punish his ex. I would not want to build a life with such a man.

This money is for the upkeep of the dc and surely if this amount has been paid for ten years then that was what your dh thought was reasonable.

Will the children have to go without if this money is dropped!

Tbh if the dc will not differ then pay the suggested amount and put the extra aside for dc

How old is DSS?
ExW has shown herself to be a bit of a prat, can money go straight to DSS.
DH's ExW did the same, we met her at the half way mark and gave the difference to DSDs. Make sure you do not punish the kid.

except it is the ex who has reduced the payment though isn't it. Albeit foolishly. Let her get on with the lower payment. SHe could have easily worked it out before involving the CSA. I think you are right to stick to the new payment.

It isn't about 'reducing maintenance'.
XP said the amount we paid wasn't good enough, so she said she was going to the CSA for their assessment.
Their assessment came out that we should be paying less than we are.

Yes by csa rates which frankly are a bit shit. Feels a bit mean.

Yes its far better to win than be the bigger person. If your dh can afford it he should carry on if hes been ok with it for 10 years.

The CSA amount is an absolute minimum though. If you can afford it, why would you pay the minimum?

It's not that really- DSS is with us just under half the week. We have, until now, paid voluntary C M. weekly. Now, we have an official C.M.O- for less than we were paying.
So really don't see why it is wrong, to just accept the order, and pay what we've been requested to, when it was XP's choice to involve CSA in the first place?

But the official amount is designed to be the absolute minimum. Not what you 'should' pay.
Sounds like you've made your mind up though so not 100% sure why you're asking.

The CSA rates are the lowest possible amounts. That's not really what he should be paying, its the minimum. So the amount he was paying was more than the minimum, that's not to say it was 'too much'. I would always feel a bit suspicious of any man who only pays the minimum he can get away with.

there's a lot to be said for being the bigger person and say that while you all agree that CSA amounts are X, your DH is happy to go back to paying Y, and hope this will be the end of it.

However you try to dress it up, it still comes down to the same thing. You are planning to pay less than you were because you want to stick two fingers up at the ex and say "This is what you wanted".

And the real loser in all of this will be your DSS.

Why are you asking then? I'm not being facetious - it seems like you've made your mind up

I agree that I would hope that if DH and I divorced, he would pay an amount he could afford to support the DC, rather than the bare minimum required.

Plus, DSS' mother has presumably made commitments etc in the basis of receiving that money - it's not as though they have just separated. She's been very silly but could you honestly listen to DSS saying that he couldn't go on a school trip or had had to give up playing rugby etc and not feel rather uncomfortable, knowing the reason why?