When to tell ex about change to maintenance

[Banhaha]

When do you think it would be best to inform OH's ex that he has to reduce maintenance payments as he is expecting another child? Should he let her know as soon as possible - at the same time she's told about the baby? or should he wait until it's born? Payments will still be above the level the calculator suggests but she will need to know not to expect as much. Has anyone got any experience with this? How did telling the ex go?

They are almost 50:50 residency it sounds like. What's the big deal moving to.dads with lovely new baby?!

Tearing,

Why are you trying to reorganise a family you know nothing about?!

You are coming across as ever so slightly unhinged.

You're not really joking tearing
I feel sorry for your children.

Glad it's not just me larry, awful.

2 over nights in 14 is not almost 50:50 and if you really believed that you wouldn't be tearing the OP apart over maintenance payments because no one pays maintenance when they have a child 50% of the time.

It's just an option they could consider.

The joke part was the working classes (feeble pun)

My kids are fine. Because I absolutely wouldn't tolerate this shit for a single second from my ex and would make his life a living hell if he tried it. To be fair, I pay 50% of costs, but I absolutely refuse to subsidise my ex's contributions. 50:50 costs is fair, regardless of subsequent lifestyle choices. if I bought a new horse, I wouldn't expect ex to fund that. Equally him having a new child. I wouldn't think the first wife on this thread is more reasonable than me, judging by the amount she negotiated for maintenance, but who knows, maybe she is.

would make his little life a living hell
You need some help.

Tearing suggesting that you would make his life a living hell, try to influence your kids against contact with their dad etc just makes you sound like an incredibly bitter ex-wife. Maybe you're justified, only you know that.

To everyone who's tried to reassure me that we aren't being completely unreasonable- thank you.

I'm concerned that it is seen by some that it is not on and feel I've been a bit naive to think it would be acceptable.

I'm not going to read anymore as it's made me a bit confused and stressed. We'll think about things and hopefully OH can have a catch up and sort things out.

A bit off topic but, are you married to this man, OP?

If I read this right,you alone are paying mortgage and bills?

We will be getting married. Mortgage in both our names and we both pay towards it at the moment. Once baby is here my money will pay most the mortgage and his 1/3 of income for our baby will cover the rest and bills. The other 2/3 will go to his other 2 children. That's what we'd planned anyway. But like I say we are going to have to go away and have a rethink.

You didn’t answer my questions earlier. Fair enough. Up to you. But what I find utterly batshit is him dividing his income between three kids. HE needs to contribute to HIS living costs. Not be supported by YOU so SHE can have 2/3 of his income.

WTAF is HE paying for days out for her? She’s independently wealthy, she can pay for days out.

You’re being weird.

He’s paying his ex 2/3 of his income?

A lot of mixed opinions on here... the way I look at it is the maintenance calculator is there to make sure that the non-resident parent is contributing no less than a reasonable amount affordable to their circumstances. If DP is already paying more than this minimum amount and even with the adjustment is still paying more than the minimum I think that is more than fair. If this was arranged via child maintenance they would lower the payments after you making them aware of your DC. So I think it's reasonable.

Congratulations on your baby, and I hope things work out well for all involved x

Hang on... his plan is to give his children 2/3 of his income... and that would be a reduction compared to what he pays now?

Crickey some of the posts are bonkers ... hell screw it and just pay the CMS amount then there's a wake up call of new baby... I say this tongue in cheek. Life moves on and it's unrealistic for children who are becoming young people to think everything stays the same. The children will have to get a paper round to buy sweets.

Dear Kids
Your step mum and i are going to give you a new sibling - great isn't it.

Problem is I can't afford to pay for you like i used to, so if you want to keep having music lessons and days out - your Mum is going to have to pay for them instead, not me because i will spending the monies on my new baby!!

Hope that is OK because i give your mum more than i should for you two.

Yeah it goes down well !

As I said to my ex - who paid less than CSA minimum, then reduced and has bever put it up - you both fucked me over and now i pay to support your second family.

He's only making a small reduction of £200 pcm, don't worry guys, it's a small percentage of what he pays apparently. Must be ££££££. A third of ££££££ is still ££.

More seriously, if that online maintenance calculator was right about the actual costs of raising a child, some must only cost about £20 a month to feed, clothe and house. It should be half of costs (as this family have come to a private arrangement on - or even more for the dad in this case) not percentage of salary if that leaves the resident parent subsidising the non resident parent. 2/3 salary is really high, but we both pay about 50% of our salaries - that doesn't leave money for violin classes or multiple holidays though! That maintenance calculator is a joke - foist all the cost onto the resident parent.

So for instance... the non resident parent earns 300 a week. The calculator says they have to pay 70 of that to a parent with 3 children. Leaving them with 230 a week to cover, rent (so the parent has a roof over their head and somewhere to have the children) bills (so the place they have the children is covered for essentials and can be comfortable for the children) food (so the parent can survive and also provide meals for the children when they are with them) and transport (a car or van used so they can work and earn money to pay maintenance and all of the above and also collect children and drop them off and do their share of running around). When you look at that as an example I personally don't think the calculator underestimates it, if anything it doesn't always take into consideration the cost of someone having to support themselves in order to support their children.

I take this example from when me and my DP were separated for 2 years. He couldn't afford to do it all and ultimately his presence in our children's lives is more beneficial to them than him paying maintenance. So I didn't take his money, we arranged that he would have the children for 2 afternoons a week for tea and have them every Saturday night and when the children needed something ie new shoes, uniform, school strips etc he would pay or contribute the most he could.

Granted had he of met someone else and had another baby then yes I most definitely would of claimed the maintenance as he would of clearly been in a more stable position but I still think £70 a week is more than enough for him to of been contributing, I could manage with the occasional bit of help which tbh made me feel good about myself as a mum knowing that I was providing for my children and working for what they needed myself.

Every situation is different and I think in the OP's they are being more than reasonable with their arrangements. The fact he sees the children as much as he does should count for a lot, I can't stand how money has to be the ruler or seperations and contact with children who ultimately need love and stability from both parents. If they're lucky enough to have music lessons then that's great, there are millions of children out there that don't get to do any extras or clubs but are still happy knowing they have parents that love and care for them. It's just my opinion.

That's reasonable, blackcoffee, if you were left with 75% of your income as well for your own housing/travel/food.

I disagree, the cheapest flat suitable for him to have the children was 500 a month. It was basically a case of either he pays me the money and affords 1 drop of and pick up a week while living on beans on toast kids included when there or we compromise and our children see more of their dad. There aren't enough resident parents out there that seem willing to compromise for the sake of their children's emotional needs if you ask me. Lots of selfish bitter women wanting to play god.

@Banhaha, do not consider any of the negative comments from pp's. Thier comments have an undertone of passive rage, I assume from a bad experience of a simillar situation you've posted about. Financially, if it's not ideal to maintain the same cm payments to his ex then simply review and reduce accordingly but fairly. In many families when there are more children the budget has to stretch further resulting in each child receiving less than before. Equally when there is more money available each child benefits from this too.

Lets say you're OH was to become unemployed then he would not be able to make any cm payments to his ex. Unfortunately she'd just have to get on with it and the kids too as that's what happens in the real world. It would be highly unreasonable for him to be expected to maintain the same cm payments without any income. Some mn posters would probably agrue otherwise and you'll get plenty of those silly ones on here.

Bearing this in mind, with the addition of a new baby on the way, it is perfectly acceptable and within reason for him to want to reduce the cm payemts. The addition of a new baby to any family will impact the family budget, so given OP's complicated situation, this is no different. Unfortunately, too bad for his ex if she will now be getting less. It does seem like the ex has suitable options to meet the shorfall such as getting a part-time job or her inheritance.

Similarly, after my OH and I had our baby the family budget was reviewed and his ex had a large cut. She was not happy about it and still is not, however, with time she's adjusted to it. 😋 Like you I also work and contribute significantly to the family money mean while his ex has chosen not to work as apparently she hates working.

Unfortunately some mothers have an ingrained mentality that every penny from thier ex belongs to them and thier biological kids so why should they get a job and work.

Why should the OP's child bear the consequences of an ex who refuses to live a meaningful life beyond cm payments. 🤔

Tearing,

You sound more concerned about your perceived idea of fairness (which sounds more like revenge than fairness) than the emotional well being of actual real sentient children.

You made your judgment when the OP first posted and, despite details showing the OP and her partner are trying to be more-than-fair, are determined to stick to your guns.

The OP’s husband’s existing children sound like they are happy with 70% of the school time with their mother and 50/50 in the holidays. This arrangement is actually great for the ‘resident’ parent as most of the costs occur in 50/50 time but maintenance is calculated on nights. Regardless, these children live a very privileged lifestyle.

It is the OP’s ex wife, who is insistent on not working yet maintaining a very extravagant lifestyle, who will be responsible for the small curtailment of her children’s lifestyle should she not get work or cut back a little on her own expensive hobbies. The OP’s partner can not afford to pay more than he is, by the sound of it.

As for what you sound like you are doing, quiety poisoning your own children against their father whilst insisting you are supporting their relationship, this may work for teenagers but, when they look back with adult eyes, they will see exactly what happened and make their own judgment.

Bitterness works for no one, and certainly not children.

This is ridiculous. If this were a normal set up and OP got pregnant with 2 kids already, no one would bat an eyelid at everyone having to make some cut backs to afford it. OP isn't suggesting their new baby will get more than her partners other children. It is life, it moves on, he and OP are entitled to have children of their own and if that means that his current children have to either drop a music lesson or their mum contributes to them then I'm sure their world won't come crashing down. It sounds like the father already contributes a lot to his children if as others have said £200 is a small reduction. I don't even get half of that for 2 kids. There isn't an infinite pot of gold just because you are a NRP. All of this well if you can't afford to keep it the same don't have more kids stuff is bollocks, if this were a mum with 4 kids on benefits stating she was pregnant again there would be people flooding in with agencies to help and feed your family for a fiver meal plans. Paying more maintainence doesn't mean you love them more or less.

OP perhaps to lessen the blow to the kids you could explain that babies are very expensive initially and so some cutbacks will have to be made until you reassess finances, and make sure they know that even though they have to drop something that doesn't mean the new baby will be getting more it will still be equally split.

Good luck and congratulations