Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Step-parenting

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

Original poster

Ex not spending maintenance on kids

241 replies

Mrskeats · 28/11/2019 17:41

What to do in this situation.
My dh pays a lot of spousal and child maintenance to ex wife and supports his oldest at university.
However DSD is always asking dh for money and says her mum has no money.
For context the ex has about 2300 net per month- no mortgage as my dh took his pension in the divorce and she took the equity and bought a house outright. She has no car to pay for either.
That amount may be underestimated.
My dh has now set up a standing order to give his daughter an allowance each week so she has a bit of money. He's knocking this off the child maintenance. DSD is 17.
Am I wrong to think that 2.3 to 2.5k is quite a lot with no housing costs?
There were no debts from the marriage

OP posts:
Betterversionofme · 29/11/2019 10:26

You don't need to pay towards step-children. Parent needs to pay towards children.

Wishforsnow · 29/11/2019 10:38

Doesn't seem right that your dh has how his ex should spend her money. If he wants to give his dd pocket money then fine but I guess she should be saying thank you to her mum for her pocket money not your dh in this situation.

Lobsterquadrille2 · 29/11/2019 11:03

I've never received any maintenance (and DD is 22 so never will) so have no personal experience but always believed that the amount paid by the NRP was based on a percentage of their net income, depending on how many children.

I didn't think that the income of a current partner was taken into account. If the NRP and current partner split, the maintenance must then decrease accordingly - and the NRP is then paying two separate lots of maintenance. That seems very odd.

hsegfiugseskufh · 29/11/2019 11:09

lobster only the paying parents income is taken into account.

however, it doesn't seem like the maintenance paid in this scenario is going through any official channels, it seems like the ex has named a number and the dh has agreed (silly!)

yes, if the NRP and now partner split up and they have joint children, the NRP will pay one amount to ex no 1 and another amount to ex no 2.

In this situation the dp would have to pay ex no 1 less than he currently does to be able to pay ex no 2.

If they went through CMS they would work out who gets what.

Original poster
Mrskeats · 29/11/2019 11:19

We are a family. It's family money whichever account it comes from
Maintenance is 1/3 of salary for my husband

OP posts:
NoCauseRebel · 29/11/2019 11:21

The OP states that he pays spousal and child maintenance. Spousal maintenance is separate from child maintenance and is not necessarily awarded in the same manner if at all.

But generally spousal maintenance would apply if the other parent e.g. gave up work so the DH could further his own career thus damaging her’s and her chances of getting back into the workplace.

If he’s paying her £1500 then only some of that will be child maintenance.

NoCauseRebel · 29/11/2019 11:24

No OP it is not family money given it was agreed prior to you getting together. You don’t and shouldn’t have an input into how much he pays for the upkeep of his children from his first marriage.

And you say that it’s around a 3rd, so how much of that is spousal and how much is CM. Because whatever the spousal maintenance is you need to take that off the £1500 and the rest is the percentage he pays as CM.

Original poster
Mrskeats · 29/11/2019 11:24

£800 child
£700 spousal
Other income to get up to 2800-3000
No housing costs
Apparently this is being 'poor'

OP posts:
hsegfiugseskufh · 29/11/2019 11:27

mrakeats is your dh happy paying that much?

CrotchetyQuaver · 29/11/2019 11:31

I would be a little cautious that it's not the daughter playing the poor little me card as mummy won't give her unlimited spending money every week. She may be limiting the amount she gives her which is not necessarily unreasonable depending on how much ££ is handed over.

NoCauseRebel · 29/11/2019 11:37

So it’s nowhere near a 3rd of his salary being paid out on CM then is it.

What her income is is frankly none of your business. His is only her business on the basis that some of it needs to be paid to her to pay for their joint child’s upkeep. The spousal part is something which he could potentially discuss with her but assuming she lives with her mum full-time the £800 is actually lower than the CMS recommended minimum if his monthly salary is £4500

Original poster
Mrskeats · 29/11/2019 11:41

In total it's a 1/3 as I said.
It was 700 higher when his son was in 6th form
He is not happy that lies are being told mostly
And that neither child has a job

OP posts:
hsegfiugseskufh · 29/11/2019 11:43

nocause actually its more than what CMS recommend.

I just put in a salary of 79000 per year (which after tax is just over 4500 per month not taking into account a pension)

that its for 1 child

who stays 0 nights a year

and there are no other children living with him (which I don't know actually but it would lower it if there was)

and it came out as a recommended 694.34 per month.

so actually he is paying over the recommendation - where did you get your info from nocause?

hsegfiugseskufh · 29/11/2019 11:44

that's based on 4500 being his net wage rather than gross wage, if its 4500 gross than actually he is paying much more than he should be

SunshineAngel · 29/11/2019 11:45

It's none of his business what he does with the money. Maintenance isn't just pocket money. It's all costs involved with having a child, school things, clothes, food etc.

You should not take pocket money away from the amount you pay to the child's mother. It is normal for a father to pay maintenance to a child's mother AND give their children pocket money.

We had this conversation with DSS's mum who couldn't understand where we were spending the money she sent, as we didn't have enough to buy him games (which were £50 a pop, and all we said was wait until his birthday). Once you add up the mortgage, meals, money for college, bus pass, the odd tenner here and there to go out, plus a portion of the household bills like water, gas and electric which it should also contribute to .. her money doesn't even cover half - which it should!

None of your business. If he cuts money out of what he pays, she can take him to court, and be well within her rights to get it back.

PrayingandHoping · 29/11/2019 11:46

You are of course assuming it's the wife lying and not the daughter.....

Original poster
Mrskeats · 29/11/2019 12:03

I don't know where the idea has come from that we don't pay much. It's been put on the table now though will all the facts.

OP posts:
IHateBlueLights · 29/11/2019 12:17

He should stop paying altogether when she leaves school. The ex can get a job as can the kids as students

AnnaNimmity · 29/11/2019 12:17

well if he's not happy that neither child has a job, he should take that up with the child, not the ex.

My dcs try to get all sorts out of me and my ex. It's up to him how he responds. To be fair to him he normally assumes that the kids are trying to pull a fast one. Although he has also told them quite a few times that the money he pays me is meant to cover x, y and z when it isn't. (usually luxury stuff that we both should be funding)

IWorkAtTheCheesecakeFactory · 29/11/2019 12:25

If he wants to reduce maintenance he needs to talk to his ex and let her know it’s happening. She may need to adjust some direct debits/standing orders to account for the loss. It’s a dick move to just reduce it without warning or discussion.

If he just wants to give his child pocket money then he can do that without adjusting maintenance.

Either way- he shouldn’t reduce it without discussing it with his ex.

ANiceLuxury · 29/11/2019 12:27

Why doesn't he just stop paying it if its not court ordered?

IWorkAtTheCheesecakeFactory · 29/11/2019 12:33

Why doesn't he just stop paying it if its not court ordered?

Because he actually wants his child to eat and have clothes? Hmm lovely morals you have there.

IWorkAtTheCheesecakeFactory · 29/11/2019 12:34

Imagine if all parents only provided for their kids if it was court ordered! The kids would all die of starvation.

hsegfiugseskufh · 29/11/2019 12:34

iwork nothing to do with morals, he could stop paying the spousal maintenance, and pay what CMS recommend for the CM and also give the child pocket money on top.

IWorkAtTheCheesecakeFactory · 29/11/2019 12:38

he could stop paying the spousal maintenance, and pay what CMS recommend for the CM and also give the child pocket money on top.

That’s very different from “just stop paying it” come on now. Don’t pretend you can’t see the difference.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.