Husband's Ex Wife demanding more money, HELP!

[NewbieSM]

Hi there, I've been lurking on Mumsnet for about 6 months now and this is my first post..

I've been married to my husband for 3 years and it mostly been amazing, we are best friends, get on with family and his two DD's (10 and 8). I myself don't have any kids but grew up in blended family so feel I can relate to the girls on this level and get on really well.

DH has custody EOW and half the holidays, but will often have them extra weekends or public holidays when possible. This means DH pays child maintenance to EXW (as he should) of £160 p/w. Now on top of this we are responsible for paying for school uniform and shoes, 50% of clothes for both houses, trainers, all dental and braces, stationary (including iPad and laptop), tennis lessons and dance lessons, all trips, school photos, birthday and Xmas gifts. You name it, we provide it.

Now EXW is a SAHM, was when married to DH and has never had a job since. She is currently supported by her DP and benefits. I'm not underestimating the life of a SAHM, that's her choice, but she is now asking us for MORE money she wants DOUBLE! Says, you have two incomes and by marrying him, I'm agreeing to financially support the kids!

Now I do provide for the kids directly, I buy almost all their clothes with my own money and send them back to her house. I buy gifts, pay for holidays, bills, all stuff the kids benefit from. But there is no way I'm giving that woman any money.

How do we deal with this? She has form for discussing finances with the kids to paint us as the baddies. It's emotional blackmail, says, "you can't go the cinema because Daddy won't give me money" etc.

Don't want to fuck up what has been a relatively amicable arrangement between us. But also don't want fork out more money!

HELP!

Sorry this turned into a novel but I didn't want to miss out anything and I'm ranting a bit

Ex needs to get off her lazy bum and get a job. Not expect the ex husband and you to fund her lifestyle.

I would tell her that you’re more than happy to go through CMS and let her shit herself. She knows bloody rightly that she’s chancing it and you can be sure she also knows what she would get if you did. You don’t have to stick to what CMS says you should pay, but at least it will be in black and white for her to see, when your husband is handing over the £160.

I’m a bit about the posters who are quick to jump in and say he’s paying too much and should reduce.

Fact is that CMS is a bear minimum and is nowhere near the cost of bringing up a child - not even 50%.

On another note, while I can see that a new partner’s income isn’t taken into account when calculating CMS, why is it that a partner’s income is taken into account when allowing child benefit for children that aren’t theirs? That hardly seems fair?

E.g. my ex has a decent salary. He pays me a decent amount anyway so that is not in dispute and I’m not remotely interested in his partner’s income.

But she has a child from a previous relationship, and because she is now living with him, his income is taken into account meaning that she is no longer entitled to child benefit. How’s that fair? Her child isn’t his, and there are posters who would suggest that he shouldn’t spend any of his money on that child. He obviously does but that’s his business. But why should Both she and that child miss out in the form of child benefit just because they live with a man who isn’t their father who happens to earn a decent salary?

They’re not married so it isn’t a given that all money is family money.

I realise that speaking up for the new partner of an ex is not customary here but it just seems wrong.

T0tallyFuckedUpFamily has given good advice. Your attitude sounds great - happily paying over the bare minimum for the sake of the kids is a good and nice thing.
Contributing from your own wage, likewise.
But no, you can't just hand over double the contributions just because you are also working and earning. She's probably persuaded herself that it's only fair that you do though, so just pointing at something external and impartial like the CMS calculator might help her reset her thinking a bit.

Braces and dental treatment is funded by the State.
Why wouls you/he pay for this??

What’s she threatening if you don’t double the money? You’re being very naive to consider a dynamic where she threatens you and has rows in front of the children as “amicable coparenting”. It’s not amicable. Going through the CMS won’t ruin anything because there’s nothing great to ruin.

@allheart1 I agree with you but that's for the government to decide!

Are you in the uk? Braces are free?

I agree with you but that's for the government to decide!

You know they're supposed to work for/represent us, the populace, right?

Youngest child was not approved for nhs treatment plus doesn't have traditional braces yet, just a plate/retainer this for her jaw and then braces after that at age 12ish. We have already paid for this.

I think I'm making her sound worse than she is. She's a good mum, loves her kids, is really close with them, kids are happy. It's just been a few bumps in the road usually about money but otherwise pretty friendly.

You know they're supposed to work for/represent us, the populace, right?

My point was more that this has naff all to do with the original question really. Just because the government choose to (wrongly) take the partner's salary into account for child benefit purposes, it wouldn't make it right if it was also considered for maintenance. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I think I would laugh in my DSDs mums face if she started demanding my money should go to pay for her child while she sat on her arse. Because it is a joke. It’s not even a reasonable request worth discussing or negotiating or giving any sort of serious thought whatsoever.
@AnneLovesGilbert has the right of it. She’s happily manipulating and upsetting her own children over this - not an amicable co parenting relationship at all.
The children are old enough to be told basic facts IMO. Ie. “Dad and Newbie pay for XYZ and the rest for you, as well as giving mum money for you, and if people want more money they need to go out and work”. And not another word about it because you don’t want to actually say anything bad about their mum.

Try saying no, easy as that, no discussion, "no"

It sounds so simple, just say no, but in reality we refuse a request and DH will get a call saying that their electric has run out and they need money to top it up. She's living pretty close to the wind financially as her new partner doesn't earn much and has his own DS to support as well.

Maybe we could agree to give a little more after we see an income and expenditure report? Just so we can have a clearer idea of what money is needed where?

I don't want the kids having no electric at home

I’d volunteer to have the kids when she’s found herself incapable of providing basic care for them. Like electricity, clothes, food etc.
You could hand this woman your entire salary and it still wouldn’t be enough. And if you ask for and income/expenditure report, guess whose name will be mud for being controlling and overstepping?

If she doesn’t have enough money to pay her electric she needs to get a job. But i suspect she has got the money, she’s just chosen to spend it elsewhere. She’s not spending it on her kids anyway.

You do realise OP that the more you and DH give in to her demands that the more she will push. I do think you should get assessed by CMS and show her the figures. I am not saying that you should reduce your amount if it is below that but it will just let her know that you are no pushover.

And as @hillareas said just offer to take the kids if her electricity or gas is switched off. She also needs to get a job as she cannot depend on the two of you for the rest of her life or even until the kids are 18.

It sounds like your husband is paying just above what CMS say he should pay so I would leave it as is and also stop all this half uniforms etc and only directly give them what they need. He is paying £693 a month so if she is also contributing £693 a month, that's almost £1400 a month to keep 2 children and that's plenty. I imagine she is solely using the maintenance to pay for the children's things so contributing nothing herself. She can get a bloody job, her kids are school age ffs

So basically you should pay for:
Your scs
Your partners ex
Your partners ex DH
Your partners ex DH DS

Stop being such a walk over.

OP you have been given good advice - go through the CMS and ignore her requests for money.

This does not mean your DP doesn't pay for the kids clothes when they are with you, school uniform and school trips.

CMS just sounds so official and rather clinical and will ruin any form of co parenting relationship

Not at all. Remember, you don’t need to stick with what they say and your DH can pay more. However, hopefully it will make his ex wife realise that you are paying above what needs to be paid.

Walk over? Bit harsh, we are trying to keep the kids as the focus, electricity is a basic right. Not sure how the get a job discussion would go down, her partner works away sometimes and we live too far from school to support much during the week, so she's limited to school hours only or kids would be in after school/ breakfast club

Have spoken to DH and he has agreed no extra money but keep up with clothes etc. is seeing her later to drop off SDDs trainers so will update then

If you never send her cash wld be better - well except for the calculated CSA . So anything for uniforms is paid direct, school trips pay to school, pocket money pay to child and tell them not to allow Mum to have it etc.

I afree with others things need to be formalised - he can still pay more than csa but it needs to be documeted and only done that way - all the extras need to stop or only be for when with you

She's having a laugh. She's getting over £840 a month purely from CM and CB, even before we count any child tax tax credits or housing benefit, etc.

Is she making any attempt to get work?

She would get help with breakfast club or after school club through tax credits or UC if they were such low earners. Plenty of people do it that way and with much younger kids than hers.