This is going to be a divisive one...

[TeaAndWine]

Interested in opinions and ways to deal with this. Will try to be succinct.

4 DC between 5-13. We have them two nights in the week and EOW, plus lots of times one on their own for sleepover etc.

DH pays what is set out on CMS but is officialy through the CMS if that makes sense. We just used the calculator on their website. Plus extras for trips/uniform etc.

DH's ex wife is going with a friend to Disney Orlando for two and a half weeks in September, without the kids, so we will have them that time. No problems, I'm quite looking forward to it.

The kids have been to Florida as holiday many times before, and this will be around her 15th time going. Odd to me why of all the places to go in this world without kids you would choose to go their again but hey ho, horses for courses etc.

My question is - Surely if we're having the kids for nearly three weeks DH should not be expected to pay CMS while she's there? That's effectively giving her spending money. Our bills for food/days out etc will go through the roof.

We simply cannot afford to pay the CMS that month and to have them. The CMS is just that - for the children. Who we will have.

We have them numerous other nights that have never been taken into account with the calculation.

I think part of me that I'm happy to admit is bitter as she's never worked a day in her life, even before she had kids, yet we can't even afford to go for a weekend away despite both working full time, but perhaps that's a different thread.

Would we BU to say we will be paying CMS for the one week she has them that month? As the money is for the children, who will be with us nearly the whole month?

Open to hearing thoughts. Don's tin hat

how much would you say is a fair contibution for 4 children

I'm not sure, but I think on those numbers he'd be paying 25 quid a child per week, which is not huge let's face it. If she's not working, and unless independently wealthy I can only assume the state is paying the short fall from both parents.

bluntness cms calculator suggests (based on 3-4 nights per week, no other children living there earning 30k a year) £62.40 a week.

keeping in mind that they're only with the mum an extra day a week....

i dont think thats an unfair contribution considering op and her dh have all the same costs re children as their mother does.

According to op she has an inheritance and benefits to make up HER Shortfall. The shortfall isnt her ex husbands, he works, and pays for his kids both when he has them, and when he doesnt.

and actually i think £25 per child per week, so £433 ish a month, is quite a bit when he has them almost half the time.

Oh come on. If it’s that close to the wire then you’re both low earners in which the CMS level will be pittance so the mother will only have minimum financial support from you

And so she should only get a low amount if he’s not earning much. It’s the logical thing to happen.

And what’s with the “financial support from you” comment? The op and her dp are not a partnership when it comes to HIS maintenance payments.

@getyourarseoffthequattro From what little the OP has told us, no, I don't think that morally her DH should pay maintenance if he has the DC more than 50% of the time. I do, however, believe that isn't always the case. It's not hard to think of scenarios where that might be the fairest thing to do and in the DC's best interest eg one parent has the DC on more working days than the other so bares more of the childcare costs; one parent is struggling to support the DC but the other parent is wealthy; unmarried couples who split and one parent owns the home in their sole name despite both having contributed equally to the family finances.

goingoverground some of those instances are whats best for the children though are they, its whats fair to the adult.

in this scenario the ex has a house with little to no mortgage, a big inheritance and has the kids almost half the time, OP says her and husband struggle but nobody is suggesting the ex giving up maintenance or even paying the ex dh maintenance are they?

@getyourarseoffthequattro I disagree, any of those examples could affect finances to the point that it has an impact the children.

but nobody is suggesting the ex giving up maintenance or even paying the ex dh maintenance are they I kind of did suggest that
If you have them 50:50 for 182 nights (which you might with the extra sleepovers), then no maintenance is due at all, any more than that and the ex has to pay your DP maintenance

Hence I pointed out that it would be legally correct but with the caveat that it may or may not be morally right. Only the parties involved who have the full picture can know that. It works both ways though, which is why I suggested that they need to sit down and work out what is best for the DC.

going ok, other than you!

yes true, lots of variables to consider.

I think this is the point on what's fair to both parties, the OP has mentioned in her first post that her and her partner can't afford to go away on a weekend let alone a holiday yet the non-working ex can go to disney for 3 weeks.

My husband when I met him was into his overdraft every month, shopping in charity shops for clothes and had his recent car repairs on a credit card. Yet the ex wife had a brand new 4x4, a holiday home, a mortgage fully paid off, inheritance in the bank and £500 a month from him + School financial support + clothes + pocket money for the kids paid for by him. + ExW has the child benefit and tax credits + her part time wage to support her.

I think people sometimes ignore the cost that the dad has to bear in order to meet maintenance payments (Rent/mortgages etc don't come from magic beans for the second home that has to be large enough to house children and if you have to live in that house you still have to heat that home, pay council tax, etc, etc.

My ex had one of our sons for 2 and a half weeks over Xmas and I let him off the whole month, YANBU

Thanks all.
To the PP who said I'm jealous. I don't think that's the right word, but I've admitted I'm slightly bitter. I worked four 14 hour shifts last week alone, and she hasn't worked a day in her life (literally in her whole life) and yet gets to go on 4k holidays every year. I am bitter and I make no apologies for that. I was bought up in a single parent household, my mum could definitely have worked yet she chose not to and we the children reaped the consequences for that.

Thank you again to everyone who's posted. It's a tricky one.

Thanks all.
To the PP who said I'm jealous. I don't think that's the right word, but I've admitted I'm slightly bitter. I worked four 14 hour shifts last week alone, and she hasn't worked a day in her life (literally in her whole life) and yet gets to go on 4k holidays every year. I am bitter and I make no apologies for that. I was bought up in a single parent household, my mum could definitely have worked yet she chose not to and we the children reaped the consequences for that.

Thank you again to everyone who's posted. It's a tricky one.

I'm not a step mum nor do my kids have a step-mum.
I don't have opinions about step-parents.
I never thought OP sounded remotely jealous, tbh. I'm surprised she owned up to bitter coz I didn't read that either.

Still, I just don't understand the "days out" part. I could find lots to do with school age kids for 3 weekends that didn't involve any even slightly expensive "days out." The extra food might be for 18 extra days .. so £180 to feed all 3? That's

To be clear, we have them around 168 nights a year. I've just worked it out, this is including the random/flexible nights we have them, however 'officialy' through CMS we have them 132.

You need to get it recalculated in that case.

132 means the basic amount is reduced by two sevenths, whereas 168 means it would be reduced by three sevenths.

Let’s say it’s £400pcm as some have guessed. That would go down to £320.

I wasn’t sure if it was a typo in your OP that you’ve worked it out using the calculator but aren’t officially going through them.

If you have an information agreement put it through the calculator with the right number of days and your DH’s earnings then your DH can tell her that’s what you’ll be paying from now on.

We cover the costs for clothing, clubs and trips etc.

Unless they have a financial agreement you don’t have to do this. You can offer to pay half but there’s no legal obligation to do to.

It sounds like you’re bearing the vast majority of the costs of raising the kids (paying for all the trips, clothes etc & the ones ones with housing costs)

I think it’s time to reassess.

Look op, you chose to get with a man who was a medium earner and has four children. As you said, they cost a fortune. Likely way more than he pays. Way more.

No point being bitter or jealous. It is what it is. And just because she ain't feeding them during this period, all the other costs remain.

I’m a step mum and also an ex, and I think YABVU

It’s a real struggle, raising a child, and child maintenance doesn’t usually even cover half the normal costs for most people.

The majority of the costs are:
Housing, bills
Loss of income from stalled career, part time career, loss of pension.

Childcare

Do you have a room for each step child? Do either of you have to take time off if they are sick and unable to work full time?

If you have answered no to any of the above, just wake up and be a grown up. And don’t be so mean. Childcare costs for food are way down the list of how much kids actually cost.

@HeckyPeck CMS what a joke. CMS is the lease they can enforce payment of.

It is not how much that child actually costs to bring up.

So many men hold up their heads and say It pay the CMS, I pay for my kids. No, you pay the minimum amount the government can force you to pay. It has never been a calculation of what the child costs.

Do you have a room for each step child? Do either of you have to take time off if they are sick and unable to work full time

Yes and yes. Although we are normally at work, whereas she isn't. Surely you're not saying someone can't work full time in case their child is ill??

@Bluntness100 oh good, always lovely to see your measured responses on the stepparenting board. I knew what I was getting myself into, right? I do hope you say that to a mother when she has to pay costs for her children. After all, she chose to have them, didn't she?

@snowfalling your point isn't really vaild as I've already stated we are paying well over what we should

As you said, they cost a fortune. Likely way more than he pays. Way more
I expect they know that considering the kids are with them almost half the time. Or are dads only good for cold hard cash, rather than, you know, parenting?
Seems that way to me.

The majority of the costs are:
Housing, bills
Loss of income from stalled career, part time career, loss of pension.
Childcare

Ex has no mortgage. Op has to pay for a big enough house for the kids.

Bills - again ops are probably the same if not more as theres 2 adults.

There seemingly was no career to lose and nobody is paying for childcare.

Why do you think the ex is so badly off here?

Op has all the same costs as her, except ex has kids 1 extra day a week but oh no poor poor destitute ex needs alllllllll the £££ off the ex dh because kids are expensive dontcha know. (And op does know because they foot the bill for the kids on their time which is almost 50% AS WELL AS paying maintenance)

@getyourarseoffthequattro
You really will need to stop pointing out the blatantly obvious - it simply doesn’t suit the poor, impoverished single mum narrative

Her inheritance etc is irrelevant.
Your DH has to pay for the children, do we agree on that?
Irrespective whether the mum rents, has a mortgage or whatever, the kids have to be housed all year around, you can’t just get rid of the extra rooms while they are at their dad’s.
The bills incurred are all year around, they don’t stop because they’re away for 2 1/2 weeks. Or they go to their dad’s. Or on holiday. I am thinking childcare costs, if she pays the childminder, say, or the nursery. Or the times she doesn’t bill you guys for childcare.

If you want, you can recalculate the maintenance taking into consideration the extra number of nights. Or you could bank that time for when he is supposed to have them but can’t for various reasons, because this is life, isn’t it.

Another thing: it’s got nothing to do with you, it’s your DH’s problem. Yes, the income is joint, etc, but they are his kids. Put it this way, if, god forbid, you guys split up, you’ve got no involvement whatsoever with those kids anymore.

It’s really shit and complicated having a bonus family. But having been there, the best advice so can give you is stay out of it.

@BuddhaAtSea did you even read the thread?

1. Ex is mortgage free because dad let have all of the house equity when they split
2. Ex doesn’t work so there are no childcare costs
3. Ex has never worked so it is a choice she’s made, and therefore she shouldn’t be expecting her ex DH to support that indefinitely
4. Their dad and OP have them 6/14 nights minimum so they’re pretty much 50:50 split between parents so both household bear the brunt of the costs of raising the kids

God I love it when sharp fuckers like HeckyPeck get on these threads and give crystal clear advice.

Feckin’ Mumsnet. Love it. It can solve all the world’s problems. #notsarky

I wouldn't expect my exDp to pay child maintenance if he had them for almost the entire month. So no, I don't think YABU for wanting to use the money to pay for food, Bills etc while they're staying with you.