If your kids' times is split 50:50, do you pay CMS?

[COVIDcausesCHAOS]

I am curious as to how it works with other families.

I am childless. My partner has a son (age 9). My partner and his ex share joint custody and have since they split many years ago. My partner has always paid maintenance towards his ex as she was unemployed when they first split. The mother gets the child benefit too.

Even though the arrangement is 50:50, my partner usually has his son around 60% of the time. Pre-COVID, this was because of his ex's job (which involved travel). She is currently working from home, but my partner still has his son more than 50% of the time as he will take him when he's asked to.

Anyway, after a disagreement about a year ago, my partner's ex decided to go through the CMS for maintenance. She lied about how much time dss spent with my partner. My partner challenged it, and she then corrected herself. However, as they both agreed to the CMS that the split was 50:50, the CMS are still saying that my partner has to pay?!?

We think that this is unfair given that my partner is doing far more childcare and so forth.

Is this the case for others?

I think you need to look at a child’s life as 100% rather than 50:50.
Taking an extreme example; RP parent is a millionaire, the NRP on minimum wage. I don’t think NRP should be paying maintenance unless they have no contact. They should keep that money to provide for their child while in their care. Why should the child be in 5* splendour 80% of the time while their other parent struggles to provide the basics the other 20% of the time? Who benefits from that scenario?
On one hand, I don’t think being the penis parent should mean you have to pay up regardless of the circumstances, on the other hand I don’t think it’s fair for a child to live two completely separate lives. They should benefit from their parents income roughly evenly across their time with both.
Example. I was a bit about DH paying £££ in maintenance at the same time as struggling to find a decent flat to rent (with luxuries such as working heating and secure doors, no leaks etc) to accommodate his child while he had her. Even a £50 drop in maintenance to his ex would have meant a far more suitable flat for him and DSD, and still remained well above the CMS minimum.
There’s no simple answer.
But, assuming mum and dads earnings are roughly the same, I cannot fathom why your DP owes his ex anything.

No! My ex and I share our son and that means we do our own thing financially with our son. I keep the £80 a month you get in the uk for having a child under 16 and he’s fine with that.

No, of course not. Presuming that essential expenses like clothes, uniform would be shared in the absence of maintenance, then no.

How many days does your partner have his Son? How does it work during the week when he goes to school?

It depends on who pays for clothes, shoes and days out and so on.

@Blossomhill4

How many days does your partner have his Son? How does it work during the week when he goes to school?

It depends on who pays for clothes, shoes and days out and so on.

You understand how percentages work, no?

@Youseethethingis

I think you need to look at a child’s life as 100% rather than 50:50. Taking an extreme example; RP parent is a millionaire, the NRP on minimum wage. I don’t think NRP should be paying maintenance unless they have no contact. They should keep that money to provide for their child while in their care. Why should the child be in 5* splendour 80% of the time while their other parent struggles to provide the basics the other 20% of the time? Who benefits from that scenario? On one hand, I don’t think being the penis parent should mean you have to pay up regardless of the circumstances, on the other hand I don’t think it’s fair for a child to live two completely separate lives. They should benefit from their parents income roughly evenly across their time with both. Example. I was a bit about DH paying £££ in maintenance at the same time as struggling to find a decent flat to rent (with luxuries such as working heating and secure doors, no leaks etc) to accommodate his child while he had her. Even a £50 drop in maintenance to his ex would have meant a far more suitable flat for him and DSD, and still remained well above the CMS minimum. There’s no simple answer. But, assuming mum and dads earnings are roughly the same, I cannot fathom why your DP owes his ex anything.

I see your point, but this isn't the case for my husband and his ex.

My husband has a reasonable job. His ex wife was unemployed when they split, but she now works in the aviation industry. I have no idea how much she earns, and I don't think that's my husband's business. I do know that she owns her own house and car, so she seems to have more money than my husband an I.

@Blossomhill4

How many days does your partner have his Son? How does it work during the week when he goes to school?

It depends on who pays for clothes, shoes and days out and so on.

They have on paper a "one week on, one week off" rota. This was agreed with a mediator. It isn't a court order.

Because of his ex's job, she sometimes has to travel. When this happens, my husband takes his son on those days too.

During COVID, his ex has been working from home, but she has still been asking my husband to have their son a bit more than 50% as one of her friend's is sick.

My DSC's lived with us 50:50. Mum probably earned more than us, but overall similar lifestyle.
We didn't pay or receive maintenance. Clothes etc were bought by both families as needed. I guess we were reasonable and there were never any issues about who paid for what.

Who pays for the clothes, days out and holidays? Who ever pays for these things that person should get the Maintainance for the child.

Well, we paid for the holidays and days out we did and Mum paid for hers.
We spent a similar amount on clothes etc.

@Blossomhill4

Who pays for the clothes, days out and holidays? Who ever pays for these things that person should get the Maintainance for the child.

In my mind it would be split, you pay for your own holidays, clothes at your house, own set of uniform.

I don't think who pays for holidays is relevant though actually. If you want to take your child on holiday you pay for it. You don't take them and expect your ex to pay half.

How are all the expenses split? Their activities, presents for parties, school contributions, clothes, all that sort of stuff. My ex decided just to give me an extra £x a month (I won't say the amount) so that I didn't go to to him every 2 minutes and say 'you owe me £25 for dds ballet shoes' etc

DSS has clothes, school uniform, toys, and a bedroom at both houses.

Pre-COVID, all extra curricular stuff was paid for by my husband.

Based on that I don't think he should be paying anything. Surely if she can claim CMS off him he can claim it off her? If she won't drop it, that's what I'd potentially do.

Who gets the child benefit?

Sometimes when the split is 50/50 the parent who doesn't get the child benefit still has to pay child maintenance. That's just the way it works and it doesn't seem logical even if the parent who gets the child benefit is earning the same or slightly more. There is no point getting angry about it.

If your partner isn't happy about it he just needs to refuse to pay for any extras e.g. extra curricular stuff, but make sure the child is adequately clothed and shoed at his home.

Also be aware if there is no court order you could find once the child hits secondary school they move into yours nearly full-time.

There is no point getting angry about it

Of course there is. If something's unfair you should get angry about it. If we didn't things would never change!

'I have no idea how much she earns and don't think it's any of my husbands business'

It's very relevant. Hypothetically - one parent A earns £1million a year and parent B £1; 50/50 care; if parent A gives parent B nothing, then child lives in a mansion mon-weds and eats steak; and in a box thur-sun and eats bread. I'm sure you can see why it's relevant, and why the courts would want the child to have the same standard of living in both houses.

See I don't agree with that because that's where it stops being money to support the child and starts being money to subsidize the other parent.

If both parents want the child to have the better lifestyle then the child needs to live with that parent.

If I were the poorer parent I wouldn't expect the richer parent to pay for me a better house etc. I really wouldn't.

I don't think the courts generally do take that stand unless the difference is that big, and then it would be spousal maintenance as well which again I don't really agree with - it's much less common now though.

It's very relevant. Hypothetically - one parent A earns £1million a year and parent B £1; 50/50 care; if parent A gives parent B nothing, then child lives in a mansion mon-weds and eats steak; and in a box thur-sun and eats bread. I'm sure you can see why it's relevant

I see the point hypothetically, but at what point does the person who earns £1 (or chooses not to work) start taking responsibility for their child on their time financially?
My DP has done considerably better for himself since he and his ex split 11 years ago. He put himself through training courses etc and bettered himself.
His ex has decided to live off benefits. She her chosen not work, quitting or turning down reasonable opportunities of employment. If they had 50/50 split in childcare why should he have to support her lifestyle choice and make up the difference because she chooses not to work?
A decent father would always make sure his kids had clothes etc but I don’t think it’s up to the “NRP” (if there is such a thing in 50/50 custody situations) to make up for the other parent’s shortfall in income. It doesn’t incentivise people like my DP’s ex to work or aim to earn more.

Kids are ok with knowing there are different rules and different things available in different households, they just adapt.

Okay, this is good to hear. But the CMS are saying that he should have to pay? So what should our next step be?

People are confusing CMS for spousal maintenance. CMS is not a substitute for spousal where that’s convenient. If people want the financial benefits that marriage affords they are at liberty to get married. So no, it shouldn’t matter whether A is more wealthy than B or vice versa. It’s about whether or not care is shared.

@COVIDcausesCHAOS

Okay, this is good to hear. But the CMS are saying that he should have to pay? So what should our next step be?

Ring CMS and ensure they have the right info.

I think of the CMS are saying that he has to pay; then he has to pay. I don't think you get to choose.

Use the online calculator to double check.