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 would certainly want to check that the CMS has all the right information rather than just hand over my cash without a peep.

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

It only every matters one way though. If the NRP is working at McDonalds and the RP is a multi millionaire and it is 50/50 or near enough, then the child is still going to be eating bread.

This will be a very unpopular opinion, but I actually think that if there is such a huge difference in incomes and both parents have an active role in their children’s lives, then one should pay the other to maintain the child standard of living so that there isn’t this big difference between steak and bread. No matter who the RP is on paper.

If I became a multimillionaire overnight I would ensure that they have the same standard of living at their dad’s and definitely wouldn’t expect a penny in maintenance. Anyone who does in those circumstances really is on a power trip. Imagine having £30 million in the bank and taking some of your ex’s minimum wage income. That really would be a shit thing to do.

@funinthesun19

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

It only every matters one way though. If the NRP is working at McDonalds and the RP is a multi millionaire and it is 50/50 or near enough, then the child is still going to be eating bread.

This will be a very unpopular opinion, but I actually think that if there is such a huge difference in incomes and both parents have an active role in their children’s lives, then one should pay the other to maintain the child standard of living so that there isn’t this big difference between steak and bread. No matter who the RP is on paper.

If I became a multimillionaire overnight I would ensure that they have the same standard of living at their dad’s and definitely wouldn’t expect a penny in maintenance. Anyone who does in those circumstances really is on a power trip. Imagine having £30 million in the bank and taking some of your ex’s minimum wage income. That really would be a shit thing to do.

In that instance CMS wouldn’t have jurisdiction so it is entirely irrelevant to the facts of this thread.

@arethereanyleftatall

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.

If he has to pay then she should be paying him also, no?

I would be ringing them and demanding to know why

If I had 30m in the bank I wouldn't be taking anyone's maintenance regardless, no. But I can't imagine id be buying my ex husband a bigger house. I'd not expect him to provide clothes or school trips unless he wanted to though.

No, you don't. 50:50 means no maintenance due on either side.

It's not that simple though is it. Very often when a couple have a child, one parent (usually the mother but not always) takes a step back career wise to raise the children. I did. And it affected my earning potential hugely.

Meanwhile my ex continued to progress in his career and has far more earning potential.

After we split I continued to work part time so I could be there for the kids when needed. We had 50:50 and he tried to insist I went back full time (I chose not to while the kids were still small) - I had the kids before and after school on his days.

Yes - he should have paid maintenance despite 50:50! Too right! He didn't though. And to pursue it would have created huge animosity and aggression which would have impacted the kids and my own mental health. So I didn't.

But it's not always as straight forward as 50:50 equals no maintenance.

@sixpencenonethepoorer

It's not that simple though is it. Very often when a couple have a child, one parent (usually the mother but not always) takes a step back career wise to raise the children. I did. And it affected my earning potential hugely.

Meanwhile my ex continued to progress in his career and has far more earning potential.

After we split I continued to work part time so I could be there for the kids when needed. We had 50:50 and he tried to insist I went back full time (I chose not to while the kids were still small) - I had the kids before and after school on his days.

Yes - he should have paid maintenance despite 50:50! Too right! He didn't though. And to pursue it would have created huge animosity and aggression which would have impacted the kids and my own mental health. So I didn't.

But it's not always as straight forward as 50:50 equals no maintenance.

That was your choice though surely? I don't think it's fair to expect maintenance because you chose to continue to be part time.

When you're together fair enough you make that joint decision, but surely you recognise it's a risk?

I don't agree that maintenance should be payable here because he's paying for your choice, realistically, as opposed to paying his "fair share" as it were.

But then you didn't have to have them on his days either, and you could have said no.

Legally, he should be. According to the cms. I didn't pursue due to his aggression- couldn't face it to be honest. Of course I didn't have to have them on his days - but they're my kids. I didn't ask him to pay either

It was also his choice to continue to work and further his career.

One of my children now lives with me full time - he doesn't pay for him at all (though of course this is not 50:50)

I just think it's not straight forward, and the role of child care and buying extras usually falls to one parent (usually but not always the mother) certainly does in my case.

I think it's often overlooked that the mothers usually take a step back career wise. This is my biggest bugbear.

Having said that - if all is equal then yes, in that case 50.50.

The CMS change their mind about this more than they change their pants though to be honest. If it's truly 50/50 nothing should be payable.

They are your children but if you're actively choosing to do more than 50% when you dont have to then why are you complaining about it?

Yes he chose to further his career. You could have done the same, no?

With childcare and extras surely you just pay for whatever you do on your days? I don't understand why it needs to be so hard.

But if one parent gets UC and the other doesn't, I'd suggest they pay the childcare as they'll get money towards and then split the bill after that with the other parent as then it benefits everyone.

I think the reason why the career thing is overlooked is because it's hugely old fashioned, it's personal choice and it's almost impossible to prove or even guesstimate what the "loss" is to that parent.

I'm sure dps ex would say she never furthered her career (she never had one to start with) because of the kids and therefore dp should pay her more but the reality is that she didn't want to work. She's never wanted to work. She hasn't furthered her career even now when her children are older teenagers. So her "loss" was entirely her own issue and not something that dp ever particularly agreed with or should pay for.

I personally for this reason didn't give up my career.

I think it's often overlooked that the mothers usually take a step back career wise. This is my biggest bugbear.

Not always, especially not where the resident mother is motivated and wants to balance childcare with a career, as in my case. I was never going to allow myself to settle for anything less than what had been my career ambition since before I fell pregnant part way through my first degree at university. I finished that degree, sat my finals whilst heavily pregnant, took 8 months last leave and returned to the bottom of the career ladder to work my way up (completing 2nd degree part time on evenings and weekends while DD was 2-3 years old). I've never stopped studying and working despite being a mum because that's what I wanted deep in my heart. It's been incredibly hard slog, but I now earn substantially more than her Dad does. So mum doesn't always haven't to be the person taking a step back.

I think the reason why the career thing is overlooked is because it's hugely old fashioned, it's personal choice and it's almost impossible to prove or even guesstimate what the "loss" is to that parent.

Agreed entirely.

Agreed that it doesn't have to be, and neither should it be. And great that you had those opportunities. Many people don't.

I am motivated too, but had neither time nor financial resources to do this when they were young. My ex did the studying and the career progression. This may make me sound rather weak, but the kids needed someone to parent them, and he wasn't interested in doing the day to day stuff, so I had to.

I'm doing a Masters degree now, my kids are much older and those opportunities are there.

But I certainly didn't lack motivation. I did what I had to to survive.

Yes, it's old fashioned. But for lots of women it's not as easy as 'just get motivated'.

Also totally agree it doesn't have to be the mother! It should be equitable. Unfortunately it isn't always though. Especially if there is a power imbalance in the relationship.

And great that you had those opportunities. Many people don't.

Those opportunities didn't come knocking at my door. There is nothing different or special about me compared to others - I just had a sheer wilful determination to succeed regardless of where I was in life. I had to put in the hard slog to find these opportunities and then commit to making them happen for me. It was mentally, emotionally and financially beyond draining. I'm trying to make the point that I wasn't some privileged person where stuff just fell into my lap. It was 10 long years of bloody hard slog, alongside doing the vast majority parenting for my daughter.

I'm doing a Masters degree now,

Good for you!

After we split I continued to work part time so I could be there for the kids when needed. We had 50:50 and he tried to insist I went back full time (I chose not to while the kids were still small) - I had the kids before and after school on his days.

So your childcare commitments were equal but nonetheless you expected to be supported to work PT? Yet you seem indignant re your ex thinking that wasn’t on... You chose to continue to work PT, he chose FT by the sounds of it. If you wanted compensating why not just have the children more and even it out?

Arrrggghhh! This thread (and the CMS generally) is so confusing!

The thing is, my husband and I have no idea how much his ex-wife earns. She obviously knows how much my husband earns as the CMS are allowing her a percentage (I think 7%) of his salary (so she could easily work it out). Personally, I find this to be unfair. My husband doesn't want to ask his ex how much she earns as he feels it's quite a rude question (which I agree with).

So I suppose our next step is the counter-claim people recommended?

@COVIDcausesCHAOS

Arrrggghhh! This thread (and the CMS generally) is so confusing!

The thing is, my husband and I have no idea how much his ex-wife earns. She obviously knows how much my husband earns as the CMS are allowing her a percentage (I think 7%) of his salary (so she could easily work it out). Personally, I find this to be unfair. My husband doesn't want to ask his ex how much she earns as he feels it's quite a rude question (which I agree with).

So I suppose our next step is the counter-claim people recommended?

They will tell her what he earns in their letters. She will know to the penny of his last p60 unfortunately. I know this because when dps ex paid us CMS the letter told us her earnings per week. I agree it's wrong.

I would personally call them and ask why she can claim and then depending on what they say counter claim.

@TrustTheGeneGenie do they really say how much they earn

[quote LyingDogsLie1]@TrustTheGeneGenie do they really say how much they earn [/quote]
Yes certainly the the few we received said something along the lines of we have based this payment on miss xxx earnings of £xxx.xx per week"

This was maybe 2 years ago so could have changed.

@TrustTheGeneGenie

It's still the case - I got a letter a few weeks ago saying what my payments are from DD's dad based on weekly earnings of £xxx amount.

[quote LouJ85]@TrustTheGeneGenie

It's still the case - I got a letter a few weeks ago saying what my payments are from DD's dad based on weekly earnings of £xxx amount. [/quote]
That’s terrible!
I am horrified. The issue with that is that the RP isn’t bound by any confidentiality and so can freely disclose that to absolutely anybody. Whereas CMS should treat your data as confidential.

I agree I think its horrendous. I was extremely angry when I realised. It's none of dps exs business what we earn and vice versa. It also has given her much ammo over the years.

@TrustTheGeneGenie

I agree I think its horrendous. I was extremely angry when I realised. It's none of dps exs business what we earn and vice versa. It also has given her much ammo over the years.

Spot on. I now realise how my MIL knows what my DH earns despite him never having shared it with anybody!!!

I don’t understand how they can share that legally?

I agree it's not on. I don't really care what he earns to be honest, but they feel the need to tell me in their letters 🤷‍♀️