Does anyone here believe CMS should take into account a step parents earnings and if so, why?

[PutItInYourPocket2]

Just curious as to people's opinions. I know the majority, or so it seems, believe they shouldn't take into account SPs earnings when calculating CMS or that SPs should be responsible if the bio parent cannot pay for whatever reason.

However it seems from reading another thread that there are those who believe they should.

If you do, what are your reasons?

Again though, if a SM is paying toward bills, food etc... for the house the children stay at then she is contributing, just not to the exes household which is fair enough.

Exactly! People seem to forget that stepmums provide a lot in the own household which the rp obviously doesn’t see, therefore people think she’s not providing anything. Absolute joke.

Also those figures only include the amounts due to be paid on the newer system. They don’t include those still on the old system.

They also don’t include any of the cases where self-employment or lack of a firm address (which means not on official systems, even if they’ve lived in the same house for donkeys years) preclude a proper assessment.

It also doesn’t appear to include any of the almost 4 billion that was still owed when the CSA changed to CMS (which the government basically stated they expected to collect less than 15% of).

It should also be remembered that there are a lot of people on here used to dealing with considerably above average salaries. Maintenance is only dealt with up to salaries of around 150k so some of the larger than expected amounts would be court mandated rather than CMS, which will distort views on fair maintenance on here.

CMS are shite. Very often people only get anywhere if they have a decent MP to push on their behalf.

What percentage of people actually go through cms?

There should be a min amount of say £100 a month that should be paid regardless of circumstances for each child .
So even if someone is on benefits they should still have to pay it - only exemption I would allow is if someone is ill getting PIP / ESA

If they decide to be a SAHP while their 2nd wife / partner works so that they get 0 calculation tough shit. £100 a month still needs to be paid .
It should be treated like council tax in that they could go to prison for it . And this should be done promptly - within 3 months of not paying they should be up in front of the courts
And if I was the judge I wouldn’t allow any sob stories or excuses like my new wife will not be able to work if I go to jail
It would be a simple pay the bill or jail

The other option would be If they don’t pay then slap a CCJ on them . But this needs to be done quickly .
That will screw up their credit rating so they can’t go and remortgage or get a new house to rent and most people don’t want that to happen to them. And no paying it off £5 a week it’s the whole amount or Jail . 😂

If I was really in charge I would ensure that they could no longer use their passport and I would put six points on their driving licence as well .

Then just maybe when it actually physically starts to affect them and their new partner in that they can’t go on holiday or get a bigger house or possibly lose their job because they can’t drive they might think twice before thinking that their kids maintenance Is option.

@funinthesun19

Again though, if a SM is paying toward bills, food etc... for the house the children stay at then she is contributing, just not to the exes household which is fair enough.

Exactly! People seem to forget that stepmums provide a lot in the own household which the rp obviously doesn’t see, therefore people think she’s not providing anything. Absolute joke.

What about when the dad/step mum aren't providing anything in their own house? Other than the very very bare minimum?

JustLyra those are all very fair points that you make.

However, I would question just how large a number of people are actually evading payment through self employment etc.

Does it happen? Of course it does, there are enough stories here to testify to that.

But, in the overall scheme of things, the number of NRPs that successfully do that is very small. Of course this doesn't help any if it's you that has to deal with an exH that is doing that so I can certainly understand people's frustrations.

CMS clearly are not good at dealing with the majority of "difficult" NRPs - although they do obviously get some suspended prison sentences and do actually send a few to prison.

But that does not mean that they are useless or "shite" as others here have said, but they could clearly do better.

Why do people think only things NRPs care about is holidays and mortgages?!

Sure, some of them probably do only care about those things, but to tar someone who has lost their job or something with the same brush is unfair.

And saying oh 100 a month even if they're on benefits is basically saying the step parent should pay isn't it? Because they'd have to subsidise it.

What about when the dad/step mum aren't providing anything in their own house? Other than the very very bare minimum?

Well step mum doesn't have to provide a thing so....

If they decide to be a SAHP while their 2nd wife / partner works so that they get 0 calculation tough shit. £100 a month still needs to be paid

They could always offer to look after their child while the RP goes to work. I'd day it's an option, not everything needs to be paid in £££, time & health are our most valuable assets.

@Funfairballoon

What about when the dad/step mum aren't providing anything in their own house? Other than the very very bare minimum?

Well step mum doesn't have to provide a thing so....

Good point. Also this can easily be flipped what about the rp who refuses to work and only provides the bare minimum for the children?

What about when the dad/step mum aren't providing anything in their own house? Other than the very very bare minimum?

What do you mean? I said bills and food, I'm assuming most people who live in a house pay bills and for food. I'd also bet that the majority of time, the step mother pays toward said bills and food when their SC are there hence contributing...

For example, I go 50:50 on bills and food and anything else in our home. I don't make my husband pay 2/3rds of all the bills because of my SC which I believe would be unreasonable personally but it does mean I am contributing to my DSC when they are with us.

Once you become entangled, living together, you take on an involvement in his prior commitments. If you do not agree with that, don't get involved.

Erm. No.

Sorry but no.
It is a parents job to provide for the child they have, not the person who becomes their partner after the split.
If they stop working and Choose to care for any further children born after that, that is their choice and there is nothing the ex partner can do about it money wise.
Your not entitled to a non blood persons money, just because it would improve your life, after all if your ex died would you then chase the payer of maintenance?

It depends on individual financial position. If RP loses their job what happens? They have to pay out of savings/ sell belongings/ take any job going. Really both need to ensure that they have savings for that eventuality. If they are on such low income that they can’t afford to save I guess they’d be entitled to benefits. It comes down to both sides being reasonable really depending on how much income they have after essentials are paid

I guarantee if dp died his ex would be trying to claim my house for her kids, let alone just adding for maintenance!

In reality it would be tough shit.
(They would obv be entitled to their share of our house after I die!)

*So in that scenario, the RP should offer to have their maintenance reduced if they shack up with someone new then? Because they're better off financially. Works both ways, surely?!!

What an utter crock of shit.*

Excellent point.

*What would happen if the NRP is single or if the parents were still together? No convenient fairy stepmother to come to everyone’s rescue would there?
*
Exactly. What utter entitled bollocks on this thread.

@BungleandGeorge

I don’t think the point is that the step parent is personally responsible, but that once you move in with someone you become a household. Practically everything apart from maintenance is based on household income. A parent running a house alone pays the same as if they are part of a partnership. I think what people are saying is that the percentage salary paid by the NRP should increase based on household income to reflect their improved financial position. If you move in with someone your income affects their eligibility for benefits including child benefit which is no different really

I don’t understand this logic. People will be paying for a lot of children if things ran this way. So my ex for example would be paying for our child and then what about the woman he lives with she could also demand money for her kids from my ex (her partner let’s say). Plus the what about the biological parent of my ex’s partners kids? He also has to pay for kids kids

@nickymanchester

JustLyra those are all very fair points that you make.

However, I would question just how large a number of people are actually evading payment through self employment etc.

Does it happen? Of course it does, there are enough stories here to testify to that.

But, in the overall scheme of things, the number of NRPs that successfully do that is very small. Of course this doesn't help any if it's you that has to deal with an exH that is doing that so I can certainly understand people's frustrations.

CMS clearly are not good at dealing with the majority of "difficult" NRPs - although they do obviously get some suspended prison sentences and do actually send a few to prison.

But that does not mean that they are useless or "shite" as others here have said, but they could clearly do better.

It was me that said they’re shite. They are.

I lasted 4 months working there and had to leave as it was just dire. The length of time it takes for people to get proper enforcement is scandalous. I’d put my hat on the vast majority of people who received suspended sentences being because an MP got involved and pushed hard.

I saw numerous cases get a letter requesting more information when the NRP had been evading giving details for 2/3/4 years.

Self employed NRP’s are plentiful. It’s one of the most common ways to dodge paying (and certainly a great way to stall paying). The majority of the variation requests I saw involve self employed people using dividends to get around paying. The lack of willingness to investigation variations is huge as well. People really need to push for that.

They are dire. And it’s incredibly frustrating because they have the powers. There just isn’t the political will to fund them properly or encourage them to properly use their powers.

If it was well known that they will raid your bank account, put a charge on your house and suspend your driving license then the vast majority of non-payers would wind their necks in. Instead it’s very well known that they’re unlikely to get that serious.

I actually got told off for reminding some people on the phone of the power CMS ultimately have because apparently I sounded threatening and some people (every one a long time piss taker) complained.

Also, the amount of money wasted by them in compensation because of fuck ups is scandalous. They have a shit system, are understaffed and it’s just so frustrating.

Anyway. I’ll put my soapbox away now.

I think what people are saying is that the percentage salary paid by the NRP should increase based on household income to reflect their improved financial position

No. It shouldn't.

Parents job to pay for their child. My ex used to refuse to pay child maintenance in December so he could be the one to give all the love presents for child and he hoped I could not afford much. He would sometimes catch up payments at end of February. My new husband has always been very kind and generous to my children even after they become adults. Their own Dad not so much. Now they are adults they remember. Their step Dad gets Father's Day card, their Dad not.

@HaloTattle

What about when the dad/step mum aren't providing anything in their own house? Other than the very very bare minimum?

What do you mean? I said bills and food, I'm assuming most people who live in a house pay bills and for food. I'd also bet that the majority of time, the step mother pays toward said bills and food when their SC are there hence contributing...

For example, I go 50:50 on bills and food and anything else in our home. I don't make my husband pay 2/3rds of all the bills because of my SC which I believe would be unreasonable personally but it does mean I am contributing to my DSC when they are with us.

And that's great and totally normal, or at least for most families.

My DCs 'd' F often picks them up after lunch and gives them the same size portion of food as their pre school siblings. They are 16 and 14, so even on 'his' days I'm feeding them 3 meals as they come home starving. The 1 "family" holiday my dc were allowed to go on I had to send all their clothes (fair enough as I already had them). I was also told "if they want ice cream/spending money you need to send it. And if they need sun cream make sure they pack it."
So in my case their Dad/step Mum aren't providing anything. Other than the minimal electricity use for a couple of hours and a couple of fish fingers each.

And to the PPs who said its not their SMs job to provide, well no it isn't. My comment was a direct reply (complete with quote) claiming that step mums already provide. I'm sure most do. My own step mum, and my Mum who is also a step Mum always have.

@LucieStar

I think what people are saying is that the percentage salary paid by the NRP should increase based on household income to reflect their improved financial position

No. It shouldn't.

By that logic it should also decrease, then, when Mum has a new partner move in with her, to reflect the improved household income of the RP. Bet people won't be so vocally advocating for that on this thread, somehow ....

If an NR parent earns they pay.
If they have more children they reduce the amount.

Yes I know of someone who had a 40k charge put on their house.
If the NR parent is showing no or not enough income to live on., I do think their lifestyle should be investigated.