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?

@KoalaOok

Maybe it should all be talked through before they split up/divorce. If they are being divorced in part because they are a useless parent then I don't think it's fair to expect that to change and let any future parent make up for the shortfall. If they've suddenly gone from being a great parent to one that doesn't want anything to do with their children then something is up.

I guess the thing is that things can change a lot following divorce, whatever is agreed at the time.

When people are in the midst of a divorce they will not be considering that they might one day lose their job, that both will have greater expenses now to maintain separate households, or that either or both may meet someone new and have further children.

It's a difficult situation for both parties to navigate, especially if their lives aren't 'moving on' at similar speeds.

@KoalaOok I don't agree it should, unless you are an enabler to a child maintenance dodger.

I wouldn't expect my income to be taken into account but if my husband can't pay his maintenance then I do pay it for him. But he isn't a useless dad, he works bloody hard to provide for his kids with his ex and his kids with me. And his ex isn't petty and spiteful, I actually like her and I know how much she struggles so I'm happy to help when needed.
If my husband treated his ex and kids like crap and avoided paying his way then I wouldn't even be here, I'd certainly never enable it.

Over my dead body. It wouldn’t pay for me to go to work if I had to support children in addition to my own - why would I do that?

[quote MrsTophamHat]@aSofaNearYou i do agree that it is both parents' duty to ensure that they have sufficient income to provide for their child, first and foremost.

However, I have seen scenarios on Mumsnet whereby a NRP has taken a planned cut in hours/pay because if suited their new household, knowing full well that doing so would mean they would earn less "on paper" for CM. My argument on that was that if the stepparent is happy to supplement NRPs other general outgoings such as clothes, phone contracts, insurances, holidays etc then CM should be no different.

If a NRP began purposefully "sponging" off a new partner, then new partner should be getting rid, quite frankly. [/quote]
Well I think opinions will naturally differ on this depending on how well off you are. Me and DP don't make significantly more than we need to pay our bills and reasonably satisfy our needs. So no, I wouldn't really be willing to spend hundred's of pounds a month on things solely for my partner, after he deliberately reduced his income so he couldn't afford it. So likewise, I wouldn't pay his maintenance. If I made moderately more than I do, I imagine I would want that money to go into savings and things I currently get by without but would aspire to, so I still wouldn't want to pay those things for him. The only scenario where I could imagine it not seeiming unjust is if I was lucky enough to be very wealthy and had a surplus of cash.

Perhaps my outlook is less generous than some, but I broadly believe in "neither a borrower nor a lender be". I believe there should be fairness behind who pays for what. In this context, that means that if a person has children, it should be them that pays for them.

I agree. My ds grandparents save for him and is wounderfully kind of them but if they didn't I wouldn't feel entitled to them acing to do so and they are ds flesh and blood.
My dsc are not entitled to any of my earnings or assets from me as their dad's partner. They are entitled to me facilitating their relationship, which I choose do through paying for our significantly bigger than my needs require home. If I chose not to pay for the bigger home, their dad would have to make up that shortfall so it could be afforded or not have access overnights as they are his respsonibilty.

No and neither should there be any reductions though for step children taken into account.
Rather than make a step parent pay, I’d put much much stronger measures in place where either a NRP or RP aren’t financially supporting their child/children themselves through work. Same if together and not providing. It should never be an option to opt out of providing.

Noooo! My income has nothing to do with my partners children and ex. He pays for them then chooses to spend all his spare money on his hobby (hundreds and hundreds of pounds, sometimes near on a thousand) while I save my money. My savings are for me and my boys

We don't share money so I don't care what he spends. Obviously I think he's a bit of an idiot doing it, but its his money.

My DSD is now 20, and at uni. My husband is now paying what he paid in maintenance direct to her. I have paid it during some of lockdown as DH was furloughed. It’s not her fault that those circumstances happened, and I am very glad that I could make sure she was ok. I was under no pressure to do this and my DSD asked me for budgeting advice so she could manage without it. I also pay for her mobile phone every month and her car insurance. I do this because I earn more than my husband and i have a fabulous relationship with her. If I was told I HAD to, I probably wouldn’t be as forthcoming. However from the other side, my DS gets £5 per month from his dad. He gave his company to his now wife (OW) and is apparently a SAHD to their 3 kids. He was given a nil payment, but sends £5 a month and is forever pontificating over social media about how he props up my household 😂😂. This is from the guy who hasn’t seen DS since he was 4 - his choice, DS is now 11. He puts loads of tripe all over Facebook about how my 3 kids are my world, and wasn’t even embarrassed when someone commented “Mate you have 4 kids”

Can we all please remember, and this ALWAYS seems to be forgotten:

The NRP's partners income will have a positive impact on kids regardless of if they pay CMS or not.

No way could my DH afford a 4 bed detached on his own. Food bills, utilities, the step parent pays their part in all of these when it would be a damned lot cheaper if I lived on my own, without his children.

My income has a huge positive influence on the step kids, regardless of me paying for CMS.

DH's ex wife gas never worked. She got a big insurance pay out, which is slowly dwindling, 15 years ago, and lives off benefits and DH. I work full time. She had the audacity to find out my salary (I'm public sector) and add it to her CMS calculation, then told DH we have two incomes so she's taking that into account. So she expected me to fund her job shy lifestyle (no physical or mental health issues, all kids long have started school), just because she can't be arsed to get a job. When mediator queried her about getting a job, she said she couldn't because 'When would I do the food shop?'. That's not a lie. These people walk among us.

As I said, little does she realise were it not for me paying half the £1150 rent a month DH, and therefore the kids, would be living in the two bedroom flat he was in when I first met him.

Oh hell no