Another CMS question

[monkehsee]

When DP and his ExW separated the agreement was that they had 50/50 care of the children, she kept the house which has no mortgage and they had a clean break.
She works full time awkward shift pattern so DP agreed to stay part time on fixed hours with 2 hours of childcare needed by to be paid each day for wrap around care.
DP was not paying the childcare bill because his ExW claims the childcare element of tax credits and they had agreed that he would stay part-time and do the majority of school runs etc. He picks up Extra hours when he can to supplement the part time income but can only do this if she isn't working over the weekend.
Unfortunately the wrap around care requires payment all week as the requirement for it is ad-hoc and they have variable use of it.
DP never has set days with the children and only has the children when she is working so she can continue to work full time in her job. He has them 50/50 but doesn't get to decide the days.
Now however she has suggested that he should be paying the childcare because it falls on his days?
I kind of get what she is saying but he has already agreed to take a reduction in income and be part time and she gets the tax credits element for childcare.
Surely if she expects home to pay the childcare he should be entitled to the tax credits as they have 50/50 care?
Am I missing something or is this unfair? If she is claiming the tax credits for childcare but he is paying for it surely that is fraud?

Leave male or female out of it

If the OP's partner was the mother working part time, there would be a very different response. There are frequent threads on this forum, in single parents and on AIBU which go along the lines of the ex is refusing to change contact times now my partner has got a new job. It is always the majority that say she is being unreasonable and should do whatever it takes to accommodate the ex given that she will expect the maintenance. God help her if she doesn't work full time. All sorts of vitriol is spat out.

The courts will not generally rule for a NRP to pay for childcare unless it falls directly on their usual access day

Unless things have changed (and I admit it is some years since I was in court dealing with child stuff), the courts can't actually enforce the payment of anything in relation to children unless it is outwith the jurisdiction of the CSA/CMS (which is only the case with very high earners). When an order for contact/residence is sought, the court can only deal with that anyway. Otherwise the courts would be clogged up with ex partners trying to sort out small financial issues like childcare and nothing of any real substance would stand a chance.

The mother is effectively the NRP here. Male NRPs aren’t generally paid maintenance by the parent with majority care of the children, and don’t generally get to claim any benefits/tax credits relating to the children either

This is how I feel it should be. However I haven't mentioned anything to him as I don't want to be intrusive
Surely all this he has already thought of. The question is more why he has done nothing about it. Maybe because he hasn't told you the she story, or maybe the situation does suit him or another reason he doesn't want to share.

The mother is effectively the NRP here

Effectively? The children live with mum who works irregular hours. Dad is working round those irregular hours.

I agree there is some...irregularity with the maintenance situation. He would need to decide whether he wanted the children full time and make a decision to fight for that.

@SpongebobNoPants

If this went to court, the court would probably order in favour of the ex re shifts etc and not necessarily having set days. The logic for childcare would be that if the ex is claiming it via tax credits, that of the 30% owed left, that he pays 2/5 of that to account for the 2/5 days he does work

I just wanted to chime in because I have direct experience of court with regards to shift work and childcare costs with my ex.
It may be different because I’m the RP but my ex worked shifts which changed week to week, said he wanted 50:50 but couldn’t do set days.

I worked part time at the time and my complaint was that i couldn’t up my hours and work full time to enable the 50:50 care because of my ex’s shift patterns or make any plans further than 2 weeks in advance.

I also had to pay for full time childcare even though I didn’t require it because I didn’t know from week to week which days my ex would be having our son and I couldn’t find anywhere that could do childcare on an ad hoc basis.

My income and our lives were greatly limited by my ex and his unreasonable work pattern and him insisting on doing 50:50 even though he couldn’t really adhere to it.

His view of 50:50 was having our DS to sleep at his house 3-4 nights a week but the reality was he would collect our toddler at 6.30pm after work, put him to bed at his house then drop him home at 6.30.

The court ruling was that I was able to keep residency of our DS and I could enforce set days for my ex. He couldn’t in reality stick to 50:50 (he never really had this) and when he protested about the arrangement changing the judge actually said

“Your long standing work pattern is not of concern here, MsSpongebob had to change her job to be able to support her children and be available to care for them which is what I also suggest you do”.

Set days were issued for contact and all I had to do was make sure my DS was available but if my ex couldn’t make it then tough luck for him.
In the end we’ve fallen into a regularly pattern of Weds and EOW plus as much extra in the school holidays as my ex is available to do.

I work full time and I have to pay ALL of the childcare bill because my ex now pays maintenance and not a penny more. The courts will not generally rule for a NRP to pay for childcare unless it falls directly on their usual access day.

I honestly think in the OP’s DP’s situation he and the children would be better off with him being the RP if the mum’s shift pattern is ever changing and her having the kids whenever she is able but that way Dad is still available for all the emergencies, school runs etc due to being part time but he’d then be able to be financially supported to do that.

Or he pushes for set contact days like I did and mum sorts out childcare for the kids if her work falls on her days, DP sorts childcare for his set days and then he can then work fall time and no one is being disadvantaged financially.

That was a very positive outcome for you. And very different to what I know of many situations, though they were not going for 5050,except one who wanted 5 out of 14 nights, was closest.

Though again these had more static rotas.

@monkehsee It's unusual to not have sight of a longer term rota, even if just monthly.

Effectively? The children live with mum who works irregular hours. Dad is working round those irregular hours
If the children spend more time at their dads then that’s where they live 🤷‍♀️
Even if the letter of 50/50 was stuck to no maintenance should be paid, and especially not by the parent who works part time to facilitate the other working full time.

[quote Tiredoftattler]@monkehsee

You can encourage him to go back to Court, but keep in mind that everyone entering a Court wants it their way. A Court is not likely to change an agreement that the parties themselves willingly agreed upon; your partner voluntarily agreed to work part-time.

Now that the agreement has proven to be less desirable than you think it should be, that is hardly a reason for the Court to consider a modification.

Would it not make more sense for him to look for a better paying part-time job?

Wanting things her way does nor make the ex wrong; given the opportunity most people want things their way.

You are not wrong to want things your way, but the route to getting what you want may not be by attacking or objecting to what on the surface may have been a not unreasonable agreement given the parties respective financial status at the time of the divorce.

If you want to have a long term relationship with your partner , you like his ex should prepare yourself to be a higher earner. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a woman earning as much or more than her partner.

As you discuss this situation with him, make sure that you know exactly why the agreement was structured in the manner in which it was structured. It is unlikely that it was structured that way simply because the ex was greedy or grasping.

In any case, if you are prepared to provide yourself the lifestyle and future that you desire, you will then not be at the mercy of his ex or anyone else. Focus more on your own financial independence and let him figure out a resolution to his problem. Sometimes you can be most supportive by stepping back and allowing a partner to grow into his or her own.[/quote]
But it's not that the agreement is less desirable.
It is that she has changed the goal posts
@Tiredoftattler

@BusyLizzie61

21k for 2 days work IS a good wage!

They need to have a frank discussion. If this went to court, the court would probably order in favour of the ex re shifts etc and not necessarily having set days. The logic for childcare would be that if the ex is claiming it via tax credits, that of the 30% owed left, that he pays 2/5 of that to account for the 2/5 days he does work.
Unless she went to cms, then I would stop paying cm. If however, she has gone via cms, and he has the children 60% of the overnights then make a counterclaim. However, this may mean also claiming the cb, which will remove the tax credits claim for the ex, and you wouldn't be eligible to claim as you'd have to claim uc, which if you're working would be over the income threshold.

I never said he only works 2 days? He works 5 days

She should pay childcare and he should not be paying maintenance. Why is he giving her free money? Will he give me free money please 😆

Child benefit should be shared too.

@FireflyRainbow

Child benefit should be shared too.

Only one parent can claim it and she already does

@FireflyRainbow

She should pay childcare and he should not be paying maintenance. Why is he giving her free money? Will he give me free money please 😆

Totally agree, I still haven't mentioned it aside from her causing an argument with DP about something unrelated, I asked why he lets her speak to him like crap in front of the kids and he replied 'I don't want it to escalate into an argument and I just agree to whatever she says to keep the peace'. We are planning to move in together in the next 12 months. For me it won't be happening now. I'm not going to play third party to this shit show. If he can't grow a spine and put boundaries in place now there's no hope if we're living together.

OP, what is the upside of joining your life with somebody who seems unable to sort his own life?

If he is satisfied with his life as it is, then you should just decide if this is the life that you want. You are not going to change or fix him. If he requires so much fixing, you should go back to the toy box and find one that is not broken.

@Tiredoftattler

OP, what is the upside of joining your life with somebody who seems unable to sort his own life?

If he is satisfied with his life as it is, then you should just decide if this is the life that you want. You are not going to change or fix him. If he requires so much fixing, you should go back to the toy box and find one that is not broken.

Nobody said anything about fixing him. This whole situation is about the way his ex treats him, he is not a toy and not have I ever seen him as one. I have an exP too so come with my own added 'baggage' when it comes to kids and coparenting. When any people come together as a second marriage/ relationship or however you want to look at it there are things that need to be discussed/ explained/ compromised for it to work out. I choose to love him and I choose to be with him, I will however not choose for myself and my kids to have to come second to his ExW and her demands.

YADNBU

OP, I would imagine that the ex is only making demands in res her child or children. At this point, she has every right to speak to arrangements and funding regarding their mutual children.

You have every right to be assertive and protective of your children. It would seem that at this juncture , as you are not married to nor live with him , that their is no real right of place that your children have in his life. You do not want them to come second , but exactly where should they come in his life? Should they come first and ahead of whom should they have first place standing.

You object to the way his ex speaks to him, but he does not object. It seems as though he is in the less than enviable position of having 2 women trying to exert control in and over his life, and the irony is that he is not married to either of them.

Not only are you choosing to love him, but you are also trying to fix him.

I think that it is much easier to find a man that you don't perceive as broken, than it is to mold the broken man into your image of an acceptably functioning man.

You are never going to fix his ex , and to the extent that she directs her ire and communications to him, that really is an area from which you might be happier stepping back.

Clearly, your way of responding is not bringing much contentment into your life at the moment.

You might be happier just dating him and living apart. Living apart and not being involved with his interactions with his ex would allow you to continue loving but not having to be involved in the other dysfunctional aspects of his life.

It does not sound as though he is anywhere near ready to take on the responsibility of yet another family when he is having difficulty managing issues related to his existing family structure.

@Tiredoftattler

you might be happier just dating him and living apart. Living apart and not being involved with his interactions with his ex would allow you to continue loving but not having to be involved in the other dysfunctional aspects of his life
I agree with this, my take on this is that we would not function together as things are now.

you have every right to be assertive and protective of your children. It would seem that at this juncture , as you are not married to nor live with him , that their is no real right of place that your children have in his life. You do not want them to come second , but exactly where should they come in his life? Should they come first and ahead of whom should they have first place standing

I don't expect my children to come first over his children, I would expect that all the children are given equal love and respect in our family home.
However, my issue is that financially if we are to join incomes, and logistically if we are both working, living together and having both our children at home, it just won't work.
Maybe I need to take a huge step back, which saddens me but I just can't see this moving forwards the way things are right now.
Thankyou for being so upfront as it has given me food for thought on the circumstances and has made me realise my own feeling and how its not just about the finances/child arrangements.

I don't understand why if childcare is paid for 5 days a week then he can work full time ?

@Starlightstarbright1

I don't understand why if childcare is paid for 5 days a week then he can work full time ?

Two hours of childcare per day In the mornings, he works pt as ExW has advocates shifts that vary from week to week. He finishes work everyday in time to collect his kids from school as he never knows from week to week when he will need to be available to collect them as she will be at work so he does part time contracted hours so he may do so. He picks up extra hours when available if he doesn't have the kids. As she get the tax credits etc if he paid for childcare to work full time he would be paying out more than he would earn doing the extra hours.

Ok that makes sense.

He could get after school childcare and offer to split funding, use childcare vouchers to pay his share. Ex’s tax credits would increase.

Or completely revisit fixed days.

Does ex have the kind of job she could put in request for fixed days ( can’t remember what it is called )

There’s a lot of this that doesn’t add up.

They’re both low earners but owned a mortgage free house? I think it’s more likely that there is a mortgage and little equity and the agreement was he walked away and she took the whole mortgage on.

Why would he agree to pay maintenance if he has the children so much more? Do you actually know that he does? Or is he talking a good talk?

Does she actually get Tax Credits or is that his assumption? The cut off for help is quite low.

If the ex gets the childcare element of tax credits to my understanding they pay 85% of the childcare but you have to send them invoices every month. Is she wanting your DP to pay the outstanding 15% or for him to pay it all? Is she did want him to pay it all she shouldn't be claiming it. I don't think he should be paying maintenance but you could check on the Cms calculator to see what that says? Sounds like the ex is taking the piss a bit. You DP should definitely question it.

@JensonsAcolyte

There’s a lot of this that doesn’t add up.

They’re both low earners but owned a mortgage free house? I think it’s more likely that there is a mortgage and little equity and the agreement was he walked away and she took the whole mortgage on.

Why would he agree to pay maintenance if he has the children so much more? Do you actually know that he does? Or is he talking a good talk?

Does she actually get Tax Credits or is that his assumption? The cut off for help is quite low.

No the house will be paid off in 18 months. They overpaid for years, hammered the mortgage to get them term right down now just 18 months ish of min payments left

He should return to work full-time to protect his pension and future.