DP’s ex’s constant demands for more money

[SpongebobNoPants]

Many of you will recognise me from previous threads about my SD’s mum.

Quick summary of relevant info:

• she’s nearly 40 and her and DP split nearly 12 years ago due to her having an affair with a colleague
• up until recently she had been unemployed for over 3 years through choice (no illness, was made redundant from old job and didn’t look for another)
• she has never had a full time job, again through choice as childcare options were available etc
• she recently got a job but has decided to only do part time hours even though SDs are 12 & nearly 17
• DP pays above CMS, for all phone bills, uniforms, bus passes, and at least half of absolutely everything else
• SDs officially come to ours EOW but are here several times a week for dinner or stay overs because they’re old enough to come and go as they please now

So, here’s my gripe. Every single month (sometimes actually weekly) without fail she’ll call / text or get the girls to get in touch asking for more money for different things. It’s often not small amounts either… £100 for this, £250 for that etc.

Most of the time DP will oblige because he would never see his kids go without.

We took youngest SD away camping (oldest didn’t want to come, we paid for her to go to the Reading festival instead). The day we returned SD17 told us she’d just tested positive for covid. She was fine but obviously had to isolate.

We therefore made the decision to keep SD12 with us as we didn’t want her to go back to a household with confirmed covid in it. 5 days into isolation their DM tested positive, then as soon as her isolation period was up she went on trip away with her friends because it ended on “our weekend” with SDs.

So all in all we ended up having SD12 for nearly 4 weeks solidly. Not a problem, these things happen etc and of course she’s always welcome here as this is her home too.

Here’s now my problem… SD12 has now tested positive for covid (asymptomatic so not poorly, just positive) and her DM is kicking off demanding money as she now has to isolate and can’t go to work.

DP questioned this as the rules have changed but it turns out she’s anti-vax and turned down the vaccine so under the new guidance still has isolate if a member of her household has covid. Due to her short working hours, SD’s age and the fact she’s not actually poorly - if their DM had actually got the vaccine there would be no reason why she would need to miss work.

She was literally screaming down the phone saying she’ll miss out on money from work as she’ll have to take unpaid leave etc. She thinks DP and I should pay her wage or at least give extra cash.

Firstly, we do not have the spare cash to do this. We’ve offered for SD16 to come and stay here to ease the burden etc.

Secondly, my DP cannot afford to keep giving her the extra cash all the time as it is and I’m constantly bailing him out financially towards the the of every month and it’s beginning to really piss me off. I’ve accrued some credit card debt forward funding a few joint costs which I seem to always be paying off singlehandedly.

I have my own 2 children to support (not DPs, from previous relationships) and I am becoming resentful of her lazy, demanding attitude.

I do not think it’s up to us help out other than with the children and the only reason she’ll now be out of pocket is because of her life choices.

-she chose not to work for so long
-she chooses to only work part time
-she chose to not get vaccinated

I fail to see how any of these things are our problem? If she’s short of cash this month then she’ll need to do what other people do… use savings or a credit card.

I have told DP I would have no issue him giving extra all the time if he could actually afford it but he can’t so essentially I’m subsidising her monetary demands and I’m not willing to do it anymore.

I swear to God if he caves and pays out to her I will ask him to leave. I’m that furious about it.

We’ve had a huge blow up today. He’s apologising profusely and trying to explain his side of things but he’s finally acknowledged my feelings.

I don’t have either of my kids here tonight so we’re going to have a long discussion about everything. He seems very upset at the thought of losing me and wants to fix things.

He’s apparently blocked his ex’s number. There is zero reason for them to be communicating to be honest. He can always unblock her in case of an emergency (which is unlikely).

I’ve asked how he is going to tackle his children’s behaviour and he said he’ll deal with it and I don’t even have to know about it all now. He said he wants to protect me and all costs and show me I’m his priority.

It’s what I wanted to hear but words are easy aren’t they. They’re only meaningful if they’re followed up with actions.

@SpongebobNoPants
Your household budget should have included a certain amount of money to be put aside for savings and unexpected expenses. You should both be contributing money for contingency expenses.

It seems as though you and your partner have many expectations and assumptions that have not been articulated and discussed.

@Tattler2
By paying the full deposit and 90% of home contents, Sponge has subsidised this man housing his children. He's paying her back monthly by way of a higher contribution to the ongoing costs.

@Tattler2 did you miss the part where op quite clearly states she put down the full deposit on the house & paid for 90% of the contents???
She has also repeatedly stated that she pays for her dc entirely from her own pocket!
She has also done all the saving for their wedding!
She is not being subsidised or benefitting from living with her dp in any way bar possibly having a bigger house than she would need if it were just her and her dc! - I'm assuming the house in question was chosen to also accommodate dp's dc.

That's a positive update. I hope as you say that he can follow it up with actions.

Although I understand if for you it has come too late

@Tattler2

You’re not reading what I’m saying, he is not subsidising me… he OWES me the difference and that is why he contributes more. That is how he’s essentially paying his way to making things equal.

Yes we’re here more, but also I bought the house and my mortgage would have been £90k less if we’d not needed the 4th bedroom for his children. I could easily afford a 3 bedroom house on my own and could have had a longer term to make the payments more manageable.

I couldn’t afford to live here without his contributions no, but I wouldn’t need to live here if it wasn’t for him either.

It isn’t subsiding when he is contributing more because he owes more to make things equitable.
He is also substantially better off living with me than he was renting a property, so he is gaining from this set up way more than I am.

@Tattler2 I had substantial savings prior to living with him, hence my generous contributions to subsidising him and his children (note: not the other way around).
There should be around £250-500 a month left over in the joint account every month based on what our actual bills are. I also have some investments and company shares I could cash in if there was a large dire emergency.
I also have insurances for almost every possible item that would cost ££££ to repair.

Is he a joint owner of the house? If not ,he should not have to repay any expenses that she incurred in the initial purchase of the home. I don't think furnishing a home falls in the category of joint expenses particularly if it included the purchase of bedroom furniture for her children. Those are not joint expenses. Those are expenses that she would have incurred no matter where she lived. I don't think that you can bill someone for a tax benefit that you lose as part of your elective decision to change your living arrangement.

Perhaps they should live apart until they are both better positioned financially. Neither should become the other's financial dependent. It is always easier when people bring equal resources to their mutual table.

Hmm I'd still cancel or at least defer the wedding for the time being. And I would most definitely not be giving him any more cash subsidies.

He can block the vile EX but she will just go through the SDs and he's never going to block them. And he already lets them walk all over him.

Like you say, words are easy.

@Tattler2

Is he a joint owner of the house? If not ,he should not have to repay any expenses that she incurred in the initial purchase of the home. I don't think furnishing a home falls in the category of joint expenses particularly if it included the purchase of bedroom furniture for her children. Those are not joint expenses. Those are expenses that she would have incurred no matter where she lived. I don't think that you can bill someone for a tax benefit that you lose as part of your elective decision to change your living arrangement.

Perhaps they should live apart until they are both better positioned financially. Neither should become the other's financial dependent. It is always easier when people bring equal resources to their mutual table.

Why are you ignoring the fact it also included furniture and an EXTRA ROOM for HIS children? If his children weren't a concern she wouldn't have needed a bigger house so she wouldn't need his money to pay the mortgage.

It is always easier when people bring equal resources to their mutual table. of course it's easier but most people don't choose romantic partners that way.

@Tattler2 yes he is joint owner, however we have a legal agreement whereby if we split he can only take out equity proportionate to what he has put in which is why we mutually decided he would contribute more at this stage until our inputs were matched.

Furniture is joint, my children’s furniture was fully funded by me alone. I’m referring to white goods such as washing machine, fridge, dishwasher, also carpets / wood flooring, sofa and our bedroom furniture. These are joint expenses which he owes a contribution too, no?

Also he isn’t being “billed” for me losing out on the child benefit. We did however discuss that I would lose it by moving in with him because it’s based off his income that I’m no longer eligible and it was agreed that it was right for him to make up some of the difference due to him benefitting substantially financially by moving in with me.

Oh… I also bought everything for his children’s room too. Just in case you feel like being obtuse about that too @Tattler2

Neither should become the other's financial dependent
In case the irony is lost on you, that’s the entire point of this thread.

Probably missing the point a bit here but how is he only taking home £2.5k if he earns more than £60k?!

I never said he earns more than £60k?
He used to be a much higher earner but took a lower paid job last year. He earns (I think) circa £44k now and takes home around £2,700pcm

Your DP needs to start parenting.

Firstly he needs to learn to say No, she had trainer money she gets no more, she doesn't need clothes (she wants them, but that's not need), and as for the hair thing, he needs to demand that she apologises to you immediately. He also needs to say no not paying. And teach her she can't have everything she wants.

As for the mother, she could claim SSP so I wouldn't even entertain giving her any extra money, as you say she choose not to get vaccinated, so she can take the hit in these circumstances. Your DP also needs to tell her her messages are out of order.

If I was him, I would go to a solicitor, have a document drafted detailing exactly what he is prepared to contribute, ie, monthly CMS, girls mobile bills, half 'needed' clothing, half 'hair and beauty treatments' etc.

As for the laptop, she doest need one, college has provided one. I'm assuming some sites are blocked on it hence her asking for one. In that case at best I'd offer a table or cheap Chromebook. She can use college one for school and other for personal

@SpongebobNoPants

I don’t even know how this has happened? I earn less than DP. I put £1k into the joint account every month and he puts £1.5k.

That leaves me with around £1k every month and his £1.5k.
Out of my £1k left over I pay for everything for me and my kids… childcare for my DS6, dinner money / bus pass for my DD11. All clothes, uniform, haircuts, phone bills for me & DD, petrol, car tax, car insurance, any treats etc.

He pays his ex £400 direct, then phone bills for him and both kids. He has no petrol costs, car insurance, car tax because he has a company electric car.

So he has committed bills of maybe £600 from his “own” money. Where the fuck is the rest of it going??

It's going on haircuts, clothes, trainers and whatever else ex and sd16 demand

I can't believe what I am reading Spongebob, sounds terrible. You sound lovely and being completely taken advantage of! I think you should take some time out and go to your mum's for a bit to really take stock of your situation.

[quote Tattler2]@SpongebobNoPants
Your household budget should have included a certain amount of money to be put aside for savings and unexpected expenses. You should both be contributing money for contingency expenses.

It seems as though you and your partner have many expectations and assumptions that have not been articulated and discussed.[/quote]
I would be saying the £250 he currently takes from the joint account is now to be used to pay off the credit card. Once that's paid, any money left in joint goes in a savings account.
He will have to manage his money.

OP in your discussion with him tonight, you need to find out the true extent of what he gives the ex and kids, and reign a lot of it in.

@SpongebobNoPants

I never said he earns more than £60k? He used to be a much higher earner but took a lower paid job last year. He earns (I think) circa £44k now and takes home around £2,700pcm

Why can't you claim child benefit then? He's earning below the threshold.

It's calculated on joint income, I would assume that jointly they earn to much to claim it

Op I'm struggling to see what benefit you're getting out of this relationship and it can't be good for your DCs to be living with all this tension.

Sorry, but I'd split as this will never get better.

@HalzTangz

It's calculated on joint income, I would assume that jointly they earn to much to claim it

I don't think that's correct