Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

Original poster

Child Maintenance - is it ever OK to reduce it?

276 replies

FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 11:39

So cost of living is going up etc and we've taken a look at our finances. We are going to have to cut back a bit. Is it ever ok for the maintenance payments to the ex to reduce? They are well above the CMS recommended amount (DH's choice) but we all know the CMS amount is not always half the amount of raising a child. It also shouldn't matter what mum earns/pays but she's living rent free in an inheritated property and works what I would call "extremely part-time".

OP posts:
ldontWanna · 03/04/2022 13:44

@DownToTheSeaAgain

Presumably *@AskingforaBaskin* the money is not for her but the DC. She has planned her expenditure on DC based on an agreed amount. You can't just change that because it doesn't suit you any more and you're jealous.
And if he dropped dead today she'd get fuck all with no notice.
Eightiesfan · 03/04/2022 13:44

I think you are being completely reasonable to ask DH to reduce CMS payments, you have a house and child to pay for. A divorce does not mean exW gets to live the life of Riley on your husbands salary.

Yes, he should support his child financially, but she also has a responsibility to start supporting herself, if she wants to carry on with the lifestyle she had when married she needs to pull her finger out and increase her hours or find another job.

You and your child should not be the collateral damage in this.

AskingforaBaskin · 03/04/2022 13:47

@DownToTheSeaAgain

Presumably *@AskingforaBaskin* the money is not for her but the DC. She has planned her expenditure on DC based on an agreed amount. You can't just change that because it doesn't suit you any more and you're jealous.
Tough. Then her plans for raising her child need to reflect her disposable funds.

We're about to hit an economic crisis. There is no room to be upset about losing horse riding which is a massive privilege and not something to think twice over when crunching your budget. Like the OP is.

Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 13:48

And if he dropped dead today she'd get fuck all with no notice. quite.

And its not like we could have forseen the pandemic, war in Ukraine and whatever else is driving up the cost of living when we decided to have our child.

OP posts:
jelly79 · 03/04/2022 13:49

If you need to cut back and paying more then you are entitled do do so, whether that is fair isn't necessarily an issue if you cannot afford the payments and have explored other options

You said she refuses to do the journeys? Do you mean for DSCS to come to your house?

DownToTheSeaAgain · 03/04/2022 13:51

@FloralsForSpring

And if he dropped dead today she'd get fuck all with no notice. quite.

And its not like we could have forseen the pandemic, war in Ukraine and whatever else is driving up the cost of living when we decided to have our child.

So there is no provision for the DC in the will?

My point was the money is for the DC and the DC has been provided with things/ experiences on this basis. You can't just remove that. Or rather you can but it is not a nice thing to do.

Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 13:51

@jelly79 yes, it's meant to be one journey each (she moved, it's a fair distance, another reason why having them here more outside holidays wouldn't work, too far for school) but she frequently says she can't do her journey or if she does she is late for drop off or really early (hours) for pick up and sits their beeping her horn.

OP posts:
Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 13:53

So there is no provision for the DC in the will? in his will, yes there is provision once I'm dead/remarried. In his life insurance policy, there most certainly is, but that's for them not her and she wouldn't get her hands on any of it as she won't be named as a trustee.

OP posts:
Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 13:56

My point was the money is for the DC and the DC has been provided with things/ experiences on this basis. You can't just remove that. Or rather you can but it is not a nice thing to do.

It's not nice no, but we are also having to remove things here. Getting rid of the TV package they so like, no more fancy shampoo which the eldest DSC had already moaned about. Shopping at Primark for their clothes instead of Next which they prefer. None of these things are "nice" or what we would like to be doing.

OP posts:
LegMeChicken · 03/04/2022 13:57

@Coyoacan

I paid for my dd to have horse-riding lessons as a single mother on a low income and with zero help from her dad. How come you can't afford horse-riding lessons for your child, OP? Are you also relying mostly on your husband's contribution?
Did you receive any taxpayer benefits?
timeisnotaline · 03/04/2022 13:58

@toomuchlaundry

So he decided he could afford another child but wants to cut back on paying for his other children. CMS is the bare minimum, wouldn’t be impressed by any parent who only pays that and then goes in to have other children (I know this isn’t your case OP)

How much are you looking to cut back? I would say it is the correct thing to do to talk to the ex. There are his children who will be impacted

If my older 2 dc did horse riding we possibly couldn’t have afforded a 3rd, in which case I’d have cancelled horses riding without a blink. Some people would argue a sibling is more overall benefit than horse riding lessons Grin That’s irrelevant though as they are obviously not cutting back because shared dc is here now, but because the cost of living is becoming painful, just like everyone else. Nothing to do with having a child together.
aSofaNearYou · 03/04/2022 14:01

Of course it's ok to reduce it if you're struggling, in the same way it would be if you all live together.

Maintenance is not permanent, it is what can be afforded at the time.

Getyourarseofffthequattro · 03/04/2022 14:02

I think in this situation is absolutely fine. If she can't afford it, then she can work a few more hours like the rest of us can't she!

TheBigDilemma · 03/04/2022 14:02

Honestly, you can reduce it to the CMS calculation if it is no longer viable to over pay, but don’t assume she is working part time just because she wants to.

When you have the kids on all or most of the working days it is difficult to balance wrap around care costs, times and other stuff and still meet the needs of the children. For example, taking some extra hours here and there one year may result in the children not qualifying for school lunches on the next even if she doesn’t manage to get extra shifts or loses her job and that is of you manage to get extra days in the after school club that will also come at an extra cost.

Many single mums manage to work full time but that mostly happens when you don’t have changing shifts, have a good enough salary to pay for childcare or a very helpful family around wanting to commit to regular childcare.

Getyourarseofffthequattro · 03/04/2022 14:04

@TheBigDilemma

Honestly, you can reduce it to the CMS calculation if it is no longer viable to over pay, but don’t assume she is working part time just because she wants to.

When you have the kids on all or most of the working days it is difficult to balance wrap around care costs, times and other stuff and still meet the needs of the children. For example, taking some extra hours here and there one year may result in the children not qualifying for school lunches on the next even if she doesn’t manage to get extra shifts or loses her job and that is of you manage to get extra days in the after school club that will also come at an extra cost.

Many single mums manage to work full time but that mostly happens when you don’t have changing shifts, have a good enough salary to pay for childcare or a very helpful family around wanting to commit to regular childcare.

Or it's that she has no mortgage to pay and can't be arsed. We'll never know.
TheBigDilemma · 03/04/2022 14:04

And upping your hours at work is not as simple as telling your boss you want to work extra hours, especially on professional roles where jobs are offered on a pro rata basis.

jelly79 · 03/04/2022 14:11

@FloralsForSpring ahh I was interested in this point as i don't do the journeys

Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 14:17

She is very open about not wanting to work more as she "doesn't need to" and enjoys socialising with her friends. It's a different world. That's ok I don't mind, I don't judge, its her life. It wouldn't suit me.

OP posts:
Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 14:18

That is of course only what eldest DSC has told me, maybe secretly she wants to work more who knows.

OP posts:
TheBigDilemma · 03/04/2022 14:21

Or it's that she has no mortgage to pay and can't be arsed. We'll never know.

True, that applies to every woman though, whether they are single, married, working or being SAHMs.

I believe, however, that any extra you want to pay that is voluntary can and should be stopped when is no longer viable.

I raised DS mostly in my own and never managed to get affluent exH to pay maintenance even as per CMS calculation but I have also seen the other side of a coin where a NRP lives on beans on toast to over pay to keep the children in their former standard of living just for the kids to look down on them as the parent gets poorer and poorer trying to over pay.

Stop overpaying if you need to but be fair, so both sets of children have similar childhoods.

AnneLovesGilbert · 03/04/2022 14:24

I don’t think her circumstances are relevant. What he pays is a percentage of his income and he’s choosing to add more on top because he’s been able to afford it. She could be a millionaire and he’d have to pay the same percentage. Each of them as parents is supposed to pay towards what they cost. He can no longer afford the extra so it’s unsustainable to keep paying it. That’s what happens when things get difficult. He’s not stopping paying towards his kids, he’s stopping paying extra. He’s still feeding, housing and clothing them during contact.

It’s good he’s told her. If she’s unpleasant about it I’d cut it back to the CMS amount and use the extra on stuff they’ll benefit from when they’re with you.

Original poster
FloralsForSpring · 03/04/2022 14:24

I have also seen the other side of a coin where a NRP lives on beans on toast to over pay to keep the children in their former standard of living just for the kids to look down on them as the parent gets poorer and poorer trying to over pay we aren't in quite that territory yet but the "cheap shampoo" incident and the sneering at Primark has started to make DH feel a little like this.

OP posts:
ToiletPoster · 03/04/2022 14:30

@DownToTheSeaAgain
To continue to pay full maintenance in a situation of general cost-cutting would mean a disproportionate decrease in the living standard of resident children. A fair situation would be cuts distributed evenly.

VodselForDinner · 03/04/2022 14:34

If cost of living dropped, would your husband want to increase maintenance on the grounds that he has more money in his pocket?

No, of course he wouldn’t.

Tell him to pay for his kid(s).

Getyourarseofffthequattro · 03/04/2022 14:35

@VodselForDinner

If cost of living dropped, would your husband want to increase maintenance on the grounds that he has more money in his pocket?

No, of course he wouldn’t.

Tell him to pay for his kid(s).

What about his resident child? Or don't they count?

He is paying for his kids even if he reduces it.