CMS question & new baby

[Rosebella215]

Hi all,
This may go down like a lead balloon, as all CMS questions seem to, but we are really after some helpful advice please.
My partner & I had lived together for 3 years and are expecting this October :) He has a DSD (8) who he pays his ex child maintenance for. This was never done officially through CMS, at the beginning of their split they sat down using the CMS calculator, worked out the rough number of nights he would be having DSD, with his salary etc and the payment roughly came to £435 (which he rounded up to £450), and he has been paying this for 4 years now (no issues).
Since we knew we were expecting, he would like to have this taken into account with CMS as it will help massively with costs etc. Based on the previous figures of how much he has DSD, this puts the amount at around £380 a month (he did actually add up an average figure of how much we have DSD over the past 4 years and it does technically trickle into the next bracket, which again would reduce payments further, but we aren't going to rock the boat too much with this, as would mean payments would be around £150 less).
He approached this with his ex, and shared the CMS calculation of £380, and she has kicked off threatening with legal action.
What are the next steps with this please? Can the CMS be reduced? Does my partner go through the official CMS route now?
Thank you!

The only way to avoid this is to not procreate with people who you can't maintain a relationship with, perhaps using the crystal ball that step mum's use to know what they are getting into.

👍👍👍

Go through CMS and if there isn’t one institute a contact order so she can’t play around with his days. So it NOW. Of course she’s kicked off. She’s been getting more than she’s entitled to officially and the Gravy Train is leaving the station without her. Be prepared for her to start with the Poor widdle Stepdaughter… lines. Don’t be surprised if SD starts parroting her mother about the new baby. Friend has this happen when her step daughter was weaponised by her mother. She caught SD with her hand over baby’s nose and mouth saying “Go away! Go away.” Get everything in place and in writing. Hopefully his ex isn’t the evil nightmare my freinds DHs ex was

@beachcitygirl

A few things.

1. You can have men in the same position, let's say every other weekend time with the kids, paying very different sums of money. One can be paying 900, another 600 and the third 300. All based on their salary level. Are they all paying the bare minimum?

1. It's a lot more than 12% of net salary in some cases.

1. The state provides additional financial support for the primary carer(usually mother) through tax credits etc.

1. Sometimes the primary carer the will be living in the old family home. The other parent stuck in some inadequate rental for years or with family etc as the capital from the old marriage is tied up for the sake of the kids.

You sound incredibly entitled

CMS is the statutory minimum contribution an NRP is required in the UK to make by law. The law allows your DP to reduce CMS if he has another child. CMS is also reduced for stepchildren living with an NRP. The law does not require an NRP to contribute to other expenses.

You’ve decided to have a child & can’t continue to support his child from a previous relationship in the same way. The law supports this Choice.

Whether it’s right, wrong, fair or not is irrelevant

I think it's a really shitty thing to do, especially with the price is everything going up.

His child is going to cost more to feed and keep warm but he's going to pay less towards this. How can that possibly be fair🤯

And the second one will be completely free and brought up on fresh air and the fact their parents are still together.

Think about what you've just said!

Well unless you're suggesting that OP either has an abortion or goes back a few months in her time machine, resources will have to be stretched across the DC just like in any family where's there's more than one child. Ok DSD's mother had no say in the decision to give her child a sibling but it doesn't alter the fact that the new baby will also need to be fed and kept warm just like their sister.

But that's the deal when you seperate. The maintenance is never guaranteed.

This is correct aside from its not a 'minimum'

It's the amount calculated that is due like income tax.

I’m not sure I agree it’s like income tax… for a start you can’t reduce income tax liability by having more children… or on the basis of another person’s children ( at least to my knowledge)

CMS is the minimum because it represents the level below which you cannot pay less.. its statutory because it’s defined in law.

Actually CMS is not the statutory minimum contribution an NRP is required in the UK to make by law, it's the minimum contribution an NRP has to make if one of the parties asks the CMS to become involved. An NRP is not breaking the law by paying less as long as it's been agreed by both parties.

But it's the legal minimum amount the NRP can get away with paying. Then it goes down, through no fault of the RP.

I just don't think you should plan another baby unless you can afford to do it without cutting CMS for existing children. Obviously accidents happen etc.

It's a lot more than 12% of net salary in some cases

Where the CMS is used, this would only be the case with multiple children, or where arrears have been accrued.

The state provides additional financial support for the primary carer(usually mother) through tax credits etc

Really? All primary carers? Plenty of people earn over the threshold and more lose access to that support when they move in with a new partner.

Sometimes the primary carer the will be living in the old family home. The other parent stuck in some inadequate rental for years or with family etc as the capital from the old marriage is tied up for the sake of the kids

Sometimes. The primary carer will, usually, still have a mortgage to pay on that 'old family home'.

But that's the deal when you seperate

It's hardly a 'deal', particularly when someone has had separation dropped on them from a great height.

You should be able to rely on your co-parent always doing their best by their children - that includes both parents working hard and the NRP paying maintenance in all but the most dire of circumstances. It should be a reliable payment and no one can convince me otherwise. Reality, however.....

The point was more that it's the amount arrived at via the calculation.

You could equally argue it's the maximum amount that has to be paid. I pay the maximum amount due as I get it calculated via cms. Of course that's nonsense but suggesting someone that works full time and pays cm via the cms is paying the minimum is also nonsense.

If you want to pretend the primary carer doesn't get support in a lot of cases that's up to you I suppose.

It's also more than 12% for one child where someone earns more than 800 per week.

Unfortunately you are not in control of what someone does after you split up with them. They could have 3 or 4 more children, lose their job, keel over from a heart attack, move to a different country, marry a millionaire and quit working, go to court and get 50/50 residency ...

There are endless things they can do which would mean that the level of maintenance due changes. It is why financial independence is vital after a split. Relying on maintaince is extremely risky.

@DebussytoaDiscoBeat well then she shouldn't be having another baby. Like you say, it's the same as other families if you can't afford to feed & clothe provide warmth for one baby then you shouldn't be having another.

Sadly she's already pregnant. So sense has flown out the window.

@beachcitygirl where does it say DSD’s mum won’t be able to afford to feed & clothe and provide warmth for her child if the CMS is reduced? She’s kicked off but it doesn’t mean it’ll actually cause her financial hardship, some people kick off mainly because they’re pissed off that their ex is no longer obliged to take their wishes into account any more than they feel inclined to.

You’re talking like the CMS is being reduced so it can be spent on fripperies but this little girl is gaining a sibling, something many parents want to give their children. We don’t have nearly enough information to judge whether OP “shouldn’t” be having a baby of her own just because another woman got there before her.

If you want to pretend the primary carer doesn't get support in a lot of cases that's up to you I suppose

you quite clearly stated that the resident parent gets government top ups - some do, some don’t.

you also quite clearly state that some resident parents get to stay in the family home, whilst omitting that in the majority of cases, there is a cost to the resident parent if that is the case.

so no, it’s not pretending the primary cared doesn’t get support. Plenty of primary carers get no additional support. Or are you suggesting the primary caters can’t possibly be high earners or people of independent means?

The law allows him to drop his payments for his other children - whether you agree with it or not.
It is extremely depressing that the first thing the NRP does when finding out that they are to have new child, is work out how much less they have to pay for their previous child/ren.
That child did not get cheaper to clothe, feed, entertain etc but the onus is put on the RP to cover the short fall or be the one to tell the child they can not do their activity, have new clothes etc.
The next step will be the child coming round less - either due to the RP being pissed off ( completely wrong) or the NRP and the new family - not wanting the DSC round when the baby is new born, they have a cold, no space etc.
Invariably a slippery slope of less monies and engagement in those who feel the need to reduce paying for their former children.

The onus is on the RP to suck up the decision of the NRP to have other children and not have enugh monies to cover their share of their childrens costs. They either subsidise the EX and the new family or they disappoint their DC - shit position to be put in when you have no control over what the EX and his new family do.

Exactly. Basically when you seperate you have to try to get into the position that if they were dead you'd be ok.

Completely agree. When I used CMS to calculate the figures my ex ended up paying £100 more. I was warned that he would no longer be paying for haircuts as he won't be providing 'extras'!!!! It is disgusting to have children and to pay the absolute minimal amount. Just like it would be disgusting if I only used 12% of my income on them... because if I did that they'd be walking around in shoes that didn't fit, coats from 2 years ago and hair over their eyes. I'm actually financially better off than my ex. I have a good job. But he chose to have children. I hate all these comments about what's wrong with men paying the set amount.... when we all know the calculation to get that amount is rubbish. What's wrong with paying the set amount and on a month you've earned a bit more thinking 'oh I think I'll buy child 1 his wellies this month'.

Anyway sorry OP slight derail there. Definitely you can pay CMS £20 to give you an amount and they send how they calculated to you and your dps ex (took around 4 weeks and then if you have difficulties you can use cms to pay the money but I wouldn't unless I had to because of the percentage they take. Maybe on occasion when your dp has money spare he could consider getting something for child 1 to help out here and there. Sounds like he would anyway as he's obviously rounded up the figure and been paying more for a long time.