Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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

Drop in income means drop in maintenence- or aibu?

296 replies

goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 08:42

Name changed recently as I posted on style and beauty and someone might recognise the outfit!

Anyway. DH works contracts- he always has. His pay increases or stays the same with each contract. It lasts about 2-3 years per contract. He increases his maintenence payments in line with the cms calculator each time.

He is struggling to find the next contract- demand has fallen and competition for the roles has increased. So he's started looking into permanent positions. These all seem to come with a lower salary.

He's started applying and gave the ex a heads up that in 3 months he's going to have to look at the maintenance and as he's looking for a permanent position for stability it will probably go down.

All hell has broken loose - she claims maintenance should stay the same even if I have to subsidise it.

For info as I know everyone hates a drip feed. he and I both have well paid jobs. We have one shared DC. We have mortgage. Ex works term time only (not a teacher) and has no mortgage or rental commitments. DSC are all at secondary school.

Aibu to think its ridiculous for her to expect him to keep a career decision made 15+ years ago when they were together and she'll just have to accept the drop on maintenance?

OP posts:
monsteramunch · 10/08/2023 10:10

She can if she wants but then that won't include the extras then will it..

So if he had to pay through CMS, he would actively choose not to contribute to the extras he does now? Even though it would be the same amount he paid each month?

Why? As some sort of punishment?

Spacecowboys · 10/08/2023 10:11

No you shouldn’t be expected to subsidise child maintenance from your income. Another woman’s children are not your financial responsibility and it’s ludicrous of her to even suggest it. However, if your household is very comfortable, plenty of money spare for holidays, days out , savings etc despite the pay cut then it may be in the children’s best interests to keep maintenance the same. The fact that his ex ‘expects’ you to subsidise her kids may make you’re reluctant to do this though and I wouldn’t blame you for thinking that way.

AndyMcFlurry · 10/08/2023 10:14

No he only get to reduce the maintenance he pays for his children if his income has dropped my more than 25%. That’s the CMS rules which you say he agreed to.

Given that he only works part time ( as he’s term time only ) I’m sure he won’t want his children to suffer for this. Perhaps he could look at picking up some other work during the his 13 weeks a year holidays .

AnneLovesGilbert · 10/08/2023 10:16

It’s the ex who’s part time. Maybe she could use 13 weeks to work a bit more. Especially when the kids are with their dad for half of all holidays…

holabiatches · 10/08/2023 10:16

To those saying he should pay half of all children’s expenses, it’s unreasonable. You’re not considering that he has to pay 100% of a home for DC. He can’t pay 50% of costs at mum’s ie gas, electricity, etc plus all of the expenses at his own home (keeping in mind he probably has a larger house to accommodate DC that the OP is likely also contributing towards).

In a nuclear family, an adult takes a pay cut then belts are tightened accordingly. This should be the same for separated families.

holabiatches · 10/08/2023 10:17

@AndyMcFlurry
agreeing to the rules ie using the calculator is different to being under CMS.

OP, if CMS haven’t officially calculated and it’s simply worked out via the online calculator then you can reduce it how you like.

whitewinefriday · 10/08/2023 10:20

AnneLovesGilbert · 10/08/2023 10:16

It’s the ex who’s part time. Maybe she could use 13 weeks to work a bit more. Especially when the kids are with their dad for half of all holidays…

This

firstpregnancy1 · 10/08/2023 10:31

Surely a key thing is how much the overall maintenance is?

If usual maintenance is 300 and he's looking to drop it to 200 that's quite shitty and significant.

If he's a high earner and the 'minimum' cms is £1000pm and he's looking to drop it to £900 a month then that's an entirely different story. If she has no mortgage or rent to pay on her own house especially.

OP I think you would get more realistic responses if you said much he pays in the first place. There's a big difference

TeddyBeans · 10/08/2023 10:37

goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 09:54

And fair enough if CMS will only reduce it when it drops by 25% I assume they also don't recalculate it every time there's a bonus or a payrise

It's adjusted every year based on that years income and you can request a recalculation I think twice a year if you have reason to believe the paying parents income has changed/the paying parents can request if they believe their income has changed by more than 25%

Goldbar · 10/08/2023 10:38

It's difficult really to judge. I mean, paying the CMS minimum (and it is really a minimum) is not great. But it does sound like he pays for some things on top of that.

And it's true that all households are feeling the pinch with CoL increases and rates increasing, so that does mean discretionary spending on days out and activities is being reduced in lots of families.

I guess the thing that sucks with separated parents/stepchildren etc. is that it's very hard to say overall whether the decisions being made are in the children's best interests. There are three (or four) adults involved, only two of whom are necessarily obliged to take decisions in the best interests of their children and only one of whom often actually does so. And often there are other children involved so their interests have to be balanced as well in a situation where there are limited resources.

I don't know whether HINBU or HIBU. It depends on the impact on the children of the decisions he is taking weighed against any alternatives available to him. If he spends thousands on hobbies and holidays while his kids won't be able to do their activities or go on days out, then that's pretty reprehensible.

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:40

harriethoyle · 10/08/2023 08:53

Nope. She's definitely BU. There's no way you are responsible for subsidising her. Stupid woman.

Why is she stupid? everyone has bills - she has more if she’s supporting the children, so him reducing his contribution will impact on them.

Uptoyou34 · 10/08/2023 10:42

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:40

Why is she stupid? everyone has bills - she has more if she’s supporting the children, so him reducing his contribution will impact on them.

Show quote history

I mean, she could always work full time?

Goldbar · 10/08/2023 10:42

AnneLovesGilbert · 10/08/2023 10:16

It’s the ex who’s part time. Maybe she could use 13 weeks to work a bit more. Especially when the kids are with their dad for half of all holidays…

I disagree with this because they are both parents and both have a responsibility to contribute equally to their children to ensure they have a decent quality of life.

Maybe she should contribute more. But that shouldn't be to plug the gaps in their father's contribution. He still needs to make a fair contribution, which minimum CMS rarely is.

And ultimately the responsibility of providing your children with a decent life is morally a joint and several one. You can't escape it by claiming that the other parent isn't doing their bit. If one parent falls short, it is the other parent's responsibility to make good their shortcomings for the sake of the children.

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:45

goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 09:02

They don't need a better quality of life. If they did their mum would work more.

Show quote history

Do you really mean this “they don't need a better quality of life”? Because it makes you sound awful!!!
I’d be interested to see the whole financial picture in terms of how he managed to work his way up to a well paid job whilst she works TTO in no doubt a lesser paid job. How much of the childcare did he do when the children were young? How much of it does he do now? What happened to ensure his ex got a house outright when they divorced?

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:49

OP, when you read all your posts together on this thread, you don't come across well. In reality, it’s none of your business what he pays for his children.

Original poster
goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 10:49

monsteramunch · 10/08/2023 10:10

She can if she wants but then that won't include the extras then will it..

So if he had to pay through CMS, he would actively choose not to contribute to the extras he does now? Even though it would be the same amount he paid each month?

Why? As some sort of punishment?

No because she will have changed what she wants?

OP posts:
Original poster
goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 10:51

TeddyBeans · 10/08/2023 10:37

It's adjusted every year based on that years income and you can request a recalculation I think twice a year if you have reason to believe the paying parents income has changed/the paying parents can request if they believe their income has changed by more than 25%

Show quote history

So he's been adjusting it up when the CMS wouldn't make him then.

OP posts:
Original poster
goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 10:52

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:45

Do you really mean this “they don't need a better quality of life”? Because it makes you sound awful!!!
I’d be interested to see the whole financial picture in terms of how he managed to work his way up to a well paid job whilst she works TTO in no doubt a lesser paid job. How much of the childcare did he do when the children were young? How much of it does he do now? What happened to ensure his ex got a house outright when they divorced?

Show quote history

Their quality of life is very nice.

Her parents died.

OP posts:
Original poster
goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 10:53

Soontobe60 · 10/08/2023 10:49

OP, when you read all your posts together on this thread, you don't come across well. In reality, it’s none of your business what he pays for his children.

Hi thanks. I agree what he pays for his kids is none of my business. What is my business is that she is demanding that because I earn well that my income should count for something and he should carry ok paying as he is. We have a mortgage. So I should pay more towards this because she won't accept a reduction in maintenance?

OP posts:
Unexpectedlysinglemum · 10/08/2023 10:54

@goldensquaresofjoy
Re 'she should be embarrassed' I can see how you feel you're not a cash cow for this lady and her child BUT

If my ex meets a rich lady who supports him and off the back off this he decides to quit working or work part time I would think HE should be embarrassed for not providing for his child and living off a woman.

But wishing embarrassment on other people doenst really get us anywhere. As I said before she can ask for what she wants but she'll only get what she's entitled to as annoying as that is for her. The only exception if they were married and they haven't got the financial order finalized and she went through courts - then they would they your income into account as unfair as that feels for you as he lives with you and you house him

Original poster
goldensquaresofjoy · 10/08/2023 10:55

AndyMcFlurry · 10/08/2023 10:14

No he only get to reduce the maintenance he pays for his children if his income has dropped my more than 25%. That’s the CMS rules which you say he agreed to.

Given that he only works part time ( as he’s term time only ) I’m sure he won’t want his children to suffer for this. Perhaps he could look at picking up some other work during the his 13 weeks a year holidays .

Um.. no he agreed to use the cms calculator to work it out.

And what are you on about? He doesn't work part time. She does. Perhaps she could look at picking up some other work during the holidays 🤔

OP posts:
Unexpectedlysinglemum · 10/08/2023 10:56

Sorry I also thought your ex was working part time, please ignore my previous post.

kirinm · 10/08/2023 10:58

EekGoesTheBaby · 10/08/2023 08:47

It's based on income, so yes it should be recalculated. She's being ridiculous. Just follow what cms says. She was happy to take the ups. Now she needs to deal with the downs.

Happy to take the ups? When she's looking after children who are also his?!

ChristmasCrumpet · 10/08/2023 11:00

All hell has broken loose - she claims maintenance should stay the same even if I have to subsidise it.

When I'd stopped laughing, I'd ask her why she thought as their actual parent, she was entitled to only work part time and only financially support them at that level, whilst expecting voluntary handouts from an unrelated person.

The father hasn't cut his hours deliberately. It's the only job he can get now. The ex would be taking the same cut in household income if she were still his partner. It's life.

Goldbar · 10/08/2023 11:01

Obviously your income shouldn't have anything to do with this. But it does sound like she's having a huff because CM payments might be reduced and you're having a huff because, in her huff, she mentioned it.

Also, if your income is irrelevant, then so is any inheritance she received from her parents. You can't have it both ways... if she could make do with less because she got her parents' house then arguably your OH could also make do with less because he's living with you. Both of these are irrelevant factors.

The real question is what it is reasonable for him to contribute towards his children, given what he earns and his lifestyle. If their mother doesn't need the money for their day-to-day expenses, it could always be saved for them.