Drop in income means drop in maintenence- or aibu?

[goldensquaresofjoy]

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?

I think your issue is kind of wit your partner- how do you divide your own finances as a couple?
Can you agree that any extra money he chooses to give on top of cms comes from his 'fun money' or personal spending budget not from your joint home expenses like the mortgage- that would seem most fair to me.

Again, the ex is allowed to complain and ask for more if she wants to. The issue is what your DH chooses to do about this.

The ex is probably only working part time as she has no one to help her with childcare in evenings and weekends, wrap around childcare is very expensive especially if on minimum cms payments! He's chosen to leave his children in her care and this does impact her career

@Unexpectedlysinglemum I see what you mean. Maybe she doesn't understand this isn't really a choice. The contracts are just so highly fought for he keeps trying but he needs a job

Yeah I guess that makes sense because then he'll still contribute to this household according to income so I wouldn't be subsidising the maintenance. Thank you very much that's the reason I like mumsnet- sometimes it just needs that outside input to help clear things up

This!!!

Did I imagine this, or are they all in high school, where this doesn't really apply.

I've always thought the legal amount to pay was a joke but you can't pay her more. Dc should come first though.

That's a bit patronising to mum though isn't it? If she needs it then she can easily earn it herself if she needed more.

1. She has a partner who also has kids and they DSC regularly spend time with her partner and kids without mum there while she does stuff at the house.

1. Wrap around childcare is expensive no matter what your income is. She doesn't use it though as they are at secondary school plus see above re partner.

And he offered to be primary resident parent when they split - it would have been easy for him to work flexibly and part time to look after them but she refused and insisted she go part time instead. She had a choice.

Looking after children takes time. Unless you use childcare prices it’s hard to quantify that but that it’s input from her.

She’s also housing them. Saying there is no mortgage or rent is disingenuous as she is housing them using her finances. He rinheritance is her money.
(presumably also means she has no parental support)

If she claimed through official channels saying she wouldn’t then get extras for uniform etc makes you sound bitter. That could still continue.

The fact that he was using the cams calculated amount when he was well paid doesn’t come across well. Even with a few extras

1. Having them weekends and school holidays when it’s convenient for you, won’t encourage your ex back to work. If you want her to work full time you need to plan your days with stepkids to suit her. That may mean completely 50% during all weekdays and holidays but that she gets them on weekends.
2. CMS is the legal minimum your DH needs to give to his kids. But income drops of less than 25% will not result in a decrease - is he confident his calculations were correct, because if his ex goes through CMS officially they could ask for past payments?
3. In a normal stepfamily (outside mumsnet), stepmums do often plug the gap in unofficial arrangements like this — either through childcare (which it seems you’re doing) or by paying. In fact in most cases when the stepmum is a professional it actually costs more to stay at home. So you might be better off as a family if you paid for their care/holiday clubs instead.

Then frankly, she can feck off.

She actively chose to work less, and receive high maintenance, even though her DC had the better option of an equal time with their father. Funny that.

And now she's complaining that the maintenance option isn't paying the dividends it used too. Fine. Back to what dad wanted, them spending half the week with their dad and no maintenance due at all then! She's got no excuse not to actually go out and work then. See what happens when the prospect of her having to work full time to pay for her own children is put on the table. I think we both know the answer.

Yes, very true. Most of my friends and acquaintances are high earners - using cms to calculate maintenance / support is viewed negatively and can ruin reputations when it comes out. So I get why OP name changed.

Ok she's not entitled to more then.

They agreed on the cms amount at mediation. I believe part of this was also that he'd have no claim on her assets.

I'd agree with this. Most high earners I know tend to fund things like school fees/trips/holidays/significant extracurriculars for their children. There is an expectation of a certain access to opportunities for your children; that's a large part of why people work in these kinds of job. Expecting your kids to make do with the absolute minimum would be unusual amongst most people in this income bracket.

Was he primary carer before the split?

If not, this feels like a pretty empty offer.

He does he pays for half these things and we make sure they have a great time when they are with us on holidays etc

@asterdaisy that's a silly thing to say, for all we know he could be paying her £40k a year etc. - and bear in mind if she isa low earner she could probably claim UC too- as child maintanance doesn't count ( I personally think it should if it's consistent and above £6k a year)

OP make sure your DH stays firm.

As each child gets to 18 and leaves secondary education, he will start handing over money to the child directly particularly if they go to university, so the maintenance he pays her directly will go down. She kick off each time.

I think some of you might have a different idea of "high earner" than me. We aren't landed gentry.

Some couples don't have primary carers.

I know a couple who don't so now one of them has split up their child does 50/50.

I think she'd be OK with that? That seems like what he is planning to do anyway. Do you think he should let her know that when the eldest starts college maybe? Then she won't have to save.

Not really but nor was she