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

Bit of complex CMS situation

45 replies

whattodo33x · 05/06/2024 15:52

Hi, this is a really unusual situation and I can't find any info online of people in a similar situation so wanted to get people's thoughts on here.

DP & his ex wife have a DD 14 together, they split 5 years ago. DD has on average spent around 30% of her time round her Dad's and CMS at the time 5 years ago, was calculated to be around £550 a month. DP & his ex at the time of their split were both very high earners, ex wife even more so (plus £170k). They have a very amicable split, had just grown apart. She stayed in the family home and DP moved out and saved for a deposit on a new place so to not disrupt his DD, but kept his pension as it's a very good one. Ex wife did not want any CMS from DP as she said she was more than comfortable and very financially independent and they both split the everyday costs for DD anyway such as childcare/clubs/clothing. DP has since put the £500 he would have paid into a savings account for DD for when she gets older (hopefully for a house deposit).

Fast forward to now, and the ex has decided to take a massive career change which means her salary is also greatly reduced. She has asked for DP to start paying the CMS payments now directly to her, which is fine and DP of course agreed. The issue is, that she has now demanded the lump sum which is in DP's saving's pot he was going to give DD that he saved what would have been the CMS payments into, as ex says she needs this money now as her financial situation has changed. DP is not happy about this, as he now sees this money as DD's and wanted her to have this money. I completely understand where he is coming from, but legally I also feel that perhaps even if it feels unfair, this money saved away is actually his exes...what are people's thoughts on this? It's all got quite nasty and frosty quite quickly and I don't want this to escalate!

Just to add as don't want DP to get flamed for not paying CMS...This was completely the ex's choice, DD has had fab holiday's over the years from both parties, DP has contributed to 50% of the childcare when it was required etc and school trips etc.

Thank you and be kind x

OP posts:
FunLurker · 05/06/2024 16:09

I don't believe the ex can insist on the back dated payment as was a private agreement. Going forward they should re calculate the maintenance and that's minimum he should pay.

Womp · 05/06/2024 16:10

I don't think he would be legally obliged to give her the lump sum.

Livinghappy · 05/06/2024 16:16

What is the ex's plans for the money?

I think he should come to an agreement with his Ex especially since they have had a good relationship. If he trusts her to put their daughter first then he should hand it over. Perhaps the figure without interest. He still has at least 4 years to save up before Uni so lots of time for house deposit.

I

Tbskejue · 05/06/2024 16:30

Well no I don’t think that money is the exs; she declined the CMS so he saved money for his DD and he was paying half of costs so if you wanted to be really picky about it he could take a lot of those costs out of what he has saved. I’d also want to know why she needs that money and what her DD costs beyond £550 per month and her one contribution to DD

DaisyChain505 · 05/06/2024 17:07

No I don’t think she should get the backdated lump sum.

He is correct to start paying CMS now and saving the lump sum for her daughter.

heretodestroyyou · 05/06/2024 17:43

I think she's absolutely taking the piss. She could have claimed maintenance if she wanted/needed to and then saved it herself but she didn't and was happy with that.

Absolutely fair if she needs to claim from now on but she's got no right to the money that's been saved. Shame she even knows about it really.

What would she have done if there were no savings and has this been factored into this change of circumstances.

Mockingjay123 · 05/06/2024 17:52

No I wouldn’t view it as exes money and I’m astonished she is even wanting to take it. Your dp should never have told her he was saving that money.

millymollymoomoo · 05/06/2024 18:09

Well he should not, and won’t be expected to back date payments so he can just say no to giving the lump sum. Her choice to have forgive it and her choice to change careers and reduce salary

he can pay now based on his earnings as he’ll be expected to

althiugh Not part of the question did the ex wife receive higher than 50% of assets in divorce by keeping the house or was that all balanced by pensions ? He’s had to start from scratch whereas she didn’t in effect she’s already had a lump sum

DearestGentleReader · 05/06/2024 18:55

"Sorry, Ex, the money has been saved in your daughter's name so I cannot access it to give it to you. The End."
Silly sausage should have arranged her finances better before she changed career, instead of expecting her own child to fund it.

Cerialkiller · 05/06/2024 19:00

millymollymoomoo · 05/06/2024 18:09

Well he should not, and won’t be expected to back date payments so he can just say no to giving the lump sum. Her choice to have forgive it and her choice to change careers and reduce salary

he can pay now based on his earnings as he’ll be expected to

althiugh Not part of the question did the ex wife receive higher than 50% of assets in divorce by keeping the house or was that all balanced by pensions ? He’s had to start from scratch whereas she didn’t in effect she’s already had a lump sum

This is a really good point. Did they get a proper financial settlement when they devorced? Was it fair to the lower earner (DH).

Pickle1411 · 05/06/2024 19:53

There is no legal route she can pursue for the money that has been saved. The best bet would be to put what’s saved so far into a trust in DDs name that cannot be touched until a later date (roughly around house buying age).

Ex is entitled to a career change but how accommodating would ex be if shoe was on the other foot. If it was me, I’d pay the minimum and continue to save the shortfall into the trust fund for DD.

why should you DP have to supplement ex’s career change (more so if this is on her own volition). Can she not stick with her current career for another 2-3 years?

she’s well within her rights to ask for CMS but suggest she does the math carefully before considering CMS route as it won’t be anywhere what she’s expecting.

is the FMH mortgage free? Has this been given to ex as part of the divorce? If so then really she needs to be accountable for her daughter as much as your DP

StormingNorman · 05/06/2024 19:53

Mum shouldn’t be expecting her daughter to fund her career change. Your DP should hold onto the money for their daughter as intended.

The divorce settlement is by the by now. It sounds as if there is enough animosity without escalating it by going over old ground. It won’t do any of you any good to create more tension in the family dynamics, and I’m including you in the family as it will affect you too.

lunar1 · 05/06/2024 21:18

It's not complex. She was an incredibly high earner, your husband saved the money and continued to pay for things his dd needed.

Now she wants the maintenance, she can have it. She can't have the saved money, it's not hers to take, or your husband's to hand over. It's his daughters, and for the foreseeable future she isn't old enough to have an opinion on what happens to it. So it state where it is.

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 05/06/2024 22:23

Has their divorce gone through with financial order done?

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 05/06/2024 22:25

I thjnk he should give her something as she's obviously been spending more on daughters food and laundry and heating etc if she has her more days a week.

TeaKitten · 05/06/2024 22:27

Why doesn’t he just say he can’t access the money as it’s in a savings account that can’t be touched?

Hotgirlwinter · 05/06/2024 22:40

She cannot back date a maintenance claim
so that’s one thing.

She can claim maintenance now and he will pay it, as he should and is happy to do.

Regards to the savings, assuming they have signed a financial order post divorce then I would think it’s not complex at all. She has no right to it. He could choose to give it to her of course but he’s under no obligation to do so.

if they didn’t sign a financial order then totally different story for both of them.

One could argue that the resident parent has probably paid out more over the years and was quite generous in not taking the maintenance, so actually as you say that money could be seen as hers.

However she is only asking now because she’s making a career change and not because DD needs it per se. On that basis I’d say no it’s in child ISA sorry.

CalmDownWithChocolate · 05/06/2024 22:45

His or DD’s savings are irrelevant to her current maintenance claim. You can’t go back in time and change your mind.

LilacPanda · 06/06/2024 02:29

No way should be give her the backdated CMS. That was her choice and her choice.

Just pay her maintenance from now on. It’s not your OH fault she wants to change jobs.

Itsonlymashadow · 06/06/2024 03:24

That money is their dds. Not his or hers. That would be dd funding her career change.

EliflurtleAndTheInfiniteMadness · 06/06/2024 03:59

Legally you can't back date a CMS claim. I'm with him the XW shouldn't get that money. Now she's no longer a high earner it might be fully up to him to fund things like university, or help with rental/house deposits. If he could easily afford to replace it there might be some value in giving some of it as a gesture of good will, but otherwise Id be saving it for DDs future needs. If he'd struggle to support her through university, if she choses to go, Id be prioritising saving for that not funding his XW.

CalmDownWithChocolate · 06/06/2024 06:50

Itsonlymashadow · 06/06/2024 03:24

That money is their dds. Not his or hers. That would be dd funding her career change.

Yes this. It’s not like OH has spent his money on a flash car, he’s been mindful and when DD goes to uni and her mother has spent it all what then?

S00tyandSweep · 06/06/2024 07:34

The ex was daft to say she didn't want CMS.

According to the OP, £550 was the calculated amount (which is the minimum that the non-resident parent should pay) and the Dad put £500 a month away for his child.

So he saved less than the minimum amount and didn't increase it over the years (despite probably increasing salary).

I think Dad wants to come across as Billy Big Bollocks "look daughter, here's a massive chunk of money for you." when actually he should be saying "I've managed to save some money for you because your mum carried the full financial burden of raising you, and the money saved isn't even the minimum amount I would have contributed if she'd gone through the CMS."

By all means, the dad can give the money directly to his DC, but he should be honest that the money was saved from not having to financially support his own child, he shouldn't want a hero's welcome for it - it's literally LESS than the minimum he should have paid.

Itsonlymashadow · 06/06/2024 08:28

S00tyandSweep · 06/06/2024 07:34

The ex was daft to say she didn't want CMS.

According to the OP, £550 was the calculated amount (which is the minimum that the non-resident parent should pay) and the Dad put £500 a month away for his child.

So he saved less than the minimum amount and didn't increase it over the years (despite probably increasing salary).

I think Dad wants to come across as Billy Big Bollocks "look daughter, here's a massive chunk of money for you." when actually he should be saying "I've managed to save some money for you because your mum carried the full financial burden of raising you, and the money saved isn't even the minimum amount I would have contributed if she'd gone through the CMS."

By all means, the dad can give the money directly to his DC, but he should be honest that the money was saved from not having to financially support his own child, he shouldn't want a hero's welcome for it - it's literally LESS than the minimum he should have paid.

The mum didn’t carry the full financial burden.

The child was with the father 30% of the time AND split other costs including childcare, clothing, clubs.

Thats not the full financial burden not even close. The Ops dp had no obligation to save this money but did, in addition to splitting a lot of costs for the child with the mother.

It amazes me how anyone can think a father saving money for his child and paying half of costs must be trying to come across as ‘billy big bollocks’, because he wants to keep the savings for the child.

Starlightstarbright3 · 06/06/2024 08:38

I am also of the opinion maintenance from now ..

The savings are Dd’s