Uniform costs part of CMS payments?

[Odellio]

SS starts secondary school in September. Is it normal that uniform costs are split between parents in addition to CMS payments for the NRP? Or would uniform costs be covered by CMS?

I agree with this. Some NRPs pay way over CMS and in those cases it feels a bit petty to then get requests for more.

But if ex is paying bare minimum then absolutely larger one-off costs should be split.

The closest the CMS gets to stipulating what it's for is "contribution to essentials" . But any parent who only provided the bare essentials would be considered neglectful so if an RP chooses to provide their kids with hobbies, more than one pair or shoes, pocket money, tech, days out, school trips those are luxuries that the NRP doesn't have to contribute to? Both of my teens wear glasses. Even with the NHS voucher that can be a chunk. They're in adult clothes and shoes, they have (inexpensive) phone contracts and need laptops for school. They don't get less expensive as they get older (if you take childcare out of the equation which is a whole other thread).
Ultimately, an RP doesn't get to ringfenced % of their salary and keep the rest. The kids needs are elastic and the RP is the one who has to stretch if the NRP won't offer "extra". An NRP can usually work more, longer hours, do overnight work, take promotions not available to an RP so I don't have huge sympathy with the "I don't earn enough to give more" argument. My ex chose to step back from management roles for an easier life and gives me not a penny more than CMS. I contribute way more than he does to our kids, despite earning slightly less. He rarely sees them (his choice and increasingly theirs).

The minimum argument doesn't stack up because its based on income and can vary widely.

Sadly a higher earning NRP can be penalised as less nights they have with the kids yhe more cm they must pay.

I'd be interested in hearing how cm should be reformed in a way for RP and NRPs

An NRP can usually work more, longer hours, do overnight work, take promotions not available to an RP so I don't have huge sympathy with the "I don't earn enough to give more" argument.

That's bollocks. Being a NRP doesn't mean you suddenly have all this free time 😂My DH is classed as the NRP but the split is actually that we have them 6 days out of 14. So ex has them for 1 day more than he does.

@CandiedPrincess I said "usually" as in an NRP who sees them four nights a month. If you're doing 6/14 that's almost 50/50 so I would imagine there's not much maintenance to pay and you share most expenses as they're with you so much. That's NOT the scenario that many NRPs have. My ex absolutely could earn double what he does if he could be arsed. I can't because I would need a live in nanny to do it. We do the same job. And no, he doesn't want 50/50 or anything close.

Mad posts on here. Who calculates the RP's contribution to make sure it's in line with income and they're not paying more than they can afford?
Oh, right, nobody. The RP has to deal with actual reality.

The minimum for their income. It's not difficult.

How is an NRP "penalised" by having to adequately support their kids in line with their high income? Should children of a wealthy parent not get to benefit from that wealth because he won't actually care for them himself? The other option is always 50/50..but of course they can't possibly do that because they have a "big job" but then also resent paying the other parent a decent CMS amount when their earning potential is severely curtailed. The result is kids living 90% of the time or more with the lower earning RP in a less good standard of living than they ought to have while the NRP bemoans the CMS and the "lazy" ex.

Your inability to consider an NRPs point of view doesn't make it 'mad'

21% of net income on cm is a considerable chunk of income.

When 75% of your net income goes on pretty much unavoidable outgoings it starts to make sense. Especially when anything fun you want to do with the kids comes out of that residual 25%

Ah right. So 400/800/1200 can all be the minimum.

Logic would suggest that for an area of the country depending on number of nights a minimum figure could be calculated. But what your suggesting is regardless of cm paid it's the minimum because its income contingent.

Sound logic :)

The point I was making is if an individual say doesn't work and claims benefits as an NRP they would only pay cm of 7 pound per week. In that circumstance provided there's no safe guarding concerns I wouldn't expect an RP to object to that person having the kids half the time.

A NRP paying 800 quid a month say due to having the kids every other weekend may meet resistance if they want the kids more as maintenance will go down considerably. This is when the cases have to be fought in court as I know from first hand experience.

Interestingly no suggestions forthcoming on how cms should be reformed to be more equitable...

@DWK123 oh I've made plenty of suggestions other threads but here you go:

1. CMS to be a properly staffed and funded dept of HMRC so it's quicker and easier to ascertain the true financial picture.

1. 50/50 a notional starting point to sorted out in mediation or court if unavoidable. Courts properly funded and no advantage to having a £££ barrister. Simple common sense arguments regarding childcare arrangements heard by specialist judges who are not all old, white men.

1. Realistic actual costs submitted based on regional averages for childcare, school transport etc

1. Expert independent financial body to produce and annually review a list of average expenses that a parent might reasonably incur...including hobbies. Not the "essentials" only and that to be used in annual review meetings for every family using the service.

1. An expectation that a child will be supported by a double income. If the NRP is on benefits, an additional payment should be made to the RP in lieu of a sensible contribution from them. Depending on the reasons for not working, this can accrue as a debt to the state that does not get written off, unlike current arrears. Not all RPs receive UC. Many do work full time and earn too much to get any help but not so much they can do things easily with minimal input from the NRP.

There's probably loads you can pick holes in there..it's been a long day and my tea is getting cold, but the general gist is funding and staffing so each case can be assessed and reviewed in detail. The broad bands as it stands now are full of holes and enforcement is appalling. Courts are too slow and out of touch with all sides. I can't get too hett up about "unfair" demands on NRPs when billions are outstanding and rewritten off debts owed to children.

Child maintenance should be decoupled from time spent with a particular parent and the preference should move away from 50/50 shared care

I agree with a lot of what you say here.

I think your second point is the main one. A far less adversial system which could be applied in the majority of cases. Whereas what seems to happen at present is individuals are pushed towards solicitors and then it all becomes a dog fight on finances and time with children. A lot of needless allegations and bad behaviour which I understand is often suggested by the legal profession for positioning.

I recognise NRPs in some cases deserve criticism but some don't. I suppose it all depends which side if the fence people sit on.

I actually don;t think that's the issue with CMS as any court judgement on child maintenance is superseded by them after 12 months anyway. The only way to circukvent that is in the financial order of divorce for fees etc.