Help us regain overnight contact with the kids

[NewAlmostStepMum]

Bit of a long story, but we really need some advice ASAP!

My partner has two lovely kids who we both adore (they're 3 & 4). His contact with them has increased since we moved in together, and they have been staying overnight with us two nights a week, and every other weekend Fri-Mon AM. Not only has this been great for my partner (and me ), but the kids are obviously benefiting hugely from spending time in a home where they come first. Their mother is lax when it comes to dressing/cleaning/feeding the children and we are constantly dismayed by things such as dirty underwear, neglect of medical conditions e.g. ezcema and the kind of language used in front of the children.

My partner has been fair in paying maintenance since he and ex split, plus she gets all the CB/TC and is living in the 'family home'. However, he has altered the amount of maintenance to reflect the number of nights they now spend with us, and ex has decided that rather than sacrifice the cash, she will just stop us having the children overnight. She believes that we have increased contact with the children to lower the maintenance payments- no mention of love, our wish to spend time with the kids, or any consideration of the children's wishes/needs etc AT ALL She has 'offered'that we can take the children out, or to our house, on the two evenings a week, but that we have to take them back to hers for bedtime. This is nonsense and means our quality time with the children will mainly be spent in traffic and explaining why the routine they are used to has changed.

Cut a long story short- how can we stop her doing this? She has demanded that we see her in court, and things were going down that route anyway, but we can't wait for months to sort this out. Is there some kind of order we can apply for in the meantime? My partner has 50% PR and we are able to offer a stable environment, routine etc. She is now quoting that we are unable to get the oldest to school on time, and that this is the reason for the change, but it's not true- it's all over the £24 loss to her pocket. Please help/advise, we're so miserable over this.

if it went to court your overnights would be re instated! so file your c1 and waste no more time with her.....you can't reason with people like this

the wiki forums are quite good with this stuff,take a look at www.wikivorce.com

When you say £24 ... do you mean per week or month?

Also, how long did this overnight business last, and when did it stop?

Thanks Tiffany

£24 per week, although he was overpaying her anyway, so it's not as big a drop as it may sound. They've been overnighting for the last 6 weeks and there's been absolutely no problems until this...

Agree with Tiffany, bang it into court ASAP. The status quo is everything in the family courts.

Was the previous arrangement (ie 2 nights a week) agreed by consent between the parents or court ordered?
How long was that arrangement in place?
Does your DP have PR (Parental Responsibility)

How long was the previous shared care arrangement in place for. With a Fri-Mon and 2 o/n's per week this is basically shared care.

Do the children attend nursery?

Where would you normally collect/drop-off the children (e.g. was it from nursery or from the ex's).

As the children were benefiting, particularly in light of the children's care being somewhat neglected (have you proof of this btw, has it been raised with GP?) then the ex would need to have some concrete reasons for changing this status quo. The children must be wondering what on earth has happened to their routine - this cannot be good for them I would imagine.

If the ex's reasons for unilaterally trying to alter this arrangement are financial then that is NOT a child-centric reason.

Contact and money are not linked - in law at least, however, in practice many parents make this link as less o/n's at one parent = less money... totally wrong.

Does dad have PR? If he is named as father on the birth certificate then he automatically does.

There is nothing actually to stop dad from collecting the children from school (if that is what he used to do) and re-instating the previous schedule. This is something to think about.

As there are no court orders in place, there is nothing to prevent dad re-instating the shared care arrangement that have presumably been arrived at by consent.

The ex has no power or authority to unilaterally change the childrens parenting arrangements and disrupt their routine and stability. Possession is 9/10'ths of the law.

So you have some choices to make.

I would also advise you first to hook up with your local branch of Families Need Fathers (I'm the branch chair of my local branch) "www.fnf.org.uk"

You would normally be advised to propose family mediation to the ex. You can sort all this out yourself and find the local branch of Mediation to the ex. Find out how long their waiting list is, how much Mediation costs (if the ex is eligible for legal aid, she would have to go to Mediation first anyway).

Dad should do all of this, make an appt for himself first and go to it. Mediation should then write to the ex inviting her to attend.

Write to the ex stating the previous parenting arrangement and how long it had been in place. State that the children benefited from this and for the stability and routine of the children, in their best interests, this should be reinstated.

You have not agreed to this unilateral change of parenting arrangement and hope that you can both work together constructively for the child's best interests. To this end you propose Family Mediation to discuss parenting matters, you have made enquiries, they are available for Mediation on XYZ days and you extend the invitation for the ex to attend.

Ask the ex to respond that she is willing to attend Mediation, request that she responds within 2 weeks or you will have no other option but to make an appplication to Court so that an independent agency can make a decision as you both obviously cannot agree on matters.

In the meantime get along to your local FNF meeting or have a chat on the helpline/contact the local branch chair.

If you do end up making an application to Court it would be on a C100 form and I would imagine you would be applying for a Shared Residence Order.

The cost for a C100 is £175, there is no need to use a solicitor - you can do most of the work yourself (employing a solicitor later on if need be).

On the other hand you could look into using the help of a McKenzie friend. Some charge for this, others only ask for their costs to be covered. Some McKenzie's will also accompany you to Court and help out. Most McKenzie's will be able to prepare and help out with statements etc.

Keep a diary and write everything in it, note all that you have said here

Hi yerblurt and thanks for such a long and considered response.

Unfortutately the shared care arrangement has only been in place for the last 6 weeks; prior to that we had the same pattern minus the weekday overnights (we changed this as soon as my partner was able to alter his working hours from a shift pattern). His solicitor tells us this isn't long enough to claim it as routine, although I think it is plenty long enough for two children who are passed from pillar to post with their mother and for whom this was a reliable and stable event in their lives. My partner has PR and he's gone ahead with your suggestion and proposed mediation- thanks for that.

The only reason for the change is financial and it really upsets me that my partners ex is willing to do this for the sake of a little extra cash. When the children are in her 'care' they are never with her anyway, but with cousins/aunts/her partner/grandma. It isn't that she wants to spend more time with them.

Could you afford to give her the extra cash for a few months until the routine is established? You'll be in a stronger position to go to court and you could use the fact that she is willing to sell her children's company for the night for £12, IYSWIM.

My DH's X offered him contact for money once, but it was £1000 for an afternoon.

I think we could do that

Yes we were offered a couple of hours for £150 last night. Got that one on tape

"My partner has been fair in paying maintenance since he and ex split, plus she gets all the CB/TC"

but she would get that anyway, if she and your partner were still together. CB goes to the mother (if there is one).

TBH, I think it was probably a mistake on your partner's part to reduce the maintenance - did he do this of his own volition?

If he starts saying 'I have the children overnight now, therefore I am going to pay you less because I have care of them more,' then I'm afraid it is making it about money.

Now you are in a cycle of 'see you in court' and 'he said 'she said'. When actually, you sounded as if you had a workable arrangement which was, most importantly benefitting the children. By moving the goal posts (your DH did that by withdrawing the money) the children are again caught in the middle. Was the £24 a week absolutely vital to you?

As yerblurt said, "Contact and money are not linked - in law at least, however, in practice many parents make this link as less o/n's at one parent = less money... totally wrong."

And yet your partner also made this link when he reduced the payments for more overnights.

I don't think the father should have reduced the maintenance just because it now suits him to take the children overnight. I'd be fairly annoyed too - although I wouldn't stop the access.

Merrylegs, we were advised by DPs solicitor to go through the CSA with the payments and due to the o/ns they inevitably reduced. All I'm trying to say is that it's completely unreasonable for her to expect to receive maintenance as if DP had no contact when we are caring for the children 7/14 nights, and to try and trade off time with the children for cash. Bit upset by this comment TBH

I'm not surprised you're upset - I think that is very unfair and not at all what I meant when I suggested you keep paying for a bit.

If they were together they would both be getting CB/TC as part of the income of the household.

Having the DC's two nights a week means they spend more money on them, and the X doesn't have to - the money is for the children, not their mother.

If it does go to court, make sure you ask for an interim order at the current level of contact (eg with the overnights), as she sounds just the sort of person who will stop all contact as a punishment for you taking her to court, without a thought for the children.

CB is paid to the mother. TBH, you made no mention of the solicitor's advise to contact CSA in your OP. It read as if your partner had decided to reduce payment in lieu of the extra o/ns. It could have been construed that he was in effect asking for a refund for looking after his own children. Perhaps that is how the children's mother has taken it? I am not saying she is in the right, but it's all very well to say 'the solicitor advised us to inform the CSA' - it means nothing in terms of an emotional response from her. You have said some rather contentious things about her on this thread and I am sure the tension on both sides is very difficult.

Really Merrylegs. DD's CB is paid to DP, so no it is not just paid to mothers.

AlmostNew don't get upset just concentrate on advice that is useful to you! That advice will mostly come from other step parents. Ignore unhelpful stuff, people do like to criticise step mums, we are all evil after all.

Good advice from mmred! Yep it would be advisable to get at least 6 months 50:50.
Oh and well done on getting audio evidence.
I think you are being very level headed and savvy.

DP and I are in a similar situation btw. DSD's mum cares for DSD very poorly whilst having a good time socialising/buying stuff for herself/ eating out etc. Its really painful for DP and I to see DSD treated like that.
We however never go out, I have holes in my trousers, shop at Lidl/charity shops etc. Always struggling to make ends meet.

Btw my DP is yerblurt.

For the sake of £24.00 you are all going to put each other and your children through this - MADNESS!!

You are all being bloody silly and selfish. £24.00 ???? , it costs an absoulte fortune to bring a child up these days just wait till they are at school and need uniforms school dinners trips, will you be arguing over every single penny????

I have never said anything about 'evil stepmothers'. It was the OP who has implied that the mother may be in some way neglectful. The OP's original post said that the father had altered the maintenance to reflect the fact he had his children o/n. The OP was upset and angry that the mother's reaction to this was to stop the o/ns. I was merely pointing out that from the father's point of view, his actions might be seen as reasonable. From the mother's point of view, it might be seen as churlish - and now the goalposts have been moved, the reduction in maintenance is being used as a stick to beat him with, rightly or wrongly.

I hope the mother agrees to mediation and that it works.

I can see why she'd be upset, if it were done without warning or discussion - how did she find out about the reduction?

However, the way she's reacted is totally unacceptable and I'd consider going to court as soon as possible. It clearly gives her the message that it isn't down to her to decide whether or when your dp sees his own children.

However, what I would weigh up is whether the stress and cost of going to court is going to be worth it for the extra £24 per month (it is per month isn't it?). You might find that you'll pay more than that in legal costs.

The other thing with court is that it completely polarises the two parties, it can get really nasty. And this isn't like a friendship, for example, where you can just walk away and have nothing to do with her, all of you are going to be in each others' lives for good because of the children and it might just be worth thinking more long term about building a good relationship with her, because IME that pays dividends. It just may not be worth rocking the boat over £24 per month if you can afford it.

What I don't get though is that if she has the children for 7/14 nights, and you have them for 7/14 isn't that half of the time each and therefore no maintenance is payable?

The CSA set maintenance covers only basic needs for the child - surely most parents would want more than this for their children.

If these children are turning up filty and unkempt then surely that is a matter for social sevices ??????

If the mother does not seem to be coping (two under fives is exhausting as many mums will tell you) then it is a good thing that she seems to be getting support from her family. Surely as a father he should offer more help, and not expect financial gain for it.

To reduce her money without warning was not fair, especially in the run up to Christmas. She may have had bills coming out that would have bounced!!

If you think it is worth going to court over £12.50 per child that is up to you but try to think about the inpact on your children or stepchildern first!!!!!!

Classic catch 22 situation for step parents and NRP's. The RP does something that is completely out of order, using withdrawal of contact with the children as a way of punishing the NRP (something that qualifies as DV, BTW) and it is all the NRP's fault.

Obviously you should pay her way over the odds in gratitude for being allowed to 'look after your own children' because obviously the fact that you have to pay for the children's basic needs doesn't count at all and you should give the money you would have spent on the children when they were with you to the mother - in fact if you think it is worth the bother of going to court just to get to see your own kids when you could just pay her for them...how selfish of you!

So now the mother is now guilty of domestic violence? This is how things get blown up when you go through the court system - no thought of the impact on the children?

The OP was was unreasonable to stop maintenance without discussion or warning.

The RP was unreasonable to stop overnights (she has not stopped all contact)

Why not go to mediation, not just for show, but to actually talk to one another and do what is best for the children ( which is not escallating this argument any further ) Reach a compromise!!!!!FGS!!

He hasn't stopped maintenance though has he? He's still paying what he is meant to, he has just reduced the extra. The money thing works both ways, and this point has already been made, if he is looking after them more, it will cost him more so why shouldn't he have the extra cash to cover those things.

It does sound like NASM's dp has tried to negotiate with her and she isn't budging, otherwise she'd be saying "I'll see you in mediation" not "I'll see you in Court". But it would definitely be worth another try if she were willing to go to mediation.

Sorry, worded that wrongly, they stopped paying PART of their maintenance WITHOUT DISCUSSION OR WARNING which in my humble opinion WAS COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE!

It does not sound like nasm's partner has tried to reason with her, it sounds like he has tried to merely get his own way!

Maybe both parties could compromise. For the sake of the children, who we all seem to be forgetting. Or sd it they could all drag each other through the courts and ignore the proven damage this does to kids, they could slg the mum off and she could sl*g them off and in the end there will be no winners, only very confused and damaged children.

I agree that reducing the level of financial support she was receiving, (and without, by the sound of it discussing it with the children's mother beforehand), sounds in itself unreasonable. As the children's mother, i would have been livid! of course that is no justification for refusing overnight contact, but this is how 'tit for tat' starts.