Joint custody

There is no official way of doing it. One parent gets the CB and CTC ... end of story.

The other concern is, should she start to go through the CSA, then figures do matter. Although you share the children 50% of the time, the CSA will take into account earnings. So, if you out-earn your ex significantly, you will end up paying more to her, despite the 50/50 share ... I know, its the system!

Nonetheless, always something to have in the back of your mind ...

Glastowinebar - you are in a very similar situation to me - shared care.

Unfortunately it seems that we are unusual and therefore the way the legislation is written doesn't really work for us.

The CSA, if involved, do not deal with the concept of shared care, there is one PWC (Parent with Care) and one NRP (Non resident parent), this applies evevn with shared care (doesn't make sense at all).

The PWC is the one who receives the child benefit, and I believe that the legislation back in the 70's stated that this should be 'the mother' - amazingly sexist, but true.

Therefore in your situation you are the NRP, and your ex is the PWC.

That would mean that if she chose to go to the CSA she would get awarded 7.5% of your net income less £7 per week (half the Child Benefit). This is 15% for one child reduced by 3.5/7s for the avg days per week you look after the child.

It is completely unfair, and discourages shared parenting and 'good' dads - but that is how it is written.

You can get ridiculous situations with this poorly though out formula - for example.

Example A
Mum - earns £100k per annum, has Child 3 nights per week
Dad - earns £50k per annum, has Child 4 nights per week
Result = Mum receives approx £275 per month (£200 = 3/7 of 15% of net income) + child benefit

Reverse the sexes and you get

Example B
Dad - earns £100k per annum, has Child 3 nights per week
Mum - earns £50k per annum, has Child 4 nights per week
Result = Mum receives approx £575 per month (£500 = 3/7 of 15% of net income) + child benefit

So either way, the Mum gets money, the Dad gets nothing. Nothing to do with who has the child how much, just to do with who gets the Child Benefit (which has to be the Mum!)

hobo28 wrote: »

The current formula might not be fair to all but its a damn sight easier to understand and I would suggest fairer in MOST cases to the majority of families.

The old system was overcomplicated, impossible for anyone to understand and probably was the root cause of the CSA's issues. Now at least we know where we stand.

Correction - the current system is fair if you assume that the Dad is a stay away Dad or a weekends only Dad. It is completely unfair if you are a Dad who wants to be involved in the upbringing of your child.

The current system is better, but it is still very bad. Why not just use the Austrailian system which uses a % calc on both parents income and offsets them, so 50/50 care equals 12% of Dads net income minus 12% of Mums net income = maintanence.

The current system discourages shared parenting which is a terrible thing in my view.

Well there is a whole other topic for discussion - why should the ex wife get the house, and those bills if shared care is in place.

But its slightly off topic, as that would all be dealt with in the divorce.

Also its a bit of a generalisation to say the man is "with new GF", a lot of Dads don't cause the breakup in the first place, but seem to get a raw deal on everything regardless of that.

Anyway main point is that the current system is obviously flawed and should be fixed.

Just look at the scenario of 50k each and shared care - both parents have equal costs to bring their children up, have the same disposable income, yet the father has to pay the mother £270 pcm, she gets £80 in child benefit and the Dad gets nothing (other than the negative £270).