Company Directors & CSA

LizzieS_2

chriszzz wrote: »

Thats your opinion and thats all it is!! like mine, its just my opinion!! If i want to have the opinion that I think its ridiculous having to add soap powder as part of costs and how much I of it I use on the childrens clothes, well eeermmm i think ov better things to be working out, like Get a life!!

I already have a life thank you - one that doesn't revolve around working out what my husbands maintenance pays for, or checking to see if my ex is making a precisely accurate payment for his children.

I think you will find several contributors to this thread have simply explained some of the indirect costs and how - do you seriously believe anyone adds up everything

Dancing_Shoes

Soubrette wrote: »

I don't think we disagree on much here actually. I certainly do believe some PWCs are abusive although I am stunned how many of them are alleged abusive on here yet the NRP doesn't go to social services about them :eek: We DID in fact go to ss and court about this very matter but she is allowed to spend the money as she sees fit and even though the children benefit very little from our "maintenance" as long as they aren't starving there was nothing we could do:(

I recognise what you are saying about the PWCP making the household pot larger and hence a larger amount is spent on the children - I happen to agree with this and I personally would not be with a man who did not see my children and I as part of a family package - and yet though, it still sits uncomfortably with me how many NRPP's want absolutely nothing to do with financing their partner's other children and yet for the PWCP it is actually almost a given that they will. You are correct as an NRPP I refuse to finance somebody else's children:p

As to being petty - I didn't include electricity/water/council tax costs in my spreadsheet in my discussion with the ex because I wanted to be scrupulous that I could back up my costs - and I didn't want to derail the conversation with a debate on how much electricity they do actually use.... but if the ex starts getting petty on how cheap children are, then he will be served the same dish back financially.

Sou

I can actually prove (and did prove in court) that we pay enough money to cover housing costs and ALL of the costs that our pwc incurs from raising the children but yes I agree we are probably in the minority when you work it out. Our pwc sits on her behind sponging off both us and the state, she contributes NOTHING financially towards raising the children so I think we have a right to feel a bit miffed about this:rolleyes:

With regards to school trips then that isn't a neccessity it is a luxury for some children and should not be factored into maintenance but if the nrp has the funds then I think they should contribute towards half of the costs. You have to laugh we contributed towards a school trip abroad which sounded lovely.....and i'm sure the child would have loved it had it not been completely made up just to get some more money:rolleyes:

chriszzz

LizzieS wrote: »

I already have a life thank you - one that doesn't revolve around working out what my husbands maintenance pays for, or checking to see if my ex is making a precisely accurate payment for his children.

I think you will find several contributors to this thread have simply explained some of the indirect costs and how - do you seriously believe anyone adds up everything

I agree with your last remark but still in all if ppl want to go into such fine detail of what it cost you will never get an accurate sum to what a nrp should pay towards raising their children, how would you break down when all in the household is using ,the soap powder, electricity etc and its only one person who the nrp has to pay maintenance for, (that just an example).

So I still stick to my opinion that its ott. If ppl were talking about added costs ie school holidays, trips etc then i would share the same opinion, as these things are more costly and would be happy if the nrp would share these extra costs.

speedster

my stoooooooopid ex does!

trouble is, she claims poverty to me because she simply CANNOT budget.

briefly, her rent is about £380 a month and there is approx 2.5k a month coming in to their household.

poverty????? she wouldn't know what poverty was if it jumped up and bit her on the azz. she's just carp with money and expects me to pick up the tab.

muppet can go swing!! :rotfl::rotfl:

chriszzz

speedster wrote: »

my stoooooooopid ex does!

trouble is, she claims poverty to me because she simply CANNOT budget.

briefly, her rent is about £380 a month and there is approx 2.5k a month coming in to their household.

poverty????? she wouldn't know what poverty was if it jumped up and bit her on the azz. she's just carp with money and expects me to pick up the tab.

muppet can go swing!! :rotfl::rotfl:

In you case speedster i would just give her what the csa say you have to and spend what extra you want on the littluns what you will!!

There is no need for somethings in this world and one of them is dam right pettiness.

speedster

chriszzz wrote: »

In you case speedster i would just give her what the csa say you have to and spend what extra you want on the littluns what you will!!

There is no need for somethings in this world and one of them is dam right pettiness.

oh, don't worry. i do.

being ltd myelf takes care of that. plus a nice little account tucked WELL away from the ex ensures a nice tidy little nest egg for littun. :rotfl:

LizzieS_2

chriszzz wrote: »

I agree with your last remark but still in all if ppl want to go into such fine detail of what it cost you will never get an accurate sum to what a nrp should pay towards raising their children, how would you break down when all in the household is using ,the soap powder, electricity etc and its only one person who the nrp has to pay maintenance for, (that just an example).

So I still stick to my opinion that its ott. If ppl were talking about added costs ie school holidays, trips etc then i would share the same opinion, as these things are more costly and would be happy if the nrp would share these extra costs.

I wouldn't even want to disect my bills, but I can guess the hidden costs are far greater than a school trip. As I said before though, it isn't an issue for me - it does seem to be from some who question where their/their partners money goes.

I really don't think you can fairly break-down each individual case - there are so many outside factors that could influence expenditure, eg a partners choice of house due to their income. I can only see one real starting point - tax credit child element (pwc will always get CB and CTC family element) of £43pw per child. That gives a starting base for some-one on benefits, obviously the figure is higher if parents aren't on benefits as higher income generally means the child gets more.

crashcoursefortheravers

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Is it a LTD company? If so, then you can get copies of his submissions to companies house.

Alternatively, you can gather as much evidence of his lifestyle (eg get car registration number and evidence of his car, postcards from holidays he sends the children - anything) and make an application on the grounds that his lifestyle is inconsistent with his declared income. Also, does he pay himself large dividends? If so then you could ask that this be looked into and ask if they can be taken into account as earnings - if he controls the money then they may well be able to.

You know, what we need in Britain is LESS snoopers and vigilantes not more. im fed up of hearing forum users here ganging up together, offering their own advice how to persecute and harrass someone, as if they were some sort of self styled, man hating avenging sisterhood. My ex wife has lied like you wouldn't believe, shacked up with a !!!!! window cleaner in a house I paid the mortgage on every month (while she was claiming the full amount from the DSS), I've paid for everything for the kids, she goes on all inclusive luxury holidays in Cyprus, spends thousands on TVs, new furnishings etc., and yet she is harassing me through the CSA for a non existent £16,500 she claims from me, but is not entitled to. Too many women use the CSA as a way of getting even as they see it with their ex partner, and of course the CSA always believes the woman over the man everytime. Its outrageous.

kelloggs36

crashcoursefortheravers wrote: »

You know, what we need in Britain is LESS snoopers and vigilantes not more. im fed up of hearing forum users here ganging up together, offering their own advice how to persecute and harrass someone, as if they were some sort of self styled, man hating avenging sisterhood. My ex wife has lied like you wouldn't believe, shacked up with a !!!!! window cleaner in a house I paid the mortgage on every month (while she was claiming the full amount from the DSS), I've paid for everything for the kids, she goes on all inclusive luxury holidays in Cyprus, spends thousands on TVs, new furnishings etc., and yet she is harassing me through the CSA for a non existent £16,500 she claims from me, but is not entitled to. Too many women use the CSA as a way of getting even as they see it with their ex partner, and of course the CSA always believes the woman over the man everytime. Its outrageous.

Actually what we need is less people trying to fiddle their way out of paying their fair share - including in the tax system. There are many NRPs out there who earn a hell of a lot of money who pay NOTHING in child support because of the loopholes that they manage to find. All we are doing is getting what is right and fair by the child. Too many NRPs use the CSA as a way to pay nothing and then bleat on about how unfair it is that the PWC dares to ask them to support their own children!!!!¬

speedster

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Actually what we need is less people trying to fiddle their way out of paying their fair share - including in the tax system. There are many NRPs out there who earn a hell of a lot of money who pay NOTHING in child support because of the loopholes that they manage to find. All we are doing is getting what is right and fair by the child. Too many NRPs use the CSA as a way to pay nothing and then bleat on about how unfair it is that the PWC dares to ask them to support their own children!!!!¬

tosh.

too many money grabbing PWC's who get greedy. just like my ex.

greed is an ugly emotion, and coupled with spite, makes it even more dispicable.