Company Directors & CSA

Dancing_Shoes

As I said our budget is £400 for 4 per month this includes all our washing powder and softener etc.As for electrical items well we don't believe in televisions in their bedrooms at a young age so all they use is lighting which is a short period at night before they go to sleep and watching dvd's but they are at school during the day so this only applies at weekends/evenings. Our food budget isn't very different to when it was just the 2 of us but instead of having the "finest luxury" foods we have the middle of the range now;)
Our gas and electricity costs us £60 per month total and our water costs £25, our council tax would be the same with or without children and yes we would probably have a smaller house but again that is a choice not a neccessity as many people have bedrooms that the children have to share.
When you have children it is in most cases a joint decision therefore you have to be realistic and know that if that relationship ends (no-one can predict this) you will have to support half the costs of raising that child otherwise how can you expect the nrp to do so?

kelloggs36

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

As I said our budget is £400 for 4 per month this includes all our washing powder and softener etc.As for electrical items well we don't believe in televisions in their bedrooms at a young age so all they use is lighting which is a short period at night before they go to sleep and watching dvd's but they are at school during the day so this only applies at weekends/evenings. Our food budget isn't very different to when it was just the 2 of us but instead of having the "finest luxury" foods we have the middle of the range now;) We've never had the luxury stuff and our food bill is definately double with the children, and when DD comes home from uni it shoots through the roof!!!!
Our gas and electricity costs us £60 per month total ours is £123 which is a fortune and difficult to reduce - although I am trying (refusing to switch heating on yet)and our water costs £25, our council tax would be the same with or without children and yes we would probably have a smaller house but again that is a choice not a neccessity as many people have bedrooms that the children have to share.
When you have children it is in most cases a joint decision therefore you have to be realistic and know that if that relationship ends (no-one can predict this) you will have to support half the costs of raising that child otherwise how can you expect the nrp to do so?

Nobody is saying that the NRP should support all costs, but many NRPs do suggest that the PWC should because they say they can't afford to. So the argument can work both ways - these days it is very easy to work out what an NRP would be paying in terms of child support being a fixed % of income - they need to factor that into their budget FIRST (as it is non-negotiable under CSA) and then live off what is left; meaning that other things have to be sacrificed instead.

Dancing_Shoes

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Nobody is saying that the NRP should support all costs, but many NRPs do suggest that the PWC should because they say they can't afford to. So the argument can work both ways - these days it is very easy to work out what an NRP would be paying in terms of child support being a fixed % of income - they need to factor that into their budget FIRST the nrp's children that they live with is factored in first;) (as it is non-negotiable under CSA) and then live off what is left; meaning that other things have to be sacrificed instead.

Yes I agree that CSA2 is very easy to work out what you should be paying but I also think if the NRP earns alot of money this is unfair as they will be paying 100% of the costs of raising a child, on the other side of the coin if they earn very little then it is unfair on the pwc as they are expected to pay for 100% of the costs. The courts are better because you get someone actually looking at both sides and seeing what is needed.
What I don't agree with is the figure of £600 per child:eek:, that means my children should be costing me £1200 before any other expenses:rolleyes:, then again I am sure "certain pwc's";) would agree it costs them a fotune to raise their children:rotfl:

Soubrette

Here's another practical example of children's costs; my youngest daughter has the opportunity to go skiing next year with the school plus a french exchange in the same year.

We estimate this will cost us approx £2500 including hiring of clothes etc (that works out at £208 per month). The school does allow you pay for the skiing in instalments but obviously we'll have extra costs when the exchange student is staying with us.

We had a long talk about this as we can afford to send her but we will be seriously depleting our car fund - we have a 9 year old car which is starting to sound a bit chunky and we were thinking of using the scrappage value next year and splashing out on one of the cheaper deals.

However, my daughter is doing three languages so we feel the exchange would be good for her educationally (she's already done one last year) and the skiing trip is a really good opportunity for her. Neither my husband and I are particularly sporty but I've always encouraged it in the children and I think it's a great opportunity to have a holiday away from Mum and Dad and learn some independence.

So we decided that yes she could go on both trips but we won't be able to afford the scrappage thing, so we'll try and get another couple of years out of the car and if the scrappage deals are still around in 2-3 years then we'll do it then, or we'll do what we've done before, get a 3-4 year old car. If the worse comes to the worst and the car doesn't make it another year and isn't fixable then we'll get a 6-7 year old car.

Now obviously if we couldn't afford to send her on one and/or both then she wouldn't be going, but because we can rejig our plans she will be able to.

Is this an obscene amount of money? I would only say yes, if it meant we were getting into debt or having to go without vital things but if it means we sacrifice one luxury for another then I don't see a problem.

Sou

chriszzz

speedster wrote: »

eh?? i've got 3 under 9 here and 2 adults and i thought we were bad at 5 or 6 loads a week. i think you need to check your wash basket. it sounds like my mates mrs!!

also, even another fiver a week on wash powder and a tenner on electric will only be £60 a month, max.

still cant see where this £768 a month comes from.

kelloggs36 The number of loads of washing increases dramatically with children - the costs of running the machine 12 times per week plus the washing powder/capsules and fabric conditioner costs me a fortune! Without children I could reduce this by 5/6.

I carnt believe that am reading about how much it costs to wash your kids clothes, the cost of soap powder, electricity, in relation to csa and how much it costs to raise your kids??

I think you all should be ashamed of yourselves to even go as low as adding up the cost of soap powder.

The only true pwc who lives in poverty are the pwc who have young children and can not go back to work whose nrp is paying maintenance and pwc is only allowed to keep £20, there the ones who live in poverty.

As for the pwc who have gone onto to marry or have a new partner, or work full/time with all benefits, they are hardly living in poverty.

I bought my own house working full/time claiming wtc/ctc I hardly call that poverty!!

Summon up the cost of having kids, I wouldn't say to my son It costs me £1.22p a week to wash, iron your clothes. Id probably say I enjoy looking after and raising you because I Love you and you are worth every bit of money that I earn and share with you.

Soubrette

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

Yes I agree that CSA2 is very easy to work out what you should be paying but I also think if the NRP earns alot of money this is unfair as they will be paying 100% of the costs of raising a child,

I honestly do not believe that any NRP pays 100% of the costs of raising their child (except in cases of neglect in which case the NRP going to court for custody). If the PWCs household income is raised because of the contribution of the NRP then the level of spending on the child is raised also.

on the other side of the coin if they earn very little then it is unfair on the pwc as they are expected to pay for 100% of the costs. The courts are better because you get someone actually looking at both sides and seeing what is needed.

But how can someone pay money they haven't got?

What I don't agree with is the figure of £600 per child:eek:, that means my children should be costing me £1200 before any other expenses:rolleyes:, then again I am sure "certain pwc's";) would agree it costs them a fotune to raise their children:rotfl:

Don't forget to factor in one off costs such as holidays, buying school uniform etc. I was surprised how much mine cost last year - I was intending to keep a budget this year as we did have some large one off costs such as the Canada holiday (£750pp) as well as not including amounts of things which weren't easy to work out from my accounts.

Unfortunately I was too lazy plus I'm not sure I want to put a financial figure on what they actually cost me - it might be too scarey

And don't forget that the £180,000+ figure was the average of what parents spent on their children, not the minimum needed for a subsistence lifestyle. As you pointed out, many people won't be able to afford anything like that sum and equally many people will be spending a lot more.

Sou

Soubrette

chriszzz wrote: »

speedster wrote: »

eh?? i've got 3 As for the pwc who have gone onto to marry or have a new partner, or work full/time with all benefits, they are hardly living in poverty.

Why should a new partner be expected to support someone else's child?

NRPP's don't think they should, why should the PWCP?

The financial argument is very important when the NRP claims that it takes £200 pm to raise a child and that's being generous. I worked out my costs last year because I wanted to give my NRP one last chance to give a proper contribution towards the children before going to the CSA. None of those costs are begrudged but none the less they are there.

I suppose what I'm saying is why should I be ashamed of pointing out how expensive it can be to raise a child when an NRP is not ashamed to point out how cheaply they feel it can be done?

I've said many times, if a PWC put the financial priority of their children on a level with some NRPs then they are being nothing less than being neglectful and possibly even abusive if they can't be bothered to cover even the basic costs of clothing, food and shelter.

Sou

kelloggs36

chriszzz wrote: »

speedster wrote: »

eh?? i've got 3 under 9 here and 2 adults and i thought we were bad at 5 or 6 loads a week. i think you need to check your wash basket. it sounds like my mates mrs!! I've done 3 loads so far today and have at least another 4 to go - there will be one load per day during the week.

also, even another fiver a week on wash powder and a tenner on electric will only be £60 a month, max.

still cant see where this £768 a month comes from. agreed that is a very high amount, however there is no way that the costs of bringing up a child can ever be quantified and so it was brought about a simple way to ensure that the children share in the wealth of both parents and if the NRP is a higher earner than the PWC then they will of course bear the higher brunt of the costs. Who's to say that whatever is leftover is not invested by the PWC for the benefit of the child/ren for perhaps when they go to uni, or for a deposit on a property in the future? As much as some might want to control every penny that goes to the PWC it can't happen and so we must let go of that argument and argue for changes that are reasonable.

kelloggs36 The number of loads of washing increases dramatically with children - the costs of running the machine 12 times per week plus the washing powder/capsules and fabric conditioner costs me a fortune! Without children I could reduce this by 5/6.

I carnt believe that am reading about how much it costs to wash your kids clothes, the cost of soap powder, electricity, in relation to csa and how much it costs to raise your kids??

I think you all should be ashamed of yourselves to even go as low as adding up the cost of soap powder. It is an additional cost - I wouldn't use an extra 5/6 worth of soap powder for my own clothes I'm merely pointing out that these things add up. Or do you not think that these things count?????

The only true pwc who lives in poverty are the pwc who have young children and can not go back to work whose nrp is paying maintenance and pwc is only allowed to keep £20, there the ones who live in poverty. WE aren't talking about living in poverty but the costs of bringing up a child - there are many hidden costs which are difficult to quantify.

As for the pwc who have gone onto to marry or have a new partner, or work full/time with all benefits, they are hardly living in poverty. No they aren't, but you seem to be suggesting that their partner can pay for the costs of the PWC children? Not for the NRPP but ok for the PWCP - I feel double standards at work here. So what if a PWC is better off when they meet somebody else? They wouldn't get any more if your wages increase would they?

I bought my own house working full/time claiming wtc/ctc I hardly call that poverty!!

Summon up the cost of having kids, I wouldn't say to my son It costs me £1.22p a week to wash, iron your clothes. Id probably say I enjoy looking after and raising you because I Love you and you are worth every bit of money that I earn and share with you.

Of course you wouldn't but you should not be the sole person paying for those costs and those arguments can be had with the ex instead!!

kelloggs36

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

Yes I agree that CSA2 is very easy to work out what you should be paying but I also think if the NRP earns alot of money this is unfair as they will be paying 100% of the costs of raising a child, on the other side of the coin if they earn very little then it is unfair on the pwc as they are expected to pay for 100% of the costs. The courts are better because you get someone actually looking at both sides and seeing what is needed. A common myth unfortunately - there were vast numbers of awards of 5p per year being made which was one of the reasons for the CSA's inception along with the costs of the benefits bill increasing.
What I don't agree with is the figure of £600 per child:eek:, that means my children should be costing me £1200 before any other expenses:rolleyes:, then again I am sure "certain pwc's";) would agree it costs them a fotune to raise their children:rotfl:

..........................

chriszzz

Soubrette wrote: »

chriszzz wrote: »

Why should a new partner be expected to support someone else's child? I never said that new partner should support the nrps children. Point I was making that his income is also added to the household funds making the money pot bigger!!

NRPP's don't think they should, why should the PWCP?

The financial argument is very important when the NRP claims that it takes £200 pm to raise a child and that's being generous. I worked out my costs last year because I wanted to give my NRP one last chance to give a proper contribution towards the children before going to the CSA. None of those costs are begrudged but none the less they are there. I think to break it down to the cost of soap powder and cost of washing clothes is a ridiculous and petty way of adding costs. It would be different if the nrp child is going on school holiday, then i think he should contribute towards the cost of the holiday but that too could be a problem if he can not afford to.

I suppose what I'm saying is why should I be ashamed of pointing out how expensive it can be to raise a child when an NRP is not ashamed to point out how cheaply they feel it can be done? I will never go that low as adding up petty costs, it would be different if it was for school holidays/trips, clothes. I understand that some might feel this way and add up everything that it costs for raising a child, but i think its only fair that the nrp is asked if they can afford to contribute more for these things that are not essential for living costs.

I've said many times, if a PWC put the financial priority of their children on a level with some NRPs then they are being nothing less than being neglectful and possibly even abusive if they can't be bothered to cover even the basic costs of clothing, food and shelter. Not all nrps are financially abusive, and believe it or not some pwc are financially abusive. So for me I am more than happy not to add petty costs as this will never make me feel bitter, if the nrp is paying maintenance then that should be the end of it, but to sit and add how much electric for charging mobile/laptop its going beyond ridiculous.

Sou

Everyone has their own way of adding up costs to raise their child and adding petty things is certainly not mine.