Child Maintenance (CSA) questions (merged)

black-saturn

Well said :T

sammyy

I wish I had a pound everytime I have heard an ex say that they are paying for the ex missus luxury lifestyle.If people want to move on and have another family,fair enough,but the first born children still need feeding and clothing.I have yet to meet all these designer clad single mums that are being kept in the lap of luxury by the hard done by ex-husbands.

dwsjarcmcd

sammyy wrote:

I wish I had a pound everytime I have heard an ex say that they are paying for the ex missus luxury lifestyle.If people want to move on and have another family,fair enough,but the first born children still need feeding and clothing.I have yet to meet all these designer clad single mums that are being kept in the lap of luxury by the hard done by ex-husbands.

You clearly haven't met my ex then!! Although I am not a hard done by ex-husband, my ex does not go without, neither does my daughter and I am delighted they don't.

bluezone

I know I may get shouted at here but the child maintenance would be going up to a staggering £751.something a month. Once you then add tax credits (and whatever the equivalent is for family allowance), thats quite a lot of money for one adult and 2 children. And lets not forget that the ex works part time. I would like to have that sort of money a month should I have 2 children. My sister and brother inlaw who have two kids don't have that much a month. Lets just remember that there are 2 sides to every coin here please!

pandas66

sammyy wrote:

I wish I had a pound everytime I have heard an ex say that they are paying for the ex missus luxury lifestyle.If people want to move on and have another family,fair enough,but the first born children still need feeding and clothing.I have yet to meet all these designer clad single mums that are being kept in the lap of luxury by the hard done by ex-husbands.

I wish I had a pound from my ex husband everytime he spends ten/twenty, I am happy to say I fund my lifestyle as the £75.00 he begrudgingly sends doesn't/can't ! I couldn't agree (for once) with Calleyw as with holidays, this guy wants 4 trips a year taken out of the equation, the bigger house, 2nd car. To be honest I think it sounds like pie in the sky and a wind up, if his assessment has come out at £173 per week after he has them as well I'd love to see the paperwork on it.

black-saturn

bluezone wrote:

I know I may get shouted at here but the child maintenance would be going up to a staggering £751.something a month. Once you then add tax credits (and whatever the equivalent is for family allowance), thats quite a lot of money for one adult and 2 children. And lets not forget that the ex works part time. I would like to have that sort of money a month should I have 2 children. My sister and brother inlaw who have two kids don't have that much a month. Lets just remember that there are 2 sides to every coin here please!

The mother doesnt actually receive that maintenance though. My ex pays £75 per week but I only receive £10 of it, the rest goes to the government. If you work you get more of it but not all of it.

sammyy

As I understand it the OP's CSA payments have gone up since he stopped having the children to stay so much.


[QUOTE=jezbo]I think it WAS (for the old payment of 112) because I had them for more than 104 nights a year, but now it's only 70ish so I lose that reduction. It's only the NEW scheme I think where you get a reduction for more than 52 too, but in the old scheme I don't think you do.[/QUOTE]


So I think its perfectly reasonable to expecting to be paying more now they are spending MOST of the time with the mother.They haven't gone up for no reason.

jezbo

Its definitely PER WEEK !!!

jezbo

june1970 wrote:

Sorry to sound rude but why do you need a nursery if your wife is not working, and why should the fact that she is a Czech be brought into it.

I may sound harsh but why should your first set of children lose out.

I know people on here are going to have a go at me but this is just my opinion

Nursery is only two mornings a week, not full time, it's good for him to mix with other children no? But no, it doesn't come into the equation. My wife being Czech and wanting to see her family occasionally doesn't either - but I think it should - they are BOTH additional dependents, and travel to see her family is an essential expense - I'd have a divorce on my hands, and another single parent - if that basic right was denied.

And my first set of children do NOT lose out. You may have got me wrong but I really don't want them to. My main annoyance is that I'm supporting my ex as well. The system means that there's no pressure on her to contribute to the kid's maintenance and little towards her own, it's all handed to her on a plate.

jezbo

deburnley wrote:

I am afraid I have to agree with June1970 on this one. By all means question the assessment, but if you take a step back, you have a new wife and new child, your wife does not work but you need a bigger house and extra car for her.

Your ex wife on the other hand works part-time, possibly on far less money than you? Your contributions subsidise for the time that she is not able to work.
Leisurely lifestyle ? - with 2 young children (considered a full-time job) and a part-time job and you not being able to take them overnight as often as in the past - me thinks not. I am sure if you ask your ex wife she would probably aspire ot a larger house and upgrade her car too.

I think the fact is that all these things do need paying for, it is a difficult situation but you cannot punish your ex-wife and children - thay are getting a rough deal too.

Our house is smaller than my ex's (she was never my wife btw), and she has just bought a new car (Ok not new, but a nice one). I have to leave my wife with the baby every day to work, leaving her without a car, having to ferry the baby about on foot and by bus. Now we can't afford a car for her.

Both the girls are at school so being their mother is not a full time job! My ex only works part time by choice, she is quite capable of working full time but why should she when she can live on the money meant for the kids, plus all the state benefits she gets too? The whole system is wrong. My wife WILL have to get a full time job and she has a 1 year old that DOES need full time care.