Child Maintenance (CSA) questions (merged)

Kimberley

Broken_hearted wrote:

Why should he pay you when he has her, maybe you should pay him for that month.

Because the maintenance is meant for everything, including clothes, food, school stuff etc, it's not paid just to support the child for that week, it's for her upbringing. If you were at work and went on holiday for 2 weeks, would your employer have the right to not pay you, because after all your not working for him/her those 2 weeks are you? No, you would still be entitled to holiday pay.

Lady_S

It is different for maintenance arrangements though. They aren't paying you to look after the child, it is providing as you have said food/water/accomodation for the child.

If the child is living elsewhere then the costs will be minimal, especially as I would expect them to provide what the child needs.

Poppy9

What a mean dad. He only sees her once a fortnight, just 26 times a year and instead of rejoicing at seeing her for 4 whole weeks together he's whinging over money.

Also how many days is he expecting her to work. Not 5 days a week surely?
If he had planned day trips you could understand he might find money tight but all he has to do is put an extra plate of food on the table for 4 weeks.

Now he has a new baby he will see how expensive it is to raise a child.

Prudent

I think the csa only reduce the amount of maintence if she stays 51 nights per year or more with him. If you are in the resident parent he will need to pay.

lushkat

Thanks for replying everyone to my post, and thank you for your thoughts and responses.

The CSA clearly say that he needs to continue paying maintenance regardless of the four weeks in the summer so from their point of view, the answer is clear. The whole reason I went via the CSA about five years ago was because he would mess around with payments depending on how "good" I was, withholding money if I wasnt agreable to his wishes in whatever way that was. That doesnt feed a child does it.

I guess the tricky bit is around the emotions, I feel I was suggesting something that would be nice for my daughter and her father, and his first response was about the maintenance payments and I feel a bit hurt.

If you go by saying that if he has her for extra days in the year, then he pays less maintenance. does that mean that when he cant have her on a weekend, he has to pay more. And that happens a lot. And after all it is the first time in 11 years that he has spent more than a weekend with her. Money shouldnt really come into it, yet it feels now like that.

I think it is about a moral obligation, based on the fact that we decided to have a child together and therefore you have a lifelong obligation to support that child, financially and otherwise to care for her and feed her and nourish her in whatever way necessary. Where is his joy is having his child close to him?

Prudent

Sadly not all non resident parents feel a moral obligation to support the up bringing of the child they chose to have. I have had lenghty disputes with my ex over money and both the court and the csa have upheld my appeals and in effect said he is misleading them about his income. He has always paid less than the csa minimum by not telling the truth. He is a head teacher - paid by society to protect the welfare of children.

mgardner

lushkat wrote:

Thanks for replying everyone to my post, and thank you for your thoughts and responses.

The CSA clearly say that he needs to continue paying maintenance regardless of the four weeks in the summer so from their point of view, the answer is clear. The whole reason I went via the CSA about five years ago was because he would mess around with payments depending on how "good" I was, withholding money if I wasnt agreable to his wishes in whatever way that was. That doesnt feed a child does it.

I guess the tricky bit is around the emotions, I feel I was suggesting something that would be nice for my daughter and her father, and his first response was about the maintenance payments and I feel a bit hurt.

If you go by saying that if he has her for extra days in the year, then he pays less maintenance. does that mean that when he cant have her on a weekend, he has to pay more. And that happens a lot. And after all it is the first time in 11 years that he has spent more than a weekend with her. Money shouldnt really come into it, yet it feels now like that.

I think it is about a moral obligation, based on the fact that we decided to have a child together and therefore you have a lifelong obligation to support that child, financially and otherwise to care for her and feed her and nourish her in whatever way necessary. Where is his joy is having his child close to him?

Oh how my heart goes out to you love, you are right it should not be about money, but a nice thing for your daughter, but love if you are up against a
Controlling, could not give a fig for the child, as you seem to be, there is really nothing to do about it.

The Law appears to be on your side, so tell him to contact you through a Solicitor. In the meantime give your daughter a big hug, kisses (as well as the extra money) and thank whatever you belive in that you are a much better parent, nicer person than he is.

My Son and I are in very much the same position. His very much loved Ex, todecided to go off with his best friend and he had a complete mental breakdown. So he is now on sick pay, I am on basic pension. We have the children (by court order) three times a week and half of the holidays.

My dear ex daughter in law does everything possible to make it difficult, sends them in awful scruffy clothes, shoes off their feet, arranges them to come when she knows there is not a bus service so we must pay for Taxis.
But we cope, we have too, the children have just gone back after three days. and we have them for four next week. So for the rest of this week my Son and I will not have heating or hot water, but will wrap up in a duvet and think how much we enjoyed taking the kids to McDonalds, how they liked their new clothes and bliss Oh bliss how they are looking forward to their Easter egg hunt and going to the fair next weekend.

Its not about money love its about doing your very very best for the child (Kids) and it seems to me that you are doing that, so the very best wishes to you She won't be a child for much longer treasure it while you can and make him stick to any legal agreement. My daughter in law tells us that the law says she is entitled to claim all the money whether she has them or not.

Prudent

mgardener - what a lovely gran your grandchildren have Keep being there for them.

nearlyrich

I feel for you lushkat, some parents don't deserve to have childrenand having been through the mill over many years with my irresponsible ex I know that what ever you do you will not win. The main thing is your daughter isn't being used as a pawn, at 15 she knows who is providing for her and if you have been providing for her from age 4 you must be doing a great job.

TELULA

I understand your frustration and annoyance. but you need to remember the most important person here is your daughter. I am presuming she wants to go and visit her father and is quite happy to stay. You say that in the past you have given your daughter money when she visits her father. Why don't you give her the months maintenance money as spending money for when she is visiting her father? She could use some of it to buy new clothes, toiletries etc for going on the visit. You would of course need to make sure that her father knows all about this. Hopefully when he realises he won't have to give his daughter spending money or buy her any new clothes he would be alright about it.