Mortgage and/or Child Maintenance

Soubrette

PaulBrian wrote: »

My X, too, chose to give up a good career to look after the kids ... a decision which I fully supported at the time. What irks me slightly is that she could revert to that career now, even on a part-time basis, and earn very good money but she has chosen a different career path which in the short term at least will not pay too well. Of course as it's my fault :rolleyes: that she gave up her career I should pay for that fault via the settlement!

ps I don't hate my X, far from it, what I hate is the petty squabbling over who gets what.

I do hate (and despise) my ex because he'd rather see me suffer than the kids do well. I hope you and your ex never come to this

I certainly don't blame him for choices we made when we were together though and it's my choice what I do careerwise now , not only do I get to spend good quality time with our children but because of his attitudes they prefer to be here rather than with him, how can I feel anything but pity for him over that?

Would family therapy be a useful idea? Where you both get to put your point of view to a mediator?

Sou

CHR15

I continued to pay for everything after I got the boot. The whole lot, mortgage, council tax, gas, elec(even the blimmin shopping for over 6 Months!).

In hindsight, it was money down the drain. It is COMPLETELY thankless.
Reading Pauls posts makes me think he was married to my ex!!

She insisted on 100% of everything and I was foolish enough to give it all thinking I was helping to "Keep the peace".

Best advice from someone who has trodden that path, is to stop everything. Pay the correct amount of Child Maintenance but nothing else.

She will be more than happy to continue taking your money for as long as you are prepared to give it away. From your posts she clearly isn't reasonable.
Make her stand on her own feet and make her own way in the World.

I'm not saying stand back and watch the meltdown, but start forcing her hand, you have your own life and future to build. You can't do it with giving away 50% of your income

I didn't squabble over who got what, it just isn't worth the stress. I left her with the whole lot and started again with nothing (although that is not how she sees it!!)

PaulBrian

Chris ... I'm finally starting to 'smell the coffee' on this one. I have so tried to do what I think is right only to meet with what can only be described as an ungrateful 'want more' attitude.

Like you I really don't want a big fight over anything ... except for the fact that I don't see why I should let the whole financial future of my kids rest in my X's hands.

Chris ... just tell me that there's a very bright light at the end of the tunnel!!

CHR15

You will never get closer to the light with the ball and chain still attached.

I know it sounds cruel but I have been there, looking back, the road to recovery would have come much quicker if I had stopped the lot and faced facts.
The light is ahead of you, not behind you.

Unfortunately the financial future of the kids is no longer in your control. Pay the maintenance as normal. If she chooses (like mine) to spend it on herself, there is nothing you can do, apart from buying them all their clothes, taking them on holidays etc when you have them with you.

For you to be in a position to do that, you NEED to safeguard your own income and stop throwing it away.

You will quickly learn to roll with the punches to stop the stress monster grabbing hold.

The "Want More" attitude will always be there, even when she has a new bloke living in the house (she is independent now remember so she won't take HIS money!!!).

I've still helped my ex out by giving bundles of cash at her from time to time (even bought her a car thinking she would bring the kids to my house for a change... Doh!!.. no chance)

Time doesn't heal anything, but it gives you a chance to figure out ways to live with it. :)

kelloggs36

Good advice Chri5 - from a PWC.

PaulBrian

Yes ... I've just worked out that in two years I have paid £15k more than statutory child maintenance would have required me to pay. Had I just paid CM it would have brought much more urgency to the house sale and/or the whole financial settlement process. Still, I can't look back now I just got to look forward!

sprogs

PaulBrian wrote: »

Sound advice ... I think she's certainly luckier than some but I bet she doesn't see it at all like that!

Yes, I would agree that she is

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Your legal responsibility is the child maintenance amount - which should cover the housing costs of the children, ie she should be paying the mortgage out of it. Why not just reduce the payments as per your £300 per month saving and point out to her that she is no worse off than she was before - she gets a free house, plus her wages/tax credits PLUS your maintenance - she is an extremely lucky woman!!!!

If the mortgage is £435 and CSA rates for CM would be virtually the same, how on earth would CM alone cover the housing needs of the children as well as feed them, clothe them and pay utilities etc. I am not saying what is right or wrong - just an observation from someone else in a similar position!

Obviously 'mum' needs to contribute towards these as well from benefits/wages.

The needs of the children must come first, they 'should' be able to continue their lives with as little disruption to their normal routine as possible, if you stopped paying the mortgage completely I would guess it would put your ex in a bit of a financial pickle?

Having just put a CSA application in myself I was told if ex had an interest in the house then he could possibly apply for a variation. Having now looked at the guidelines it says that NRP can apply for a variation if he or she pays towards a mortgage that the PWC and children still live in and in which the NRP has no legal interest, which I believe you still have. Not being an expert I can only go from what I have seen on the website as I have not experienced this myself

For what my view is worth I think you should be paying CSA rates with half the mortgage on top of that, as you still have an interest in the home, and as has previously been mentioned the starting point is 50/50.

kelloggs36

sprogs wrote: »

Yes, I would agree that she is



If the mortgage is £435 and CSA rates for CM would be virtually the same, how on earth would CM alone cover the housing needs of the children as well as feed them, clothe them and pay utilities etc. I am not saying what is right or wrong - just an observation from someone else in a similar position!

Obviously 'mum' needs to contribute towards these as well from benefits/wages.

The needs of the children must come first, they 'should' be able to continue their lives with as little disruption to their normal routine as possible, if you stopped paying the mortgage completely I would guess it would put your ex in a bit of a financial pickle?

Having just put a CSA application in myself I was told if ex had an interest in the house then he could possibly apply for a variation. Having now looked at the guidelines it says that NRP can apply for a variation if he or she pays towards a mortgage that the PWC and children still live in and in which the NRP has no legal interest, which I believe you still have. Not being an expert I can only go from what I have seen on the website as I have not experienced this myself

For what my view is worth I think you should be paying CSA rates with half the mortgage on top of that, as you still have an interest in the home, and as has previously been mentioned the starting point is 50/50.

Because it is supposed to be a contribution towards the costs - not the full costs, afterall the child has 2 parents not just one!!

sprogs

I didn't say he should be paying everything. Paying all of the mortgage as well as CM is more than generous. But if the house remains in joint names then I believe that in addition to the CM 50% of the mortgage should be paid on top of that. If the house is transferred into one person's name then that person should be responsible for the mortgage - then you get the complicated bit from when you lived together as a couple and contributed jointly....although it may have been that the husband contributed more financially but the wife gave the childcare and kept a lovely home. It's all far too complicated - remind me never to get divorced again!

kelloggs36

in theory I agree, but in reality many NRPs just can't afford to run 2 homes like that - even living in a downsized place would push too many onto the streets - the CM is a legal debt and cannot be 'negotiated' whilst the house may be in joint names, but if he doesn't pay then it means either selling and the PWC downsizing too, or taking over the full payments. If the OP is in a financial postiion to pay both, then he is very lucky as most just aren't.