What does 15% of my salary pay for?

Dancing_Shoes

Oh dear emotions running a bit high on this thread:rolleyes:

I agree that mothers and fathers both have a responsibility to pay for the upbringing of a child. I do disagree with a blanket rule for all though. Each case should be looked at individually. Sometimes marriages don't work out because the pwc doesn't want them to but they "sometimes" can make a tidy profit from this. The only reason i commented is that a very good friend of mine makes a very tidy sum from her ex husband (£1200 to be exact) every month for child maintence and it is a standing joke that she has no desire to return to work due to the sum involved. I think we all know that that sum of money is above and beyond what it takes her to raise the children (although i am not saying she is anything other than a great mother). On the other side of the coin i know people who's ex partners will do anything to dodge paying a penny so i don't think it "seems" to me that the csa is treating each case fairly. After all the friend with the loaded ex (who only did very well in his career after they split up) is really being "unloaded" of his wages because he does well

He is very bitter about this and he has told her that when he has to stop paying he won't give her a single penny.....

money makes the world go round whether we like it or not

frugallass

mitchaa wrote: »

Why are people including rent/council tax and all other household bills?

because my ex expects me to take his mortgage and council tax into account when he's giving me sob stories about his bills getting bigger BUT so are mine !

mitchaa wrote: »

You would have these regardless, children or no children

maybe so, but instead of having 2 bedrooms, I might just have one if I had no children

mitchaa wrote: »

Electricity and gas....so small that its not even bothering mentioning

not neccesarily - my daughter is at home alone Monday to Friday during the school holidays - she's eating more food and using more power than she would during term time, and no doubt she will be sneaking the heating on when it's cold !

mitchaa wrote: »

Furniture/carpets

we just moved house - daughter needed new furniture as the place before was furnished

I work full-time therefore receive very little by the way of benefits

The point I was trying to make is that the cost of caring for a child isn't as simple as 7 hot meals a week and a pair of shoes every six months - it's constant

frugallass

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

Items marked [3] - so the NRP does not need to pay for these things twice over and above the 15%? The child should bring their own when visiting the NRP?

My daughter see's her father approx twice a yar (his choice) - when she visits him she takes everything she needs. We drove her the 250 miles there and I had to pay £40 for her train ticket home because he was 'skint' (he's still managed to buy his fags and go to the pub this week funnily enough).

I have no sympathy for him, he lied and lied about his income when he was pulling in a good wage (cash of course) and he spent it like it was going out of fashion (not on his daughter I hasten to add) - now the credit crunch has hit his sorry @r5e and he his skint - what goes around comes around and I hope he is suffering.

stressed_eric_4

:mad:nobody will ever agree but i think it is totally unfair how the csa payments are disregarded for pwcs ctc/wtc and hb purposes yet if the nrp gets ctc it is based on his full gross wage even though he has no choice and loses at least 15% of this so the nrp loses out. i think it should be taken into account as income as even though it is maintenance for the child, what is ctc for?? help with the cost of raising children. in a lot of cases if the csa was taken into account the ctc/hb payable to the pwc would be less, therefore saving the tax payer more money!! sorry but this point annoys me i can get my head around paying the 15% its just the unfairness of it all!!!

Gorgeous_George

Originally Posted by mitchaa
Why are people including rent/council tax and all other household bills?

frugallass wrote: »

because my ex expects me to take his mortgage and council tax into account when he's giving me sob stories about his bills getting bigger BUT so are mine !

In that case, as both parties need to pay them, they should be discounted by both parties.

Originally Posted by mitchaa
You would have these regardless, children or no children

frugallass wrote: »

maybe so, but instead of having 2 bedrooms, I might just have one if I had no children

Likewise for the NRP - requirement discounted.

Originally Posted by mitchaa Electricity and gas....so small that its not even bothering mentioning

frugallass wrote: »

not neccesarily - my daughter is at home alone Monday to Friday during the school holidays - she's eating more food and using more power than she would during term time, and no doubt she will be sneaking the heating on when it's cold !

Is she old enough to be home alone 5 days out of 7? I thought part of the 15% was to pay for childcare?
Should the NRP pay less during school term and more during holidays?

frugallass wrote: »

We just moved house - daughter needed new furniture as the place before was furnished

Your choice to move house. NRPs move house sometimes requirement discounted

frugallass wrote: »

I work full-time therefore receive very little by the way of benefits

Do you want a medal?

frugallass wrote: »

The point I was trying to make is that the cost of caring for a child isn't as simple as 7 hot meals a week and a pair of shoes every six months - it's constant

And the cost of maintaining a home so that children can visit the NRP isn't simple either.

frugallass

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

Is she old enough to be home alone 5 days out of 7? I thought part of the 15% was to pay for childcare?

Thanks for the concern - yes she is old enough to be home alone

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

Do you want a medal?

from you ? no thanks

claire2378

every situation is different. my ex doesn't see my son AT ALL (his choice) so doesn't have to pay out anything over and above his 15%.
i don't think there's anything wrong with saying some of it goes towards council tax. i would be paying alot less council tax if i were in a 1 bedroom flat than in the 2 bedroom house with garden that i need for my sons quality of life.
in the winter i have to put the heating on for bath times etc so my son doesn't get a chill (especially important when they are babies). if i were on my own i wouldn't do this.
shoes cost a fortune. my son has a high instep like me and so i can only get shoes to fit him from clarks and they cost £30+ a time!
i would say my son is quite skinny but god can he eat!
i think alot of the nrps sometimes forget or never knew in the first place how much things cost. it all adds up pretty quickly.!

i think a blanket 15% is the only way it can be fair. i've always thought it unfair that someone who earns £150 a week and someone who earns £10,000 a week would have to pay the same fine for speeding. a fine may be deserved but the punishment is disproportionate iyswim. so why should it be different for maintenance? if it wasn't for the 15% rule then some people would be paying a hell of alot more proportionately than others. for me it's not about how much i get, it does help, but it's about my ex taking resposibility for the life we created.
i always make sure that when i get my maintenance each month i think about what my son needs first. this month the money has gone directly TOWARDS school uniforms, shoes, birthday party and gifts, a new bed, school bags, PE kit, hair cut.

Gorgeous_George

claire2378 wrote: »

every situation is different. my ex doesn't see my son AT ALL (his choice) so doesn't have to pay out anything over and above his 15%.
i don't think there's anything wrong with saying some of it goes towards council tax. i would be paying alot less council tax if i were in a 1 bedroom flat than in the 2 bedroom house with garden that i need for my sons quality of life.
in the winter i have to put the heating on for bath times etc so my son doesn't get a chill (especially important when they are babies). if i were on my own i wouldn't do this.
shoes cost a fortune. my son has a high instep like me and so i can only get shoes to fit him from clarks and they cost £30+ a time!
i would say my son is quite skinny but god can he eat!
i think alot of the nrps sometimes forget or never knew in the first place how much things cost. it all adds up pretty quickly.!

i think a blanket 15% is the only way it can be fair. i've always thought it unfair that someone who earns £150 a week and someone who earns £10,000 a week would have to pay the same fine for speeding. a fine may be deserved but the punishment is disproportionate iyswim. so why should it be different for maintenance? if it wasn't for the 15% rule then some people would be paying a hell of alot more proportionately than others. for me it's not about how much i get, it does help, but it's about my ex taking resposibility for the life we created.
i always make sure that when i get my maintenance each month i think about what my son needs first. this month the money has gone directly TOWARDS school uniforms, shoes, birthday party and gifts, a new bed, school bags, PE kit, hair cut.

I suppose it is different if the child(ren) doesn't visit the NRP.

In the end, some PWCs will spend the 15% entirely on the child. Some, like my ex-wife, will not.

GG

PlayingHardball

Gorgeous_George wrote: »

I suppose it is different if the child(ren) doesn't visit the NRP.

In the end, some PWCs will spend the 15% entirely on the child. Some, like my ex-wife, will not.

GG

GG - No different, in my opinion, 15% still leaves 85%.....I take it your ex-wife re-married/partnered someone who was quite comfortable? Either that or she has a high income and can afford the higher supplement to the childs living expenses whilst not in your care? i.e. horses. Does that upset you?

It is probably impossible to spend the full 15% on the child soley in visible, tangible ways such as shoes, school jumper, socks, etc, as it takes so much more for a PWC to provide a total package of 'Care'. Yes, a portion of mortgage, gas, water, food, etc etc is required. Surely that is quite reasonable as you would want your child warm and fed during the time they are not with you? Would you rather they are cold, but have lots of nice clothes and shoes? In exchange would you rather 'see' the tangible effects of your 15%?

Oh, I am a PWC who's child only visits NRP approx 10 days per year, so 15% could pay for 'quite a lot'.

Gorgeous_George

I accept that she is entitled to 15% of my income. I also accept that she can spend it on whatever she wants. And I accept that some readers of this forum will misunderstand me.

I reserve the right to hate her and to feel sorry for her husband. They say that love is blind - it must be deaf too.

I shall look forward to making my last payment.

I think that this thread has run its course. Thank you all for your contributions.



GG