My ex is taking our 17 year old daughter away for a fortnight

chriszzz

I cant believe that some women just think of money when there ex is taking the child/ren on holiday for two weeks??
Just be glad that your ex is having a positive part in your child's life, Its not as if your gonna be evicted or have your utilities cut off.
Think of the children who don't have there fathers in there life!! Am sure they would tell you two weeks without maintenance would be the least of there worries.
Some women just want it all!! :mad: I would rather my son be happy, his dad is spending it on him anyway!!

PlayingHardball

shell_542 wrote: »

Many of those who were debating whether she should receive the whole amount did actually state that this was only if they had a private agreement, not a CSA one.

Many? Which ones prior to my post? Post 15 posted a logical debate in that if there is a CSA assessment in place, and a reduction has already been calculated, then no, there should be no reduction. If, as post 15 went on to say, it is private and no reduction is in place, then it would seem fair that the PWC reduces maintenance for the 2 weeks.

I'm in agreement with those who have said until we know if it is CSA, we can't make an honest debate of this.

BTW, next week I will be incurring costs taking my DD to a distanct airport to ensure she goes to visit my ex on holiday for one week in the lovely south of france, the ex does not pay me a bean in child support, nor will he be reimbursing my travelling costs of approximately £50 to get her to the airport and £50 to collect her from the airport. Oh, and I have bought her a few nice things to wear while on holiday. I think it is important that the children's needs and desires are at the front of any decisions, it is not just about the money.

woody01

chriszzz wrote: »

I cant believe that some women just think of money when there ex is taking the child/ren on holiday for two weeks??
Just be glad that your ex is having a positive part in your child's life, Its not as if your gonna be evicted or have your utilities cut off.
Think of the children who don't have there fathers in there life!! Am sure they would tell you two weeks without maintenance would be the least of there worries.
Some women just want it all!! :mad: I would rather my son be happy, his dad is spending it on him anyway!!

Great post and bang on the money.

The world would be better if more people thought like you do

shell_542

PlayingHardball wrote: »

Many? Which ones prior to my post? Post 15 posted a logical debate in that if there is a CSA assessment in place, and a reduction has already been calculated, then no, there should be no reduction. If, as post 15 went on to say, it is private and no reduction is in place, then it would seem fair that the PWC reduces maintenance for the 2 weeks.

I'm in agreement with those who have said until we know if it is CSA, we can't make an honest debate of this.

BTW, next week I will be incurring costs taking my DD to a distanct airport to ensure she goes to visit my ex on holiday for one week in the lovely south of france, the ex does not pay me a bean in child support, nor will he be reimbursing my travelling costs of approximately £50 to get her to the airport and £50 to collect her from the airport. Oh, and I have bought her a few nice things to wear while on holiday. I think it is important that the children's needs and desires are at the front of any decisions, it is not just about the money.

Post 15 wasn't the only logical debate, I asked the exact same thing in post 14. Did you not read my post?

You can see for yourself that 4 of the 18 posts before yours asked whether it was a CSA or private agreement. 2 were the OP herself and 5 of them were agreeing with her that she should receive all of her maintenance. So in total only 7 posts were making comments without knowing the full facts.

My point was you jumped in with a generalisation that all the previous posters were making comments not based on fact, when in fact a few of us (including myself) were not and had already asked if she had a CSA agreement or not.

PlayingHardball

Your last edit was wise, yes he is a pillock

PlayingHardball

Shell_542 you should have shared your thoughtfullness with the rest of this thread rather than cowardly edit your nasty comment about my personal imput to the OP and relating to the situation.

chriszzz

woody01 wrote: »

Great post and bang on the money.

The world would be better if more people thought like you do

My way of thinking is!! No way am I gonna let the government and the csa ruin anything that I can do myself.
My ex and I came to an agreement, am not greedy and am happy with the arrangement, if my ex is sick and cant afford to pay 1-2 wks then so be it!!
If he takes our son on holiday am not gona be after him for the money cos I know he will spend it on our son.
I think because I have adapted that attitude, If I was ever need ie, been off sick myself and needed xtra cash towards a trip for my son I know my ex will help out and thats because he knows that am being genuine.
As soon as some women know there exes have a bit more money, then they are straight in touch with the csa.
I dont care to much for csa, they cause so much trouble for both parties, which ultimately causes trouble between partners, which then the children suffer, so it can have a really knock on effect.
Unfortunately some have to use the csa because they cant come to an agreement or the absent parent refuses to pay for the child/ren.

Blob

chriszzz, if more people had your enlightened attitude then the situation that has been caused by the CSA for so many simply would not exist. When I put this kind of idea to my ex's solicitor was told it was 'a lordable attitude' however his client did not see it that way and war was decleared, with both him and the CSA!

Bethankim

Im amazed and its not often i am,

the Op has only posted on mse 3 times and she asked a question and yes perhaps it was a bit brief and there are some great responses however the majority of responses have been less than nice based on virtually no information beyond a 1 line question.

Im not surprised the OP has not come back, i certainly wouldnt when i was a new poster I would have left the site and lost a valuable life line.

Blob

The knocks and bumps of life are hard! If you put a post that gets answers that are not what you like, that is the risk you take in going onto an open site. You have to accept that people will put both thier feelings as well as there point of view.

Yes it is a fact of life that people will put thier own point even if it has no foundation in Law or fact, that is part of being in a free socity, and I submit part of the point of this forum, people get thier feelings out in the open!

Remember you are dealing with human emotion and real people, not something the CSA like to grasp.