Child Tax Credit - how much can they take?

Blonde_Bint

Hmmm, I see where your coming from and I agree. But stick around for someone like Kelloggs who have a good knowledge of the sums and workings out and all the ins and outs.

LizzieS_2

blue_mantle wrote: »

sorry I posted twice, thanks for response Blonde Bint, this seems ridiculous, my ex has remarried to a guy with a great job and the ex has sold what was the marital home which she got as part of the settlement - so she has big wedge in the bank over £200k as a result of the sale and the costs of keeping her two kids must be reduced because it is now shared with new partner - I suggest putting part of my payment into trust for the kids but she demands I give it to her but all you PWC's out there do you agree her costs have gone down considerably and it seems odd that a NRP should provide for a PWC that is better off?

If you are on csa 2, it makes no difference to the assessment (neither would it make a difference if nrrp had the same on csa2).

On csa1, you can apply for a departure for your ex's new partners ability to pay towards housing costs - think it only works if she has a positive income herself.

kelloggs36

Bear in mind that the PWC can do the same to you though. If the PWC does not work, it won't matter what her housing costs are as she has no income to be assessed, so any applicaton will fail.

blue_mantle

she does work, they both do, my new partner with whom I have one child got made redundant and does not work yet, I do. It seems like the idea behind CSA was rightly to protect PWCs in hardship but it does not prevent a one income family supporting a two income family where the PWC has considerable wealth.... I have paid without interruption for 10 years and now I thought in "fairness" she would see wisdom of my allocating the same amount to savings for the kids rather than to her direct given the new circumstances

kelloggs36

IN all fairness though, as the money is for the children, she may be paying for all child-related things with your money - afterall that is what it is intended for isn't it? It isn't meant to be a trust-fund for them, but for the day-to-day living costs that they incur.

blue_mantle

thanks kelloggs, I have always comforted myself as NRP for last 10 years with idea that money is going for kids, and my contribution has sustained the standard of living (detached house, car holidays etc) but with over 200k in her bank from the sale of her house and a new professional partner in whose house she now lives it is difficult not to feel agrieved at the insistence of giving the money to her rather than putting it in savings accounts for the kids future. Do you agree her living costs have reduced considerably? It seems ludicrous to me to suggest that the day to day costs of having two kids does not reduce on cohabitation with an earner - the costs of utilities and so on is shared. I understand the spirit of the CSA is to protect PWC and generally this is necessary, but do you think a PWC should be less demanding when the PWC is clearly richer than the NRP? It seems that even if the PWC wins the lottery there is no provision in the law to support the long term NRP...... doesn't this seem unfair

Dancing_Shoes

Unfortunately Blue Mantle it isn't there to protect second families, they are happy for second families to enter into poverty as long as the first family have enough money to live (and sometimes more):rolleyes:

Pay what you are assessed at and when it is all over you can look back and know that you provided for your children and there will come a day when your pwc won't have any claim on your money:T

chriszzz

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

Unfortunately Blue Mantle it isn't there to protect second families, they are happy for second families to enter into poverty as long as the first family have enough money to live (and sometimes more):rolleyes:

Pay what you are assessed at and when it is all over you can look back and know that you provided for your children and there will come a day when your pwc won't have any claim on your money:T

It appears that most second families live in poverty, as the ex can have three wages coming in, her own, her partners and her exes, enough said!!

kelloggs36

Many step families are not worse off as they often get the child support from their ex though.

shell_542

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Many step families are not worse off as they often get the child support from their ex though.

And there are many more where there is no ex to claim child support off of.