Why is there no provision for true 50/50

Ready001

I have split from my ex who has the opinion that she is the main carer for our 2 children. Unfortunatley, due to my kind and sympathetic nature, I have allowed her to claim the child benefit - hence now the CB, CSA and tax credit all goes to her. Until recently she had not claimed CSA as I have the kids 3 nights one week, 4 nights the next - every week and often more than that. There are many background issues - she is an alcoholic and left home, went away to rehab and has returned and is now the "Angel" mother!!!!!

She has recently made an application for CSA and is not willing to be reasonable, I do the school run / arrange care out of school if ill, pay half school costs, clothe, feed, bath, etc, etc. In my opinion I do more than 50% of the actual care that has a financial cost.

On the basis that she is totally uncooperative, how should i move forward??

The main reason for her application is her incorrect assumption that following my fathers retirement from the family business, that I have a massive income and directorship, despite my clearly telling her this is not the case!!

Please advise

loobyloo0302

Unfortunately, unless your children are of an age where they can choose to live with you, you are pretty much stuck in the situation. I assume you get discount for the amount of nights you have the children per year?

It doesn't sound likely that she would allow you to claim the child benefit instead, which therefore (however fair or unfair) makes your ex the PWC and you, the NRP.

Sorry to get so personal but its this sort of case that really grates on me! :mad:

Ready001

I know, am kicking myself because originally I was claiming the CB. When their mother broke down with alcholism and moved out, i continued claiming the CB. When she eventually pulled herself together, I allowed her to have it, as an aid to her rebuilding her life, not knowing the implications!!!!!

Blonde_Bint

Only thing you can do Ready is your share. If she goes through with CSA then pay that, if you cant afford to pay the csa and all the stuff your paying now you will have to stop paying for extras.

Its as simple as that dont beat yourself up about it, you cant pay what you dont have. My husband is not beating himself up over the fact that he doesnt bring home richard bransons wages for me to spend:rotfl: your kids will have more when you have more. Thats the way I see it, my daughter doesnt have as much today as she did 5 yrs ago thats just life (only for now:))

shell_542

I agree with BB, Ready. Although it might be easier said than done. I think you need to explain to your ex that as she gets child benefit, tax credits and you are still asked to pay child support, you will no longer be arranging care for out of school, not paying half the school fees, etc etc. You contribute your fair share of financial support when the children are in your care 50% of the time and as she receives extra financial support, those extra costs will come out of that.

Unless of course she is willing to drop the child maintenance and then you will continue as you were. If she realises that she was actually better off when you were paying towards costs rather than a child support figure, she might be reasonable.

Have you ensured you get the correct deductions to your child support for the 50/50 care you have?

shell_542

As for why are there no provisions for true 50/50 when it comes to the CSA ... well there's no excuse really is there? Both parents have the child equal number of nights a week = no PWC and NRP, just parents = no child support payable.

It's ridiculous.

Auntyem

shell_542 wrote: »

As for why are there no provisions for true 50/50 when it comes to the CSA ... well there's no excuse really is there? Both parents have the child equal number of nights a week = no PWC and NRP, just parents = no child support payable.

It's ridiculous.

Couldn't agree more, its a shambolic situation for us to be in as a country, that the default position is *not* for shared care.

OP, we are in the same position as you but as there are two children you are in luck. If you contact the CB people and claim again, you should receive the CB for one of the children. We did and now do, so that reverses the NRP definition for one of them.

Good luck

DX2

Auntyem wrote: »

Couldn't agree more, its a shambolic situation for us to be in as a country, that the default position is *not* for shared care.

OP, we are in the same position as you but as there are two children you are in luck. If you contact the CB people and claim again, you should receive the CB for one of the children. We did and now do, so that reverses the NRP definition for one of them.

Good luck

I don't think it's that simple. Assuming the parents are being civil they could each claim CB for a child if 2 is the "lucky" number, however the PWC can dispute this and then it would be down to hmrc to decide who the CB is payable to.


If you can't decide who should get Child Benefit

If you can't decide who should get Child Benefit and you and the other person both make a claim, we will have to decide who to pay it to. We choose certain people ahead of others. This is the order we'll use:

• the person your child lives with
• the wife, when the husband and wife live together
• a parent ahead of a non-parent
• a mother, when parents who aren't married live together

The decision on who'll get Child Benefit won't necessarily be the same for tax credits - if you're getting them.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/childbenefit/start/claiming/more-than-one-claim.htm#3

speedster

one solution would be to apply for CB for one child.

then, her csa claim would be counted out by your claim.

they wont split benefit for one child, but they have in many occasions awarded 1 to each parent in these situations where there is a 50/50 scenario.

Auntyem

Hi DX2, yes appreciate its not always clear cut. I believe the court order was the decisive factor in HMRC reaching the "one each" decision in our case. There was certainly no civility between parties involved :rotfl:.

The CB seems to be the key to making the PWC / NRP distinction in cases where there is equal shared care, so worthwhile to go for it IMO as it impacts the CSA situation.

Still not fair IMO unless both parties earn the exact same amount and therefore cancel each other out, but as fair as its possible to get with the current ludicrous system.

speedster

shell_542 wrote: »

I agree with BB, Ready. Although it might be easier said than done. I think you need to explain to your ex that as she gets child benefit, tax credits and you are still asked to pay child support, you will no longer be arranging care for out of school, not paying half the school fees, etc etc. You contribute your fair share of financial support when the children are in your care 50% of the time and as she receives extra financial support, those extra costs will come out of that.

Unless of course she is willing to drop the child maintenance and then you will continue as you were. If she realises that she was actually better off when you were paying towards costs rather than a child support figure, she might be reasonable.

Have you ensured you get the correct deductions to your child support for the 50/50 care you have?

exactly. do not pay her another penny until this is sorted. squirrel the money into an account to pay off any arrears while it's being sorted though.

also, if co is LTD and you are on basic salary with 50/50 likelihood is that she'll end up considerably worse off.

let her find that out for herself though. stop the gravy train and sit back and watch her come running back with her tail between her legs begging for the old arrangement.