What will happen if he has no work?

anon33

A little of our situation: dh and I have been married for a few months, together nearly 5 years. We have a 4yr old dd, he has 10yr old dd who lives with her mum and I have 2 much older ds's who have both left home.

I work pt and dd is in pre-school or at child minder. Dh pays ex a monthly maintenance which is a private arrangement.

Dh is a builder, and although he's been really lucky with work, lately it's been very scarce with only a couple of days a week if we're lucky.

My question is, if he's not earning, am I legally liable for the maintenance??

I know morally the answer is yes, but if it comes to food, gas/elec and rent for us, then I know what's going to have to give.

LizzieS_2

No you are not liable at all.

Whether you choose to pay very much depends on the relationship with pwc - would non-payment result in her using the csa instead of the private arrangement? It might be worth looking into how much he would pay via the csa over the full year - that way you can decide whether you have anything to lose or not.

anon33

I don't have any kind of relationship with her lol, can't stand her tbh blunt!! We have a very different look on life! Dh seems to get on ok with her.

I'm not sure about the csa. Dh isn't on the birth certificate due to her claiming benefits apparently. He pays her cash every month, which I very much doubt she declares...... She's on benefits, and has never worked a day in her life.

shell_542

Benefits has nothing to do with a name on a certificate. He can apply for parental responsibility if he wanted to.

Your husband should be paying 15% of his net income every month (including child tax credits ... and all working tax credits if you get any, if he earns more than you, half if you earn the same and none of you earn more than him) to his ex for their child, after deducting 15% off first for your child living with you.

Don't know if that helps.

If she isn't declaring the money to benefits, she maybe wouldn 't be in too much of a rush to involve the CSA.

anon33

shell_542 wrote: »

Benefits has nothing to do with a name on a certificate. He can apply for parental responsibility if he wanted to.

Your husband should be paying 15% of his net income every month (including child tax credits ... and all working tax credits if you get any, if he earns more than you, half if you earn the same and none of you earn more than him) to his ex for their child, after deducting 15% off first for your child living with you.

Don't know if that helps.

If she isn't declaring the money to benefits, she maybe wouldn 't be in too much of a rush to involve the CSA.

I didn't realise any of that, and it does help, thank you.

I earn more than him, and do normally. If I put how much he's earnt this tax year (after tax & expenses? He's self employed), divided by the number of weeks to get an average, then we're overpaying her quite a substantial amount.........:eek:

shell_542

anon33 wrote: »

I didn't realise any of that, and it does help, thank you.

I earn more than him, and do normally. If I put how much he's earnt this tax year (after tax & expenses? He's self employed), divided by the number of weeks to get an average, then we're overpaying her quite a substantial amount.........:eek:

If moneys tight then you have every reason to talk to her about reassessing the amount she is getting. I would be sure to explain that you have used the calculator on the CSA website and the figure you come up with is what they would ask for if she decided to contact them ... just in case she thinks she would get more by going to them. Good luck x

LizzieS_2

The csa are not a threat from the sense of your OH paying more than their rates - he can only gain by using csa.

I am worried over the benefits part though as that could bite your OH on the backside in future. Sorry, but I have to ask, when did the private agreement begin and what was her benefit claiming status from then to at least Oct 2008? Also, how have payments been made to her?

shell_542

Can they backdate child support through the CSA if the PWC was on benefits prior to October 2008 if there never a case with the CSA in the first place?

I know what you're saying Lizzie. I thought that only applied if there was a case open though before Oct 2008 but there was a private agreement between the PWC and NRP.

In theory could the CSA really get a hold of all records of PWCs who were on Income Support before Oct 2008 and didn't have a CSA case open and then demand backpayment from the NRP for the time the PWC was on benefites?!

anon33

Lizzie - I know exactly where you're going, and it is something I dread happening, but dh won't listen to me on this and never has :mad:.

We've been together 5 years, and it's been a private arrangement paying her in cash with no receipt for all that time, and previously as far as I know. They split up when she was around 2.

Basically I feel we're wide open to having to pay this money again if anybody looks closely at her circumstances, and it's something that I'm not at all happy with!

daska

TBH I'd stop paying in cash. It bit us in the bum that we had no record of maintenance being paid and our NRP still tells DSD that her dad never paid a penny - she always refused it if I offered her a cheque. I suggest he loses his cash card and has a problem getting a replacement...

speedster

anon33 wrote: »

I don't have any kind of relationship with her lol, can't stand her tbh blunt!! We have a very different look on life! Dh seems to get on ok with her.

I'm not sure about the csa. Dh isn't on the birth certificate due to her claiming benefits apparently. He pays her cash every month, which I very much doubt she declares...... She's on benefits, and has never worked a day in her life.

i'd be a bit worried if i were you.

there will already be a case open against the father of that child. if they get wind of his name, you're gonna end up in the she-ite.

you can be darn sure if she's been on benefits for years, the csa will already be aware of it. you may get a MASSIVE bill drop through your letterbox in the future.