getting a bigger mortgage to avoid child support

speedster

PlayingHardball wrote: »

Speedster and FoundTrue: Your kid suffers at your hand whether you see that or not (fiver a week). You are both as bad as your ex's and only the children must suffer by that fact. Hopefully one day you will see that.

I would listen to Lizzie's excellent advice and set a good example of your financial integrity to your child, in the face of your most likely future court situations.

no. my daughter suffers at the hand of a contact blocking mother who uses the child as a pawn in her sick game.

it's got fook all to do with money. she's considerably better off than i am, so i fail to see exactly how my daughter is suffering at my hand.

Found_true_love

PlayingHardball wrote: »

Speedster and FoundTrue: Your kid suffers at your hand whether you see that or not (fiver a week). You are both as bad as your ex's and only the children must suffer by that fact. Hopefully one day you will see that.

I would listen to Lizzie's excellent advice and set a good example of your financial integrity to your child, in the face of your most likely future court situations.

I am deep in the court situation

I am up against a biased toward the mother system.

Mother lives with her b/f he works (good money) but yet somehow she manages to get legal aid........the LSC got fobbed off by the solicitors, can you believe the solicitor lied to the LSC to get the legal aid and the LSC are not interested!

She has a female solicitor, in front of a female judge and the ganging up on me not letting me tell them how hostile the ex is but........

The judge has now screwed up she has (i am told) acted outside of her considerable discretionary power and that has left the door open for me to appeal and get the judge recused.

Oh if only that will happen.........if it does then the courts are under scrutiny to have a FAIR hearing and I will get my chance to tell the truth about mothers behavior and attitude towards me

LizzieS_2

Found_true_love wrote: »

I have, as recently as a month ago via her solicitors, told her I would go into a voluntary agreement (remove the CSA from the picture) and would pay £80 a month to start with, to try and start the process again (I see it as an olive branch) she refuses to talk.

You have offered more than the csa, but more than likely less than the equivalent of the same job on PAYE.

Look at it logically, you are offerring a blackmail to get what you want. There is no guarantee that once you get what you want that you won't drop back to £5 (or even nil) support for your child.

Speedster, I would read the above quote before commenting what courts do and don't look at - yes they don't set amounts, but they certainly form opinions of people which leads to judgments on other issues

Found_true_love wrote: »

I am deep in the court situation

Found_true_love wrote: »

I am up against a biased toward the mother system.

And by your own admission, you are giving her ammunition. In your situation I would take the moral high ground rather than play tit for tat - I wouldn't be paying out unnecessary solicitor costs.

izzzzythedog

Found_true_love wrote: »

I am deep in the court situation

I am up against a biased toward the mother system.

Mother lives with her b/f he works (good money) but yet somehow she manages to get legal aid........the LSC got fobbed off by the solicitors, can you believe the solicitor lied to the LSC to get the legal aid and the LSC are not interested!

She has a female solicitor, in front of a female judge and the ganging up on me not letting me tell them how hostile the ex is but........

The judge has now screwed up she has (i am told) acted outside of her considerable discretionary power and that has left the door open for me to appeal and get the judge recused.

Oh if only that will happen.........if it does then the courts are under scrutiny to have a FAIR hearing and I will get my chance to tell the truth about mothers behavior and attitude towards me

best of luck , i doubt you will get far in appeal but do go for it anyway

im very supprised how you describe your situation as its a carbon copy of my own , ex screwing someone behind my back then an ex-party ruleing to get me from the house , skip forward 12 months and the court settle the devision of the home massively in her favour , violence toward myself etc , lies and deception from her proveable but went unquestioned by the courts , stopped from seeing the children etc etc , my stance was she would recieve nothing whatsoever , not a penny , it would enrich her lifestyle and leave me struggling for 15 years so thought a simple no , i feel no guilt and niether should i , she created this not myself and i will not reward her , if the children were seen to be suffering i would have them out of there in a shot , thats the bit thats always missing , if the children were suffering then 99% of all men ( and its always men thanks to the system ) would pay without question as would i

good luck fella

Found_true_love

LizzieS wrote: »

You have offered more than the csa, but more than likely less than the equivalent of the same job on PAYE.

Look at it logically, you are offerring a blackmail to get what you want. There is no guarantee that once you get what you want that you won't drop back to £5 (or even nil) support for your child.

Ah LizzieS you miss the point, please re- read then re-read again.

The offer was voluntary agreement to start negotiations to start to build TRUST, did I say £80 and I HAVE to have more contact? NO!

AND and I think you miss this point big time, if we have an agreement and i break the agreement then she can reduce contact because the agreement was outside the system areana and rules. So its not blackmail, what I am doing is, in effect, paying her £80 per month to talk to me about our childs future, what is so difficult to understand?

Its as simple as this, she agrees to my proposals, starts to get the £80 so is more than she is getting at the moment. We talk, two possible outcomes

1 - Talks successful, I compromise, she compromises we agree on "the deal" everything better than it was - result happiness :j

2 - Talks break down, we go back to using the rules that the government have made up

She uses the courts system to be a contact blocker she tries to take me for as much money through the CSA rules, trouble is using those rules doesnt get her any ££££££ because my income is shoooot,

Why? because for the last two years I have been spending all my time fighting her in the courts to get contact and have not focused on my business, which is now running at a loss :eek: and guess what?

She ends up with £5 per week

AND who is to blame? der she is

Oh and BTW as long as I am paying the CSA assesed amount then she cant use that against me because

1 the Judges trust the CSA to be correct
2 The judges hate talking about money
3 If she tries it on, the judge comes to me and says "what say you?" I say "I am paying the ammount assesed by the CSA on time every time your honour" He tells mum to "go away"

I am not critisised.

See the problem is with your thinking LizzieS is that you think NRP should pay no matter what.

I think RP should not block contact and give more contact if requested up to an equal share of care the formula of 5 nights a fortnight and half of all school holidays is actually pretty much a 50/50 split

So LizzieS what say you on matter of the NRP asking for a shared care arrangement and it being agreed without the need to resort to courts?

Lets face it MEN and WIMMIN are equal right? (womens lib and all that movement etc) they want equal jobs, pay, rights, equal maternity leave (men dont get that do they?), equal this equal that etc etc etc

Men want equal time with thier children!!!!!!!!!!!!:beer:

Is this so hard to understand for you?:T

Found_true_love

PlayingHardball wrote: »

Speedster and FoundTrue: Your kid suffers at your hand whether you see that or not (fiver a week). You are both as bad as your ex's and only the children must suffer by that fact. Hopefully one day you will see that.

I would listen to Lizzie's excellent advice and set a good example of your financial integrity to your child, in the face of your most likely future court situations.

And pray tell what role model is mother being then?

Lies, deciet, hostile towards F in front of child, hostile towards child in front of my family (go on ask me about that one then!), allowing child to sleep in same bed as 7 year old girl (not his sister even), having child sleep in same bed as her and her b/f (he has a violent criminal background), her b/f is her cousin, claiming single persons housing allowance and b/f has moved in, and on and on and on........

Me on the other hand, am married now, wife has children we get on together, wifes ex and me get on together, we work to make sure children are all happy, they like and respect me, wifes children can see thier F any time they wish (although we have the balance right so no one asks now). Because of my wifes job and her earnings we have agreed that ex's maintenance payments should go down and have.

Wife keeps his payments in a separate account so that is the money she spends on them, any surplus goes towards kids holidays spending money etc

I have no wish to live on ex's money and have insisted that my wife sets this system up, we have discussed it and agreed it with her ex, he is happy.

Me as a role model to my (only) child, when we have him he sees a loving, caring happy family, no arguments, no lies, no deciet.

I do have the integrity and moral high ground thank you

Blonde_Bint

Can I just say, Lizzie and Playinghardball. Speedster and FoundTrueLove are only giving us the tip of the ice berg here. Their descriptions of events and lies fit our situation to a T they could be describing my life.

As someone whos been in the NRP camp for a very long time (done it every which way but loose in our case) I feel that the kind of pwc that us three are dealing with are very similar people. I think that these people cannot be reasoned with at all (after over 10 yrs i have officially given up pandering to her because theres no point in 10 yrs we still cant do enough).

If either of you ever meet an nrp with a pwc like the ones we are dealing with and live in that situation for say 5 to 10 yrs you will have a better understanding of where we are coming from the length of time your at it is a factor too you get worn down by it.

This is not a pwc against nrp post dont take it like that, i'm not going for a whose the most hard done by here lol. just that I have much sympathy for hard done by NRP's I feel equally sympathetic towards a PWC struggling with a cr*ppy NRP. If my posts lean more towards the NRP its because I have experiance of what thats like being an NRPP and I have never had the experience of being a PWC, so I just dont have those experience so cant comment in those areas. I hope thats understandable.

speedster

with ref to lizzie's point about money/court.

i can assure you, the courts aren't interested. there was a case in family law week about a year ago where the judge said to the mother, and i quote "if you dare mention contact and maintenance in the same sentence again in my court, i will order a change in residency"

they hate greedy contact blocking mothers and in fact, changes of residency are becoming increasingly common, with contact blocking and emotional blackmail being the main reasons they are awarded. also, 50 odd contact blockers were jailed last year and loads more given the new option of community service. the judge in my case has told my ex that's what's gonna happen to her if she doesn't "buck up her ideas"

also, in court i produced a letter from my ex, to my solicitor stating that if i gave her more money, then i would be "allowed" to see my daughter more.

the judge went ballistic at her and tore her a new arzehole. her card was marked from then on in. hence the success i've had since.

to summarise, i dare ANY pwc to go into court and mention money.

Found_true_love

Blonde_Bint wrote: »

Can I just say, Lizzie and Playinghardball. Speedster and FoundTrueLove are only giving us the tip of the ice berg here. Their descriptions of events and lies fit our situation to a T they could be describing my life.

As someone whos been in the NRP camp for a very long time (done it every which way but loose in our case) I feel that the kind of pwc that us three are dealing with are very similar people. I think that these people cannot be reasoned with at all (after over 10 yrs i have officially given up pandering to her because theres no point in 10 yrs we still cant do enough).

How many more people on here think that this situation is similar to thiers?

AS I stated, if you analyse all thse types of case (people normally RP or PWC normally wimmin) you will find a very similar psychological profile

And the worse of it is, if they are all of a similar pshychological tytpe and the system supports them then there is something really wrong with the system because it is those wimmin that are the problem not the Father, i fear.

So the courts need to understand the reasons behind the psychology and deal with it differently.

Judge to mother "the father does not represent a threat to his children he is a loving father, a caring and good person, what reason have you got for not wanting his children to have more overnight contact

Answer from mother "bullshoot, bullshoot, bullshoot, lies, untruths, deciet, etc"

Judge "so you have no real reason then other than not good for the child to see the father as often why not?

Mother "because they will miss me too much they cant possibly function without me being there, they are too young to be away from me for anymore than 24hours or they will not cope or die"

Judge "so no real reson then other than your fears or possible lack of willingness to allow it?"

Mother "erm well erm well erm.........."

Judge to father "what contact do you feel is right for your child sir?"

Father "your honour, I feel that as I only live a short way away that I be allowed to pick my child up every other Friday and return to school on Monday (so my ex bootch doesn't have to see me, she seems to hate me so much so that wont be a loss for her lol (judge laughs too)) and that I have my child evenly space out during the weeks maybe one Thursday then one Tuesday (overnight) (both collections from school see above) either side of her weekend and half of all school holidays, meaning a roughly 50/50 shared care"

Judge to mother "and what say you to that?"

mother "erm it will harm my child, it is not fair, I want control, I want to make the father and child suffer because I can, I can offer no explanation as to why I feel that way because I am so depressed I think I have Bi polar depression (look that one up as part of your research) so I am not capable of functioning without my chilren by my side, if you make that order it will make me more depressed and the children will suffer beacuse I am not happy and my unhappyness will impact on them unnecessarily, and I dont want to shre my children with him he is horrible and deserves all he gets (or deserves all I can give him) I dont want him to have more overnight contact because then I will not have any reason for wanting money from him if we share the care, I want the children and for him to pay me through the CSA for that privilege, I dont care if he wants more contact, I DONT" (looks to Judge with tears sniffles and a downtrodded face a truly sad and loving mother aw)

Judge to mother "so what you are really telling me is that because I may award a contact order that you dont like you will pass that unhappyness onto your children? Are you not capable of dealing with orders from the court then? Are you telling me that you are not sensible enough to keep your feeling from your children are your telling me that you are not capable of dealing with these things? should I consider giving residence to the father and you a contact order then?

Mother (an enlightened look now) Ah since you put it that way your honour I will reasses my position.

after a brief interval

Mother ah your honour I will give father one more night and I will be happy

judge "so it be ordered then"

Once again the Father is screwed because of the judiciaries failure to understand the psychology of those type of wimmin.

tell me Im wrong with that scenario!!

speedster

you are wrong on a couple of points.

firstly, although pwc's are 95% wimmin. male pwc's can and are just as horrid.

secondly, i love reading your posts, with the wit and content, however. ya need to tone it down for court! i posted it on another thread that courts hate being used as a boxing ring.

if they sense the hostilities, you'll get nowhere.