How much should I "pay" my ex to have HIS kids

ben500

liney wrote:

If he thinks it costs £500 quid to take care of them for the week then his maintenace should be £250 (half) x 52 /12 = £1083 per month, not £750 if you want to be prescise about what the figures 'should' be.

Actually here's the math.
The agreed weekly cost being £175.38pw the most he could expect would be that figure, less his payment of that figure for the specified week the sum total being £350.76 so essentially he is seeking to make a profit of £149.62 assuming no other pertinant costs over and above the normal and accepted costs. Dirty rotten sh*t if you ask me. But then again nobody has asked me yet because they are all too busy making judgements on behalf of the perceived "wronged woman" rather than rational arguements based on fact I'm afraid. That is not a slight at the original poster just that the comments made are general and based on assumption with no foundation, other than bias.

BrokeBrunette

ben500 wrote:

In brief No. But no account is ever given to the fact that the absent parent still has to maintain a "home" that he or she can invite the child/children to for visiting rights irrespective of his or hers needs of accomodation! Why does the absent parent always have to be the loser? why is all the moral guilt ALWAYS placed on the absent parent? Why is it always assumed the absent parent WANTS to be an absent parent, hey give me the kids anyday! Fortunately for me I am no longer the absent parent but the resident parent, my ex-partner refused to acknowledge my childs residence at my home for FIVE months consequently receiving payments from me for those five months whilst I was raising my child, The csa insisted that as long as she kept telling them the child was with her then if I ceased payment they would PROSECUTE me unless I made a counter claim, I didn't wish to claim and refused to do so for that five months, in the end I succumbed as I was fed up with her smug attitude and my own feeling of helplesness in my pursuit to stop my own payments. I had incidentally been making payments for the last 12yrs and quite happpily despite my children being resident with me for 3 days and nights per week.

Ben
That was a disgusting thing for her to do. What else can I say.

ben500

BrokeBrunette wrote:

Ben
That was a disgusting thing for her to do. What else can I say.

I'd like to say it cost her but it hasn't, she got away with five months and will end up paying for three months as he has left school, I was just happy ending the situation where I was not only paying her to not raise our child but costing me double to raise my child,

I have my children that is enough compensation for me.

BrokeBrunette

ben500 wrote:

I have my children that is enough compensation for me.

Exactly!
I guess the only thing you can do is grit your teeth, rage inside about the unfairness of it, then thank your lucky stars that you are the one now raising your children. I wouldn't be without my two for any amount of money, even though we never have any spare!

liney

Yes I know what he actually pays, however if he thinks this is the cost (£500 as he is requesting) he should be putting his payments up on the return of the mother from her holiday. Fair's fair /wink

ben500

liney wrote:

Yes I know what he actually pays, however if he thinks this is the cost (£500 as he is requesting) he should be putting his payments up on the return of the mother from her holiday. Fair's fair /wink

Yes I agree he has either identified a shortfall in payments of £149.32 or displayed an ambition to profit, that assuming that he should be paying the full cost of raising the children and not taking into account the need for him to provide for them even in their absence but that's a whole other arguement. He's a tvvat but not as big a tvvat as he's being made out to be.

mishkanorman

I have voiced this opinion before and since reading the latest replies i agree even more,

what ben500 is saying is that the fact of asking for money isnt unreasonable, perhaps he is asking for too much but still his reason for doing so is correct. Actually most people here are arguing the same point but are, i feel, being more critical of ben500 comments as he is male,

Alos most also presuming that just because they love and want kids everyone else should, maybe thats one part of his life the dad deeply regrets and as he such isnt taking much interest BUT he is doing his moral and legal duty by providing money ( better than some dads manage)

mishka

angelatgraceland

ben500 wrote:

Actually here's the math.
The agreed weekly cost being £175.38pw the most he could expect would be that figure, less his payment of that figure for the specified week the sum total being £350.76 so essentially he is seeking to make a profit of £149.62 assuming no other pertinant costs over and above the normal and accepted costs. Dirty rotten sh*t if you ask me. But then again nobody has asked me yet because they are all too busy making judgements on behalf of the perceived "wronged woman" rather than rational arguements based on fact I'm afraid. That is not a slight at the original poster just that the comments made are general and based on assumption with no foundation, other than bias.

Now that sounds a sensible compromise. There are never any "winners" in these situations. If I said "grateful" before0I think it was taken out of context. What I meant was, glad that he had the opportunity to enjoy his children for a whole week-regardless of "rights"-just having the opportunity to do so. I hope he makes the most of it.

Dazzieboo

WOW

What an interesting thread it turned into and good to hear other peoples points of view..

Just clarifying the monthly payments, because of the financial agreement we have come to, there is 8 years left on the mortgage, the endowment (which is on track) pays in 4 years, leaving the rest on repayment. When the first half is paid off, I will be given the house and the one condition I make no claim on his new property. All parties agree on this. The mortgage, endowments, insurances come to £700, the extra £60 is a bouns which goes towards the "school fund", it costs around £70 per month for both my kids to go to school, this includes school meals, after school activities and the usual bribery letters from school, ie, if your child brings in £1, she can dress up as a george flag all day. :rolleyes:

So with the mortgage taken care of, I still have to feed, clothe and maintain the kids, if I was to give away the whole of my August tax credits, I would have no money left to buy them new clothes for the Autumn Term, I have already been asked to make sure the kids have everything they need including new shoes and their dinner money all sorted. Had it been suggested that I only sent the uniform which still fitted and he would take them out for more and shoes, the matter would be completely different and I would have offered him more. He will only actually have the kids for 4 days to take them out and do things with, so I feel £110 will be ample, my Son does not eat much and my Daughter eats everything that adults do, so there will be no need for a special diet.

When we first split and he spoke about having the kids on a fortnightly basis, there was never any mention of him having money to fund these trips, of course the visits never happened as his new partner is too old and can't cope with having young kids around. I have heard no more from him, so maybe he is mulling it over.

Lady_S

To be honest I think the way you have set it out above is a bit critical. Your ex is giving you money to allow you to stay in a house which you wish to stay in. For two children on CSA rules he would have to be on an income of £3800 a month ( take home). I doubt this is the case as few people actually take this home.

At the end of the day I do think he is asking for alot, but he is taking the care over which he pays you for. Therefore there has to be some give and take in the situation. Basically I agree with the above that he should get a discount for the week, and then the weeks money back, which would be £380.

What never fails to disgust or amaze me on this board is that people are more than willing to support women who ask for whatever from their partners and don't want them to see the kids, but, they are not willing to give anything to their ex partner at all, sometimes even access.