CM/Access advice please !!

SlowMo_2

Hi all,

I wonder if you might be able to shed some light on a matter????

My partner split with her ex about 4 years ago, leaving the shared home and taking their (then aged 2) daughter with her. During the last 4 years there has been an informal arrangement for dad to pay CM which has been sporadic to say the least.. sometimes not paid for months but ultimately 'caught up' with eventually.

Access when daughter was pre school was Fri/Sat/Sun/return on Monday morning every fortnight..

..since daughter started school access became picking up on Saturday morning/returning on Sunday afternoon every fortnight. This was in part due to daughter starting school, though mum has always been keen for dad and daughter to have good relationship and encouraged him where possible to consider picking daughter up on a Friday.. for reasons best known to himself he has always declined.

Dad stopped paying CM March of 2009, stating variously that he *was skint, as no work available* didn't need to pay because of new fella in mums life (me!), *was waiting to get paid money owed to him.

In Oct 2009 Mum eventually asked dad to stop seeing daughter and to concentrate on work if indeed that was the problem, and to be honest, she was making a point I guess, that being a parent is a two way street.

Dad has made no attempt to see daughter, and no attempt to start paying maintenance money - ironically is now saying that he has never been skint and that he isn't paying CM because access stopped - however, check the dates above!

He is suggesting that he will take mum to court to gain access, and that the court will not be concerned that he is not paying CM - in short, suggesting that he holds all the cards and won't be held accountable for not living up to his financial responsibility.

WHAT IS THE REALITY HERE??

Is he totally entitled to access despite no CM being paid?
Does mum have a course of action to gain CM?

* Dad is self employed and maintains the taxman & the CSA can't get to him!

The simple truth of the situation is that mum totally wants dad to have access in order that dad and daughter can have a good relationship.. she would actually like dad to see more of daughter than he chooses to.. she only denied access as of Oct 09 to make the point about his not paying CM since March 09 and to try and make him aware of his responsibilities.. however, here we are in March 2010 and Dad appears in emails to completely believe he is in the right and that he is being put upon and that he does not have to pay..

Please, what is the reality here - surely it cannot be that mum must do all the hard work of bringing the young one up in every respect and yet dad can come and go as he pleases and not be expected to provide some kind of financial support?

Should we also consider the joint salaries that mum and I have - is there a point at which our earnings mean that he doesn't have to contribute?

ps - we have emails in which he states that he has never been skint, and that he has just decided to stop paying!!

karenx

Firstly acess and maintenance are totally different. If the dad is paying maintenance it doesnt give him an automatic right to acess, same if he wasnt paying. I suggest mum contacts CSA and gives over all the details she knows about him, adress business name DOB etc etc! Anything that will help. As he is self employed it really is tough to get maintenance from him, as he can claim he makes no money and have his books say the same if he can do cash in hand work. This is where the problem lies. IF he was an employee its a straight forward 15% of his take home pay per month or week. All mum can do is try her best with the CSA and maybe with a legal body contacting him it might make him stand up to his responsobilities. A bit selfish to say he isnt paying as he cant see his child. A bit like my ex, he claims not to want to pay as he doesnt want to see his son, so he avoids csa like the plague and yes he is now self employed so CSA cant get any money from him!
I wish her all the best!!

speedster

shouldn't have played the contact blocking card in the first place. dangerous game where only the children suffer.

seems to have backfired a bit, and if he is SE then the csa are stuffed and it'll be a long hard battle getting anything. i would advise trying some mediation to resolve some of the issues as a start.

if he does go to court, CM wont come into it, the judge will simply tell the pwc to continue with the csa and don't bring it up in court as it's not the issue.

missmontana

Of course he should contribute, its his daughter.

Contact the CSA, and provide them with all the information you have, including evidence from emails, if they need it.

Personally, I'd call his bluff and let him have access. Then he can't use the courts as a threat.

bonjovibel_729

hiya this sounds similar to my case....my ex was having my girls fri sat and sun every week and although i wasnt happy with having no weekends i put up with it....we had anagreement between us for cm and he paid it albeit late most months but like u he eventually did pay...then came the excuses in march last year of being skint and not being able to pay...so i promptly informed him i cant afford to take them down to him anymore and refused to let him have them every week and reduced it to every other week....i didnt hear anything from him for two months then got a letter from court sayin he was fighting for access....we went to court and in the end he lost out because the judge thought he was being unreasonable wanting htem every weekend so now we alternate....as for getting maintenance it has been a long road and i am still not getting regular money mainly due to csa incompetance hang in there tho

Kimitatsu

CM and access are in no way linked so yes he can make no contribution to his daughters upbringing and still be awarded a contact order for every other weekend and 50% of the holidays.

The courts will always rule in the best interest of the child and unless you can prove that seeing her father will have an adverse effect on her life then he will be awarded contact. As Speedster has said, contact blocking is viewed dimly, and they will refer you back to the CSA for CM.

However, if he is SE, does he work as a sole trader or under a Ltd co? If he works as a sole trader then try to get him referred through to criminal compliance who will look into his accounts and can investigate bank accounts etc. If he works as part of a ltd company then you need to ask for his dividend payments to be included in his calculations, as he can legitimately pay himself a nominal salary and take the bulk of payments as dividends which are not automatically accounted for.

SlowMo_2

Thanks guys for all of your help - it sheds some light and reinforces what we already know.. I take the point about contact being blocked and would say that it was a last resort to try to make the point about parenting being about a total group of responsibilities and not JUST playing at super daddy and parading his daughter in front of friends at the pub and taking the plaudits for how beautiful, intelligent and well mannered she is.. Dad is quoted in an email as saying that he doesn't see why he should pay any money for something he sees no benefit for - but promptly ignores the obvious response that the money is not for his benefit, but in fact it is for his daughter!!

He also won't go down the route of mediation.. it has been suggesed and he says no.. pointedly so.

Basically, he wants a one to one - either face to face or down the phone with mum.. he by and large refuses to commit anything to email and refuses the notion of meeting with an impartial party (a in a mediator) present.. which begs the question, what is it that he wants to do/say that he won't commit to writing or in front of a witness?

Mum wants daughter to have a full relationship with dad - mum also wants dad to realise the moral responsibility that he has to contribute towards the daughter that they both brought into the world.

Littl'un is a happy girl, living in a great place with great friends around her.. she has her mum and me, she also has the chance have dad playing a full part in her life.. so in fact she is in a better position than a lot of kids I guess..

clearingout

You know, many of us never receive money from our exs to support our children (myself included - ex self-employed with own ltd. company, takes a small salary but doesn't even pay the CSA on that, is being dealt with by criminal compliance) but contact isn't blocked on this basis. I get incredibly angry at my financial situation - I was left pregnant with our third child and my ex now has a foreign holiday ever 3 - 4 months with the girlfriend, always wearing new clothes, bragging about the restuarant he ate in last night, standing on my doorstep with his Starbucks coffee in hand saying he has no money - but this is not the children's problem, is it? I go without, the children go without (not that they are really old enough to know that yet) and we have adjusted. He has them 3 nights a week and they love that, they love being with him and they need to grow up knowing him. It's not for me to point out the error of his ways - they'll realise soon enough, it's written all over him!

Put everything in the hands of the CSA and try to get contact resumed. Your partner's child will be grateful in the year's to come. Far better her child turns round to her at 18 and says 'I know my dad has been an idiot with money and hasn't contributed towards my upbringing in the way you have, but I appreciate the opportunity you gave us to know each other and be in each other's lives' than 'I'm walking out to live with the dad you have kept from me for the last 10 years....', don't you think? Judgements, accurate ones, will be made in the years to come. As my mum says, 'patience is a virtue'! Good luck!

woody01

This is a classic! and it shows how spiteful PWC's can be.

Not getting the cash is obviously not good, but denying access because of it makes the NRP even worse.

Using a child to get your own way, or as some kind of punishment is pathetic and very low.

SlowMo_2

Of course you are entitled to your opinion and that's perfectly acceptable.. but I would add that unless you're in full possession of the facts its difficult to determine what is pathetic and what is not.

Fact - mum asked dad to stop seeing daughter originally in an effort to allow him more time to work, following his assertion that he had no money and that where work was being offered, he could not take it because of factors including contact with daughter. Mum was helping dad to sort himself out for a number of financial reasons, including his responsibility towards their daughter.

Fact - Prior to contact stopping dad maintained that he wanted to spend as much time as possible - mum was in agreement, suggesting friday night thru sunday morning - dad declined citing a 45 mile journey on a friday evening as prohibitive whilst publically maintaining that mum doesn't want it.

Fact - dad promised daughter a holiday in Europe, which never happened, citing bad weather so pointless. Dad then went to Scandanivia for two weeks.

Fact - dad stopped paying maintenance in March 09 citing lack of work, no money etc.. fact dad now maintains he has never been short of money but chose not to pay.

Fact - dad is a grown man, well aware of what he is entitled to.. that mum has asked him to stay away until he lives up to his moral responsibilities can only ever be a request not an order - has he once attempted to make the labourious 45 mile journey to see his daughter sine October - No.

Fact - dad chose not to attempt to see or even send present over xmas to daughter, even telling grandparents not to send gifts.

I could go on...

Responsibility and rights are a two way street, I know that.. but I can see a very happy, intelligent and kind little girl - that she is those things is almost entirely down to mum.. a mum who truly wants dad and daughter to have a meaningful relationship and yet is swimming against the tide in getting dad to be reasonable - Maintenance is just one aspect.

Kimitatsu

SlowMo wrote: »

Of course you are entitled to your opinion and that's perfectly acceptable.. but I would add that unless you're in full possession of the facts its difficult to determine what is pathetic and what is not.

Fact - mum asked dad to stop seeing daughter originally in an effort to allow him more time to work, following his assertion that he had no money and that where work was being offered, he could not take it because of factors including contact with daughter. Mum was helping dad to sort himself out for a number of financial reasons, including his responsibility towards their daughter.

Fact - Prior to contact stopping dad maintained that he wanted to spend as much time as possible - mum was in agreement, suggesting friday night thru sunday morning - dad declined citing a 45 mile journey on a friday evening as prohibitive whilst publically maintaining that mum doesn't want it.

Fact - dad promised daughter a holiday in Europe, which never happened, citing bad weather so pointless. Dad then went to Scandanivia for two weeks.

Fact - dad stopped paying maintenance in March 09 citing lack of work, no money etc.. fact dad now maintains he has never been short of money but chose not to pay.

Fact - dad is a grown man, well aware of what he is entitled to.. that mum has asked him to stay away until he lives up to his moral responsibilities can only ever be a request not an order - has he once attempted to make the labourious 45 mile journey to see his daughter sine October - No.

Fact - dad chose not to attempt to see or even send present over xmas to daughter, even telling grandparents not to send gifts.

I could go on...

Responsibility and rights are a two way street, I know that.. but I can see a very happy, intelligent and kind little girl - that she is those things is almost entirely down to mum.. a mum who truly wants dad and daughter to have a meaningful relationship and yet is swimming against the tide in getting dad to be reasonable - Maintenance is just one aspect.

I realise that having been on both sides of this fence, I am a parent with care and partner to an NRP - whos ex feels that blocking contact is a way of making a point.

Ultimately two wrongs dont make a right, and you need to be seen to be allowing contact and the the ex is not making that effort becuase if he goes to court you will be hauled over the coals. Under the childrens rights act, your daughter has a right to see and have a relationship with both parents.

In my opinion if the ex is stating the he doesnt have enough time to work because of contact with the child, let him have the contact (I dont know how old your daughter is but Friday evening to Sunday evening every other week is reasonable) and then when he cant be bothered to turn up, then you have facilitated everything, and the onus is back on him. Give him enough rope and he will more than likely hang himself, but the important thing for you is that you have been seen by your daughter and him to have allowed the access and it is him that has refused it. I have been through this myself and as hard as it is you have to grit your teeth and let the child make their own decision. In the case of my children they have decided not to have contact with their biological father as he has done just what your partners ex has done, in the case of my step children we have had a contact blocking PWC, and they bless them desperately want to see Dad but are afraid of the consequences from Mum, and the fallout is truly horrideous.

As for the financial side, put it in the hands of the CSA, as many of us will tell you, after many years FINALLY they seem to be getting around to the job they are supposed to be doing. Any information you can give them, such as the car he drives, the holidays he goes on, the mortgage he has etc etc will help them to refer straight to criminal compliance and the powers they have are huge. The most important thing is not to let it affect your relationship or that with the child.

As a final point you cant make him be a responsible parent, that has to come from him. The only thing you can do is monitor your childs welfare and if the continued broken promises are having an adverse affect and having been told he takes no notice, then and only then are you within your rights to withold contact. If I were you I would keep a diary of his promised contact and whether he keeps those promises, then you will have something to show the courts if it gets that far.