Payment to ex means virtually no money to live on

lovetowinacar

ihatecaptcha wrote: »

Yes, it would make sense for him to see a solicitor and get a court order drawn up for future maintenance. Going through the CSA is no way to settle things if his name is on the mortgage. All the outgoings and assets need to be taken into consideration, including pensions. And maybe you should keep out of it, and let the parents and their solicitors work out an agreement about the best way to support their children. Your brother may feel his children are worth more than £15.50 each per week.

Yes he feels that his children are worth more than £15.50 each per week and is currently paying his ex almost all his net pay but this means he has virtually nothing left to live on hence the friend's spare room free of charge and eating at parents house. It is not sustainable and is certainly not fair. She is more than happy with situation though and I'm sure money isn't going on the children when she receives it! By paying her less he can then spend more on the children when they are with him and hopefully afford a small place to rent. Lets not forget the fact that she kicked him out - its her third affair it won't last but there you go, but meanwhile the children live with her (very distressed), she keeps the house, car, furniture etc etc - he gets the clothes on his back and pays for everythng else. I have suggested he applies to have the children live with him a much more stable environment than boyfriends passing through but he needs to be able to afford this which he cannot when he pays so much money to her (she works 30 hours he works 40 childcare currently not paid since children are 14 and 10) and she mainly works school hours with her mother on hand around corner if needed.

AnxiousMum

He may be seen as behaving in a 'doormat' fashion .......however, losing your partner is one thing, losing your kids is totally a different thing, and many a parent will do whatever is necessary to know within themselves that they have done whatever they can to ensure their children are provided for. But...........(and I'm a PWC) it is also the RESPONSBILITY OF THE PWC to assist in providing for their children, not only up to the NRP.
Get him to enroll with the CSA, and go for a meeting with a solicitor with regards to the house and assets. Give serious consideration to having the children reside with him if he feels that he can do this. A stable environment for the kids is essential, and men passing through the door on an 'as needed' basis by the PWC is not in the best interests of the kids. Maybe when she's only getting the £29.90 a week from him, she won't be wanting them! A rotten thing to say.....but seems she's all out for whatever money she can get from this poor guy.

Kimitatsu

MOVING THREADS FOR BETTER RESPONSES


Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere(please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to another board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

Kimitatsu

ihatecaptcha wrote: »

Yes, it would make sense for him to see a solicitor and get a court order drawn up for future maintenance. Going through the CSA is no way to settle things if his name is on the mortgage. All the outgoings and assets need to be taken into consideration, including pensions. And maybe you should keep out of it, and let the parents and their solicitors work out an agreement about the best way to support their children. Your brother may feel his children are worth more than £15.50 each per week.

Sorry but this is not correct. He can open a claim with the CSA for maintenance for the children - he doesnt have to wait for his partner to do it. All he has to do is ring them and they will get the ball rolling. The courts will not rule for CHILD maintenance and even in the unlikely event he did get one it can be overturned by the CSA at a later date.

He needs to stop giving her cash in hand now and if he wants to give her direct payments do it via the bank clearly marked child maintenance payments so he can prove it to the CSA instead of building up arrears.

If the house is mortgaged between them then he needs to either get the house sold (point of note here if his name is on the mortgage then legally he has a right to reside in the property) or get a court order with a mesher order on the house for 50% of the value (you dont say whether they are married - if they are then she may get more, if not then it is a 50/50 split) and indemnifying him from the mortgage. That way if she decides not to pay then it is not his fault.

Regardless of whether he believes they are worth more than £30 a week, his children will suffer if he does not find himself somewhere to live and be able to support them when they need it. The maintenance disregard in this case works in the favour of the PWC but if he stopped paying all of the bills and mortgage then she would come to her senses a lot sooner. On the point of the residency order at 10 and 14 the children would be deemed to have their own opinion and so their wishes would be taken into account. IF you brother had custody of the children then he would also be able to move back into the property and she would be expected to move out and he could claim maintenance from her, I doubt that is what he would want to do but the system woks both ways so he would be in receipt of CTC, WTC CB etc.