How do I prove he is depriving himself of income?

Marisco

SarahT1980 wrote: »

What other facts do you need? apart from that he is heavily into drinking gambling and prostitutes I didnt feel that was relevant.

My question is why is he allowed to get away with declaring his income at £15k when other building site foremen earns 50?

I think AM summed that up. Second point is not relevant. If he is paying, and that is what the CSA say he should pay, then the fact that he is doing all the other things should be of no concern to you. If you helped him build up the business, and he just gave it away, then yes, you have cause for complaint, but if he built up the business himself after you split, then no you should have no say in how he conducts his business affairs.

clearingout

Jetta, having a go because the OP doesn't consider £68 a week a fair assessment isn't really acceptable. the Law states that one child is entitled to 15% of the NRPs income etc. etc. The OP doesn't have to state the full story - it may be that she's living in the South East where a small hovel costs in excess of £300k, she may be working every hour possible with her children in childcare 8am - 6pm and a little extra would allow her to work a few less hours and spend some quality time with the children, her children may well be teenagers demanding ipods and trainers and new clothes as they keep up with their friends, she may have a child who is gifted at the piano and she wants to send her to Vienna for the summer to get some serious tuition but can't afford it....or she might just be a money grabbing witch of a woman who wants to have her cake and eat it....the point is, she's entitled to the correct % of her ex's full income, not just the amount he chooses to declare.

I would be very happy with £68 a week as I get nothing at all from my ex (who is also self employed). But being happy with that amount wouldn't stop me from chasing him for the correct amount as laid down in Law. I would do that because it's fair and our children are entitled to it.

jetta_wales

clearingout wrote: »

Jetta, having a go because the OP doesn't consider £68 a week a fair assessment isn't really acceptable. the Law states that one child is entitled to 15% of the NRPs income etc. etc. The OP doesn't have to state the full story - it may be that she's living in the South East where a small hovel costs in excess of £300k, she may be working every hour possible with her children in childcare 8am - 6pm and a little extra would allow her to work a few less hours and spend some quality time with the children, her children may well be teenagers demanding ipods and trainers and new clothes as they keep up with their friends, she may have a child who is gifted at the piano and she wants to send her to Vienna for the summer to get some serious tuition but can't afford it....or she might just be a money grabbing witch of a woman who wants to have her cake and eat it....the point is, she's entitled to the correct % of her ex's full income, not just the amount he chooses to declare.

I would be very happy with £68 a week as I get nothing at all from my ex (who is also self employed). But being happy with that amount wouldn't stop me from chasing him for the correct amount as laid down in Law. I would do that because it's fair and our children are entitled to it.

Just because something is legal, doesn't make it instantly moral, just as she might find his actions are legal but not feel they are moral he could most certainly feel the exact same way about her actions also,

clearingout

so morally you think it acceptable that a parent pays the least amount possible towards their children?

jetta_wales

clearingout wrote: »

so morally you think it acceptable that a parent pays the least amount possible towards their children?

The least amount possible would be a lot less than £68 a week if he can chose how low to show his earnings.

clearingout

jetta_wales wrote: »

The least amount possible would be a lot less than £68 a week if he can chose how low to show his earnings.

I can see that. But the point is, the OP believes (rightly or wrongly), that he earns alot more than he's letting on. If this is the case (and we don't know, it may be his girlfriend funds his lifestyle), ss her ex behaving in a way that could be considered to be of benefit to the children? Is he 'moral'?

jetta_wales

clearingout wrote: »

I can see that. But the point is, the OP believes (rightly or wrongly), that he earns alot more than he's letting on. If this is the case (and we don't know, it may be his girlfriend funds his lifestyle), ss her ex behaving in a way that could be considered to be of benefit to the children? Is he 'moral'?

ss? Don't quite get what your asking from your wording of the question sorry.

clearingout

sorry! should have read 'is'...!

jetta_wales

By not giving his ex more money than she needs to give them a perfectly adequate quality of life? Depends on wether he himself is a complete no show or not I guess. If he isn't though then I don't see why she has to be the one to spend his extra money on them (or maybe herself of course).

AnxiousMum

Looking at it from a child's point of view - if the parent I lived with was having to scrimp and save to get by each month, and the other parent was living a lavish lifestyle - I know how I'd feel I also know which parent, when they were older and maybe needed a helping hand, I'd be more willing to put my hand in my pocket to help out, or be prepared to put some of my other priorities aside to help out in times of need. Remember.....your children will choose your nursing home