What to tell the kids

fannyanna

In my opinion the PWC should not be asking anymore from the NRP. If the NRP wants to buy additional then that's brilliant but the PWC should not expect more from the already contributing NRP.

FBaby

Amazing the conclusions that are coming out of so little information, I think it says quite a lot about the stereotypical assumptions that are regularly made about how pwcs use maintenance payments...

for 1, why assume that she is on benefits? Maybe she is working very hard but lowish salary and limited tax credits. For 2, since when are school trips an essential need? For 3, who says that the child had new shoes paid by the mum, but then ruined them, or lost one, and the mum had said that she wasn't prepared to buy another new one, that he will need to use his old pair, and the child goes crying to his dad (thinking of that because that happens to be the exact story a friend of mine was telling me the other week).

We have no background here to decide whether the pwc has grounds or not to ask for extra help in addition to whatever maintenance is being paid.

DUTR

FBaby wrote: »

Amazing the conclusions that are coming out of so little information, I think it says quite a lot about the stereotypical assumptions that are regularly made about how pwcs use maintenance payments...

for 1, why assume that she is on benefits? Maybe she is working very hard but lowish salary and limited tax credits. For 2, since when are school trips an essential need? For 3, who says that the child had new shoes paid by the mum, but then ruined them, or lost one, and the mum had said that she wasn't prepared to buy another new one, that he will need to use his old pair, and the child goes crying to his dad (thinking of that because that happens to be the exact story a friend of mine was telling me the other week).

We have no background here to decide whether the pwc has grounds or not to ask for extra help in addition to whatever maintenance is being paid.

Perhaps you should read the original post again which includes "
The kids are constantly asking for me to provide clothes, trips etc.. additional to CSA payment. And they do need these items as the absolute bare minimum is often not provided. I'm often called with a child in tears, example; not having a pair of shoes for school. With trips they are told unless dad pays half they can't go, so I am the baddie when i say no. I sometimes relent , but sometimes stick to my guns and say no." :cool:

DaisyFlower

Depends on the age of the children. If they are high school age they are old enough to know the basics, tell them you pay x per month which their mother should match plus the additional tax credits and child benefit the mother gets and then let them see that they are being provided for.

If they are under high school age then tell them that you and their mum sort the money out between yourselves and then speak to your ex and make sure she knows that 50% of the costs fall to her - if not more if she gets the child benefits etc.

MoneySaverForever

Honesty is always the best policy I say, sorry to hear of your sitation and I wish you lots of love and luck xxx

Marisco

FBaby wrote: »

I think it says quite a lot about the stereotypical assumptions that are regularly made about how pwcs use maintenance payments...

Sometimes they are not assumptions though, sometimes we know exactly what is going on!! I'm talking about our own cases obviously, not others, but you do see quite a few cases on here where the PWC demands more money, even though the NRP is compliant. We can only go on what the op has written, and to me it sounds like the PWC is wanting more and more off him, and using the kids as a bargaining tool!! I'd say what a couple of others are saying, (depending on age) tell them exactly the score, if they are old enough, if not, then just say you'll discuss it with their mother, then just tell her no!!

Most NRP's feel a sense of guilt, and by the hell, some PWC's play on it!! Between the CSA and oh's ex, we nearly ended up on the street!! So we started saying no to her demands, it soon sunk in!! I started dealing with things, as oh was too soft, to his own detriment, so she got the message, she knew she couldn't "play" me like she did with him. She's the nastiest person I've ever had the misfortune to meet (that's why oh left her!!) In no way are all PWC's like this, but when you do have one, they have to be dealt with firmly, and make it plain that you refuse to be a "pushover".

iluvfreebies

well moral issues aside - the government set the rate at which maintenance should be paid - provided the op is making the payments asked of them they have no obligation to pay anything more. If the welfare of the children is an issue then there are agencys that concerns can be raised with social services etc.

FBaby

but we do NOT know how much he pays. The pcw is not asking for the FULL money for the trips, it would appear she is asking for half. Without knowing her revenues and what the maintenance is, we just don't know. We could assume that he pays a good contribution and that the pwc is on benefits and just spending all her money on herself, but we could equally assume that the nrp pays a small amount, that the pwc is struggling to make ends meet and she is asking for a bit of help.

For all we know she might be contributing just as much as the nrp, but together, it is still not enough. The PWC is also under no obligation to make up the difference, so that might be why the kids end up with not all they want/need. OP talks about clothes, shoes, trips... maybe they do get the bare minimum, but it comes from primark and the kids are asking dad for labels?

I am not saying the nrp should automatically say yes to all the demands, far from it, I am just saying that without knowing more about the circumstances, how can WE advise as to what is right and what is wrong?

Kimitatsu

I dont think anyone has made an assumption about anything. My comment was that the benefits system (and that DOES include tax credits as it is a means tested benefit) is there to ensure that the basics are provided for.

It is irrelevant just HOW much the NRP is paying because he has been assessed by the relevant government body as to how much he legally has to pay. Regardless of whether you are income related benefits or not, all schools will try to ensure that children can go on trips where they are an educational need, even if it means paying over a longer time or subsidising the cost to a certain level.

The OP's original question was should he tell the children about the finances or not? Not anything about how much it is or all of the other things that people seem to read into it. The courts actually direct parents NOT to discuss finances with the children because it is a matter between the parents not the parent and child - now this is not to say that parents should not be allowed to say, you cant have that because I cant afford it, but equally putting a child in tears on the phone and telling the parent its all their fault is not fair either.

FBaby

Kimitatsu wrote: »

My comment was that the benefits system (and that DOES include tax credits as it is a means tested benefit) is there to ensure that the basics are provided for.

And maybe, she is now with a partner who earns enough so that they are not entitled to tax credits. Does this mean that he should be the one providing for what both parents are not able to?

It is irrelevant just HOW much the NRP is paying because he has been assessed by the relevant government body as to how much he legally has to pay

And you think children 's need adapt to whatever the relevant government say is ok? If an nrp only pays £5 a week because thats how it is, he should never have to try to help to contribute towards a pair of shoes?

I agree that finances shouldn't be discussed with the children, but I don't think there is any wrong to say that a child can only go to a trip if both parents are contributing if it is the case that what both bring in can only pay for the essentials. It is very different to say 'you can't go because your dad is giving me no money at all and I can't afford to pay the trip all on my own' and 'sorry, daddy and I are not earning well enough for one to afford it the full cost, but if daddy can see if he could help with half, I will try to find the other half too'