Is her ex supposed to pay maintence

melly1980

clearingout wrote: »

she can claim maintenance through the CSA. The fact he pays the mortgage means nothing to them in this context - it would only 'count' as maintenance if he were paying the mortgage on a property he had no interest in. That would then probably shift him into giving her notice and she could rent somewhere....what she would need to be careful of is him paying maintenance, not paying the mortgage and the house getting repossessed from under her.

I sincerely hope that is exactly what he does do if this cretinous and hideous path is taken. Some people have no understanding of just what they do have.

Anyone who knows even the first thing about negotiation knows that you look for win / win scenarios. She is forcing a win / lose in her favor when she already has a win / win.

She has a free house, gets to live the same life as do the kids and can claim a variety of benefits that wont count the free house as income.

System

clearingout wrote: »

what she would need to be careful of is him paying maintenance, not paying the mortgage and the house getting repossessed from under her.

Or deciding, as he owns the house and is paying the mortgage, that he will move back in rather than pay for the house and somewhere else to live.

BigAunty

melly1980 wrote: »

she might want to rememebr with the current set up she has a free house that is essentially non-declarable as income leaving her free to claim a range of benefits. If she goes down the $h1thouse thief route it could well (and I hope it would) bite her well and truely on the @r$e.

If she moved out, then any maintenance she received from the non resident parent would also not impact her benefits. Only difference is that if she moves into a rented property and starts employment, she may find it reduces her housing benefit slightly, so god forbid, she may actually have to pay her own rent, perhaps using the child maintenance she is entitled to...

NotSuchASmugMarriedNow

karenx wrote: »

Also if she rocks the boat with him he could quite easily tell her to leave the house, seeing as its his and he pays it.
If I were her I would move out, rent own place then claim maintenance from him

and that is exactly what I would do too

clearingout

BigAunty wrote: »

If she moved out, then any maintenance she received from the non resident parent would also not impact her benefits. Only difference is that if she moves into a rented property and starts employment, she may find it reduces her housing benefit slightly, so god forbid, she may actually have to pay her own rent, perhaps using the child maintenance she is entitled to...

Child maintenance is no longer taken into account for means tested benefits and hasn't been since April 2010. Hopefully this is keeping some child off one or other of the official poverty lines but most likely, it is cause for heated debate on forums like this were single parents are damned if they do and damned if they don't....

clearingout

melly1980 wrote: »

I sincerely hope that is exactly what he does do if this cretinous and hideous path is taken. Some people have no understanding of just what they do have.

Anyone who knows even the first thing about negotiation knows that you look for win / win scenarios. She is forcing a win / lose in her favor when she already has a win / win.

She has a free house, gets to live the same life as do the kids and can claim a variety of benefits that wont count the free house as income.

to be fair melly, we don't know his details. He may have a very small mortgage and be on £100k plus salary wise. In which case, she's not better off living in his house.

I wouldn't personally be comfortable living in my ex's house - it's a vulnerable position to be in from a number of perspectives. Ultimately, you would hope that she would want to gain a house for herself again in the future so needs cash to be able to get a mortgage and start building for herself again. It can take a while to get to that position when a relationship breaks down, however, so don't be hard on her. There's a lot of probably pertinent information missing.

clearingout

clearingout wrote: »

Child maintenance is no longer taken into account for means tested benefits and hasn't been since April 2010. Hopefully this is keeping some child off one or other of the official poverty lines but most likely, it is cause for heated debate on forums like this were single parents are damned if they do and damned if they don't....

Sorry bigaunty - just realised you'd said the same thing and I'd read it wrong! Sticking up for single mums head on at the moment!

FBaby

She needs to make her mind as to what is best for her, accepting she can't have it all. Either she accepts this arrangement, which benefits her as not paying any rent and staying in maybe a decent home in nice area which she might not get if she had to rent on her salary/benefits. The cost of it is being under his control, which personally I think comes at a high price.

The alternative is for her to do everything to up her hours and earn a better salary so she can afford to rent something decent. She might potentially be worse off financially despite working more hours depending on how much he would have to the csa, but this will come with her being able to break free from him, enjoy her independency and raised self-esteem from her sense of pride to be able to support her family.

melly1980

FBaby wrote: »

The alternative is for her to do everything to up her hours and earn a better salary so she can afford to rent something decent. She might potentially be worse off financially despite working more hours depending on how much he would have to the csa, but this will come with her being able to break free from him, enjoy her independency and raised self-esteem from her sense of pride to be able to support her family.

Stop talking crazy, that would mean not milking the cash cow

melly1980

clearingout wrote: »

to be fair melly, we don't know his details. .

yup, which is pretty much why people shouldnt be advising her to put in court orders to obtain the house (which if you look back is what I have responded to ~)