Maintenance payments and new partner's salary

Birdy12

I just need some clarification on something if that's OK as I don't want to give duff information to my MIL.

My OH's cousin lives with her partner and their young DS. The partner has 2 children from a previous relationship. He's apparently not allowed to see them (never asked why - not my business) but pays maintenance for them.

My MIL recently told me that my OH's cousin's salary was taken into consideration when maintenance payments were calculated. I told her this was incorrect and it made no difference how much OH's cousin earned, this would not be taken into consideration, only the partner's salary.

I was correct in telling her this, wasn't I? I don't want to be offering false information.

Your advice is appreciated.

Birdy

Birdy12

Actually, I've just looked at another thread on here and think I have my answer. Will it depend on whether the claim is CSA1 or CSA2? In that case, I have no answer for my MIL as I don't know how long claim has been made for.

OH's cousin and partner have been together approximately 3 years and partner had been split from ex-partner for a while before that. If claim was raised before partner got together with OH's cousin, does that mean that ex-partner could make a new claim taking into consideration OH's cousin's salary?

Apologies for the questions, I don't know anyone who's ever gone down the CSA route.

Birdy

Caz3121

If it is a CSA1 case then they can ask for the partners earnings but they do not have to give it if they do not wish to however they need to understand the implications of not doing so (and it is really complex)
On CSA2 there is a straight % of the cousins partners net income used for the calculation (so cousin could earn millions and it would not matter a jot)
On CSA1 it was more complex and housing costs would have been looked at and an allowance given. If the NRP lived with someone it is probably safe to assume they are sharing these costs so the NRP does not pay 100% of them...this is where the cousins income comes into it. My understanding is that if you do not give the income they will assume 50% each. If the cousin is the lower earner of the 2 it may make sense to disclose so less is used

clearingout

if they're on CSA 2 (case was opened post 2003) his partner's salary is not taken into consideration. However, any tax credits they claim as a couple may well be taken into consideration when calculating maintenance for his children from a previous relationship. Deductions can be made for children living within the household (so, if he's paying for 2 children, he pays 20% of his income after deductions. With 2 children living with him, he receives a 20% reduction on his income - so the ex gets 20% of 80% rather than 100%. Hope that makes sense!).

Prior to 2003 and CSA1, different calculations were used and I'm not at all familiar with how that works. I don't think that a partner's salary is taken into consideration in the sense that a percentage of her wages will be used for maintenance, but I think there is consideration made to the fact that there is additional income coming into the household. Someone will be along soon to clarify, I'm sure.

clearingout

ah, there you go, already clarified!

Birdy12

Caz3121 wrote: »

On CSA2 there is a straight % of the cousins partners net income used for the calculation (so cousin could earn millions and it would not matter a jot)

Thank you.

When you put %, did you mean 0%, so cousin's salary would not be taken into consideration, regardless of earnings?

On CSA1 it was more complex and housing costs would have been looked at and an allowance given. If the NRP lived with someone it is probably safe to assume they are sharing these costs so the NRP does not pay 100% of them...this is where the cousins income comes into it. My understanding is that if you do not give the income they will assume 50% each. If the cousin is the lower earner of the 2 it may make sense to disclose so less is used

So even if partner and ex-partner had been separated for, say, 3 years, before he met OH's cousin (or anyone), any partner he chooses to live with would then have their salary taken into consideration, even if new partner has never met or is unlikely to meet 'previous relationship' children? Wow, that's something. Potentionally, that could put any new partner off, couldn't it? (I am looking at it quite simplistically)

Thanks, Birdy.

clearingout

yes, it could put people off, but are they then people you would necessarily want in your life? Would you want to be with someone who refuses to take responsibility for his/her children?

Regardless of the morals, the focus is really on the children of the previous relationship and ensuring that they receive a decent contribution from their NRP. The system separates maintenance and contact with children - regardless of the reasons an NRP may no longer see his/her children, they still need financially supporting, don't they? the court system will support an NRP in gaining contact with a child and is pro-contact, unless there has been proven abuse. It is possible to see a child regularly that you never financially support and vice versa.

Birdy12

clearingout wrote: »

regardless of the reasons an NRP may no longer see his/her children, they still need financially supporting, don't they?

Oh absolutely and, as I mentioned earlier, I have no idea why partner isn't allowed to see previous children, however, he still pays maintenance. It's just that I gave MIL my views, believing them to be right, and thought afterwards that things might not be as clear cut as that.

Thank you for all your responses.

Birdy

clearingout

sorry -missed your first question in red, above. If a person is on CSA2, they pay 15% for one child, 20% for two, 25% for three or more. And that's it. You can reduce your liability by throwing money into a pension but this is a loop hole that is hopefully going to be closed soon. The new partner can be a millionaire and it matters not a jot. Only the NRP is responsible for paying child maintenance for their children.

On the morals again, there are countless cases of NRPs giving up jobs and being supported by their new partners, or of starting a new family and giving up work to care for the baby. Nothing to be done for the existing children. New partner, aside from their tax credits, can't be touched on the current system!

Birdy12

Actually, I have one more question, sorry.

I'e just read a few more things on the Child Support section. Statistically, what are the chances that partner is paying maintenance under CSA1 rules? Have the majority of these claims been phased out/moved over? Is it more likely that's he's paying under CSA2 ruling?

Don't know if it helps but I think his previous children are 9 and 12 years old. Cousin and partner's child together is 18 months old.

Birdy

skibadee

Any cases post 2003 are CSA2, the chances of CSA1 being phased over to CSA2....very unlikely....we've been on CSA1 for 15 years!!