Advice needed - ex-husband being unreasonable about maintenance

DylanO

Seanymph wrote: »

I guess that would be an option for them if they wanted it. But it sounds like he's happily moving on, moving away from his involvement in the day to day life of his children, trying to minimise his maintenance and playing happy families with the moralless !!!!! he had the affair with.

Now, where did I hear that before?

I know, just about every day when when women post on here because Dad's walk out on their families and chunter off into the sunset to set up a new one and neglect the one they've already got - oh, and my ex of course (not the affair, but the rest of it fits).

Which is why my advice, repeated by many women who I don't doubt share my experience was - reduce your reliance upon him, and get your children's maintenance set officially by the CSA.

If he has the children every weekday before and after school, then he can hardly be not involved in his children's lives.

Why is her career more important than his? The OP receives maintenance and generous benefits for her children, and has no childcare costs to the detriment of her ex-husband's career.

ABC_123

I agree with those who said I should remove him from childcare equation. I just wanted to hear from people outside of the situation I am currently in. I don't think I can rely on him at all. I did not mention in the previous post that my mum was staying with us for the last 3 months (she is due to go back home at the end of the week, it is in another country). During her time here he gradually stopped taking them to school on a daily basis, it was 2-3 times a week on average.He dropped his bombshell about a week ago knowing that I'll be in a desperate situation, so yes, I don't feel I can rely on him. Since then he's been taunting me asking if I had childcare in place yet as he will be unable to provide it on the previous terms.
I realise that I shall be worse off financially, but it just isn't right what he is suggesting (I am being polite here).

fannyanna

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

This comment is totally irrelevant to this thread given that

1 OP is not receiving any payments through the CSA, and what she is receiving from her ex is less than the CSA calculation; and

2 If she does apply for CSA any award will be under CSA2 which is a straight forward % of the NRP's income and does not include any uplift in the form of 'carer's allowance'

OP does not come across to me as bitter.... but you do!

I think strapped mentioned this as a response to someone who said something along the lines of it being morally wrong for one parent to make the other parent pay for looking after the children.

Which in my books is quite ironic considering that is basically what child maintenance is.

Although I can completely understand that in this case things are different and I think the ex is being unreasonable.

fannyanna

ABC_123 wrote: »

I realise that I shall be worse off financially, but it just isn't right what he is suggesting (I am being polite here).

And this is where I would suggest that you speak to him about the level of child maintenance that he is paying. Point out that he should now be paying the full amount of child maintenance rather than the reduced amount that he was paying because of the childcare.

If he is unwilling to agree a private arrangement I would suggest that you go via the CSA. The additional child maintenance that you'll receive can then go toward the additional childcare costs that you'll incur.

Strapped

Bluemeanie wrote: »

I have picked up on that, especially being the Wife of a NRP and a Stepmother. Doubled with the fact that I have chosen not to have children of my own (possibly yet), I am considered a second class citizen in some situations.

However I was not picking that vibe up from the OP. The Ex in this case sounds like he is using the fact he provides some childcare as a reason to evade his responsibilities.
That's why I say do everything "properly". Agree fixed contact days/overnights and maintenance. Then everyone knows where they stand.
The same way a "bitter ex-wife" should not use contact to cause hurt, a NRP should not be using childcare or money to cause hurt.

I'm not getting that vibe from the OP either.

zzzLazyDaisy

ABC_123 wrote: »

I realise that I shall be worse off financially, but it just isn't right what he is suggesting (I am being polite here).

It might not be as bed as you think - you will have the extra maintenance, and help with child-care costs through CTC.

And the peace of mind that he can't pull your strings by threatening to withdraw childcare when he feels like it.... and you can't put a price on that.

daska

fannyanna wrote: »

I think strapped mentioned this as a response to someone who said something along the lines of it being morally wrong for one parent to make the other parent pay for looking after the children.

Which in my books is quite ironic considering that is basically what child maintenance is.

Although I can completely understand that in this case things are different and I think the ex is being unreasonable.

Maybe you're right and maintenance is exclusively to pay the PWC. God forbid a penny of it ever gets spent on the extra bedrooms, clothes, shoes, food, heating etc.

Legally it's a rather grey area because maintenance is based on the absent parent's income rather than the child's needs so strictly it isn't maintenance but more a form of tax.

Bluemeanie_2

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

It might not be as bed as you think - you will have the extra maintenance, and help with child-care costs through CTC.

And the peace of mind that he can't pull your strings by threatening to withdraw childcare when he feels like it.... and you can't put a price on that.

That is the point I was trying to make. I just couldn't put it into words so well!

Seanymph

DylanO wrote: »

If he has the children every weekday before and after school, then he can hardly be not involved in his children's lives.

Why is her career more important than his? The OP receives maintenance and generous benefits for her children, and has no childcare costs to the detriment of her ex-husband's career.

Because he is now going to charge her for having his own children, or force her to find alternative arrangements. Because now his new partner is moved in, he no longer wants that level of involvement - he's choosing time with his new partner over time with his kids, their routine, and his ongoing support to his partner.

He works from home - he has his career, and the ability to care for the children. If he can no longer have the children before and after school then the OP will seek alternative arrangements - no one is saying anyone's 'career' is more important, but I suspect they, like most of us, work to pay the bills.

She does not receive what the CSA would award as maintenance, she's said that clearly, and no where (and I have read this thread end to end) can I see 'generous benefits' that she gets.

Unless of course you know something we don't?

However she seems to me to be a struggling single mum, who has been offered support by the ex to a point but now he's moving on with the new skirt that support is being removed and she is on her own to try and maintain a job and support her children.

*I think it's me that was accused of being bitter, not the OP*

rrf494g

what is best for the children you had together ?

I'm sure it's easy and tempting to dwell on the questions of what is right and fair for you, or your ex - but - it's now really a question of what is best for the children.

My advice would be to try to get the discussion onto a mutual agreement that that is the first question. Then you might be able to arrive at what you both see as best for your children. You both have had your try at what what was best for you two and, sadly, it hasn't worked out well. Your children have not caused the situation.

Good Luck.