How much child support?

emweaver

timberflake wrote: »

She also puts her in nursery 5 days a week which the father pays for when she doesn't even work, but I guess thats fine too.

I just cant see why people on this thread think its ok for her to hold him to ransom. He pays more than he should, he's written off hundreds of £ he's lent to her, he tries to accomodate her as best he can but she always wants more.

Maybe if you stated all the facts from the start. Anyway I suspect "Im asking for a friend" is nonsense and you are actually asking for yourself judging by how much you know and how ate up you are getting.

emweaver

timberflake wrote: »

She could have kept her knickers on just as easily. But it's always the blokes fault isn't it.

Correct me if I am wrong but he was the married one wasn't he!?

emweaver

timberflake wrote: »

in addition to maintenance. The child is 4 years old in August.

At that age, each child is entitled to 15 free hours of pre-school education so she could well send her every day for 1/2 a day and wont be paying a penny!

Jacks_xxx

timberflake wrote: »

She also puts her in nursery 5 days a week which the father pays for when she doesn't even work, but I guess thats fine too.

I just cant see why people on this thread think its ok for her to hold him to ransom. He pays more than he should, he's written off hundreds of £ he's lent to her, he tries to accomodate her as best he can but she always wants more.

Nursery education is normal for a four year old.

It's considered so important to a child's future that all three and four year olds are entitled to 15 hours of free nursery education for 38 weeks of the year.

The government thinks early years education is worth paying for - so why wouldn't a child's parents want to give their child the best possible start in life?

If I was trying to bring up a child on my own I'd be very grateful for the help from a nursery to replace the help I would normally expect to get from the child's father.

It's better for a child if the person who cares for them alone 24/7 gets a break. Unhappy Mummies lead to unhappy children.

I'm guessing you don't have kids if you don't understand the - ahem - "contribution" the child's full time 24/7 lone parent is making to the child's wellbeing.

The child lives in a nice house in a safe area - isn't that what we'd all want for our children?

Why would any loving parent want their child to have to be uprooted and moved to somewhere worse?

Only if their need to hurt the mother is greater than their need to take care of the child.

emweaver

alias*alibi wrote: »

My husband came back to me after getting a girl he worked with pregnant; so that looks bad does it? He realised what a great big co.ck up he had made and we reconciled. He pays her CSA but I wont lie, i begrudge her getting it, sure I do. She was married too and they wrecked two marriages to get their rocks off. By law he has to pay CSA but she will not get a penny more out of us; don't care how hard up she may well be. She chose to get pregnant so she can get on with it. Harsh words yes, but she knew my husband was married with a child and didn't care about how I would manage financially but the worm turned and karma kicked in. Bitter; you bet the hell I am.

I understand the frustrations, bitterness and resentment of the OP.

She may not of chose to get pregnant!

Jacks_xxx

timberflake wrote: »

Ok, lets put this to bed once and for all.

My mate and wife seperated and he moved in with me. He met this girl, she got pregnant, but then decided she was moving 200 miles away back to her family against my mates wishes.

He stayed at my place for a further 6 months after which he and his wife reconciled and she was/is fully aware of whats gone on.

So, all the comments about the circumstances can stop as he hasn't cheated etc.

My mate has got the information he was after, many thanks for those that helped. The mother has been told today that technically she's receiving too much and won't be getting a penny more, suffice to say it didn't go down well and she threatened to call the CSA..........my mate offered to dial the number for her.

Again, you're not painting a pretty picture of your friend.

He will pay the minimum he can be forced to pay and no more?

And never mind the negative consequences for his child?

And the Daddy Of The Year Award goes to.... :eek:

POPPYOSCAR

Jacks_xxx wrote: »

Again, you're not painting a pretty picture of your friend.

He will pay the minimum he can be forced to pay and no more?

And never mind the negative consequences for his child?

And the Daddy Of The Year Award goes to.... :eek:

And what if paying more means that his wife cannot have a child?

I am all for men paying their dues but I do not think it acceptable for a women to sit nicely in a brand new three bedroom house with only one child, paid for by the state and the father.

Why does she not get a job while the child is at nursery? Many of the mothers I know work and bring up a child/children as well.

Jacks_xxx

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

And what if paying more means that his wife cannot have a child?

Since he has evidently been paying more than the minimum up to now, with extra loans and extra clothing purchases etc, and since has been considering paying even more than that - with no mention of any financial hardship, there's no reason to think that your hypothetical problem is an issue in this real life situation.

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

I am all for men paying their dues but I do not think it acceptable for a women to sit nicely in a brand new three bedroom house with only one child, paid for by the state and the father.

Why not? If that's the best everyone can do for the child, then why not? Aren't we all supposed to do the best thing for children in our society?

I don't have any kind of problem with the state helping to support a mother and child when the child's father is only partially supporting them, and the mother has given up work to take care of the child.

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

Why does she not get a job while the child is at nursery? Many of the mothers I know work and bring up a child/children as well.

Possibly for the same reason that between 3 million and 9 million (depending on who you ask) other people don't have a job, possibly because the mother believes that's the best thing for her child at the moment perhaps?

timberflake

Jacks_xxx wrote: »

Again, you're not painting a pretty picture of your friend.

He will pay the minimum he can be forced to pay and no more?

And never mind the negative consequences for his child?

And the Daddy Of The Year Award goes to.... :eek:

I said SHE wont get a penny more, not the child. He'll gladly pay to take her out, buy her toys, clothes etc, in addition to his monthly payment to the mother, but why should he give her more than he should that she could then theorectically spend on going out, getting her hair done, etc? Whats wrong with her a resonable amount each month ie 15%, then pay for anything extra as he see's fit. She isn't entitled to anything more thsn 15%.

Lets look at the facts. He travels 200 miles 2/3 times a month to see his daughter, he's been over paying thus far, and paying child care which isn't required in addition to this. He's written off a lot of loans to the mother as its clear she doesnt have the means to ever pay him back, we're talking hundreds of £'s, possibly thousands!

He's just taken a job in London to enable him to put more money away for his daughters future, even though it means a 14 hour day commuting etc.

Yes, i agree, a terrible father.

Jacks_xxx

timberflake wrote: »

I said SHE wont get a penny more, not the child. He'll gladly pay to take her out, buy her toys, clothes etc, in addition to his monthly payment to the mother, but why should he give her more than he should that she could then theorectically spend on going out, getting her hair done, etc? Whats wrong with her a resonable amount each month ie 15%, then pay for anything extra as he see's fit. She isn't entitled to anything more thsn 15%.

Lets look at the facts. He travels 200 miles 2/3 times a month to see his daughter, he's been over paying thus far, and paying child care which isn't required in addition to this. He's written off a lot of loans to the mother as its clear she doesnt have the means to ever pay him back, we're talking hundreds of £'s, possibly thousands!

He's just taken a job in London to enable him to put more money away for his daughters future, even though it means a 14 hour day commuting etc.

Yes, i agree, a terrible father.

I thought you said the extra money was to pay her rent so the child can stay living in a nice house?

Nothing about the child's mother having her hair done.

If he's happy to pay only the bare minimum even though it will have negative consequences to his child then he is what he is.

I just think the child is "entitled" to a Dad who gives a monkeys about them that's all.

He seems mainly concerned with not helping the mother of his child at any cost and doesn't seem to realise or care that he's hurting his child in the process.