Child maintenance question

BLUEBIE

Hi

Right this is not something we are agueing about just wanted to know what other oeple did / opinions.

When you receive child maintenance do you just use that for food / roof / clothes and split other things like school clubs / music / riding lessons etc, or does everything come out of the maintenance, esp if you are only receiving the minimum etc?

For example if I received, £47 per week, my daughters school dinners are £5, riding lessons £28, + £80 guitar every term, is it fair to try and negotiate the other parent paying a bit towards those things too? Or do I foot the bill for everything else all the extra etc, bearing in mind he wants her to continue to do these things.

Like I said its not an arguement I am just trying to be fair whilst also being fair to myself.

Thanks

B

HappyMJ

BLUEBIE wrote: »

Hi

Right this is not something we are agueing about just wanted to know what other oeple did / opinions.

When you receive child maintenance do you just use that for food / roof / clothes and split other things like school clubs / music / riding lessons etc, or does everything come out of the maintenance, esp if you are only receiving the minimum etc?

For example if I received, £47 per week, my daughters school dinners are £5, riding lessons £28, + £80 guitar every term, is it fair to try and negotiate the other parent paying a bit towards those things too? Or do I foot the bill for everything else all the extra etc, bearing in mind he wants her to continue to do these things.

Like I said its not an arguement I am just trying to be fair whilst also being fair to myself.

Thanks

B

It's for the extras but some would say otherwise. Income Support or JSA is money for the PWC to look after themselves. Child tax credits puts food on the table and pays a bit towards the gas and electric bills. Child benefit pays towards clothing and direct expenses of the child such as mobiles as well.

To me Child maintenance should be used to give an average of each parents income earning capacity so if you actually do use it for extras such as holidays, riding lessons, music lessons then that (in my opinion) is what it is for. If there was no child maintenance then there would still be a roof over the child's head and there would still be food on the table and there would still be clothes on the childs back. If you make your budget to rely on the child maintenance only for extras then if it were to stop then only the extras would stop and you will still have money for rent, food and clothes.

Of course if you earn money as well then you also buy extras such as your own holiday expenses when taking your child away for a week somewhere.

Seanymph

Everything comes out of the maintenance. You get nothing extra.

Put the boot on the other foot - as the non resident parent you budget xxx amount per month, and rent somewhere to live, pay your own bills, make your own commitments.

You can't then suddenly get 'hit up' for 50% more because your EX has decided Pebbles has to go to private nursery, or judo, or have nothing but accompanied pony rides every third day.

Likewise as the ex you get xxx amount, if your child cannot then do whatever it is then that's unfortunate, but you have to live within your means, you can't use your EX as a never ending source of income.

clearingout

the official line is that child maintenance is a contribution towards the cost of bringing up of children - this includes the roof over their heads, food, utilities, clothing (all the basics) plus any extras. Child maintenance, if you go by the CSA calculations, is the legal requirement that needs to be paid. Whether you consider that a minimum or a maximum payment depends on individual circumstances, I guess!

Many of us receive no maintenance at all. Others receive huge amounts and have ex's who are happy to contribute on top. I suspect the majority receive child maintenance and little else.

I disagree with HappyMJ that clothes, the house etc. would all still be there. Many of us have lost our homes, struggled to pay the bills and buy basics such as clothes when relationships have broken down. Yes, benefits and tax credits will pick this up - but at a basic level which often means children go without activities or items they previously had when their parents were together. That's life and it happens - but very difficult when you're a parent trying to explain that loss to your child in terms which blame neither parent for the change of circumstances.

HappyMJ

clearingout wrote: »

the official line is that child maintenance is a contribution towards the cost of bringing up of children - this includes the roof over their heads, food, utilities, clothing (all the basics) plus any extras. Child maintenance, if you go by the CSA calculations, is the legal requirement that needs to be paid. Whether you consider that a minimum or a maximum payment depends on individual circumstances, I guess!

Many of us receive no maintenance at all. Others receive huge amounts and have ex's who are happy to contribute on top. I suspect the majority receive child maintenance and little else.

I disagree with HappyMJ that clothes, the house etc. would all still be there. Many of us have lost our homes, struggled to pay the bills and buy basics such as clothes when relationships have broken down. Yes, benefits and tax credits will pick this up - but at a basic level which often means children go without activities or items they previously had when their parents were together. That's life and it happens - but very difficult when you're a parent trying to explain that loss to your child in terms which blame neither parent for the change of circumstances.

Yes it's at a basic level but it will all be there covered by benefits. You could use some of the child maintenance to rent a property in a better location above the LHA rate for the area instead but you must rely on the child maintenance being paid every month for that to continue. You could buy branded clothes rather than primark/matalan out of the child maintenance but the cost of basic clothing will be covered by benefits even charity clothing is very cheap.

abitofhelp

I use the money i receive form my ex for extras for my son. However i am in a position to do so. My partner and i both work full time in reasonably well paid jobs. If the maintenance amount remained in my account i have no doubt it would be squandered. I use it mainly for his clothes, shoes/trainers, sports equipment & save some for him. I buy him things also my ex will buy him things. My ex doesnt give any extra for clubs or passports and i wouldnt ask him to. My son lives with me and he is my resposibility to feed and put a roof over his head. However he did increase the maintenance slightly a few years ago when i mentioned that our son wanted to try school dinners. He offered to pay half.

GobbledyGook

There's no obligation on the ex to give you anything other than the maintenance and it's entirely down to you and your circumstances how you spend it (as in on essentials or extras).

It depends on the circumstance whether they "should" pay towards extras. In my case my ex particularly wanted my daughter to attend a specific nursery. It was the most expensive in the area by far. I couldn't afford to continue with that and planned to move her to another nursery that I could afford, but he paid the difference between what I would have paid and the nursery he wanted her to attend on top of maintenance so she could stay. In that kind of case I think it's right that he should pay more because it is his insistance that she continued there.

I think activities like horse riding or ballet should be paid for by the parent who decided the child should go.

clearingout

HappyMJ wrote: »

Yes it's at a basic level but it will all be there covered by benefits. You could use some of the child maintenance to rent a property in a better location above the LHA rate for the area instead but you must rely on the child maintenance being paid every month for that to continue. You could buy branded clothes rather than primark/matalan out of the child maintenance but the cost of basic clothing will be covered by benefits even charity clothing is very cheap.

I don't mean to be argumentative (honest!) but have you tried bringing up children on benefits for a prolonged period of time?!

You seem to be assuming that the PWC will always receive benefits and ignoring the fact that many of us work and some of us even earn so well that we're not entitled to tax credits or anything else! A child who is used to a good life as both it's parents have been high, full-time earners can find it's lifestyle downgraded dramatically as a result of divorce but not necessarily be living the life that most of us associate with the 'single parent on benefits'. Child maintenance in these circumstances is just as important as it is for the 'poorer' PWC to ensure minimum disruption to a child's life.

HappyMJ

clearingout wrote: »

I don't mean to be argumentative (honest!) but have you tried bringing up children on benefits for a prolonged period of time?!

You seem to be assuming that the PWC will always receive benefits and ignoring the fact that many of us work and some of us even earn so well that we're not entitled to tax credits or anything else! A child who is used to a good life as both it's parents have been high, full-time earners can find it's lifestyle downgraded dramatically as a result of divorce but not necessarily be living the life that most of us associate with the 'single parent on benefits'. Child maintenance in these circumstances is just as important as it is for the 'poorer' PWC to ensure minimum disruption to a child's life.

If a PWC works then they can use some of their own earnings to bring up their own child not all expenses have to covered by the NRP 100%. Earnings have to be quite high for no benefits at all to be payable. If you want to have an agreement in which all child expenses are split 50/50 then fair enough.

OK then single PWC on £500 net a week (the level at which no benefits are payable) and no childcare expenses with one child. Then PWC can use 15% of net income to cover child expenses and be in exactly the same situation as the NRP. The 15% is more than the child tax credits due to a single PWC with no income.

The 15%, 20% or 25% of net income from the NRP helps improve the lifestyle of a child with nothing.

BLUEBIE

Thank you for all your replies, I'm obviuosly very lucky as we don't recieve benefits / child tax credit etc. He has offerred more than the minimum and some towards trips / extras etc, was just wondering if just to ask for a donation towards or split down the middle, something we will have to work out between us I guess.

shegirl

BLUEBIE wrote: »

Thank you for all your replies, I'm obviuosly very lucky as we don't recieve benefits / child tax credit etc. He has offerred more than the minimum and some towards trips / extras etc, was just wondering if just to ask for a donation towards or split down the middle, something we will have to work out between us I guess.

And that's what a father should be like rather than whinging about having to pay maintenance in the first place and think that paying that is the end of their responsibility!

If only more parents were like that -thinking of the kids and their futures rather than just their own pockets.