Should I help my OH subsidise his nasty ex so the kids can see their Mum?

shegirl

Earlier you said you think she may setting herself on jobs more on par with that she used to have.Now you're saying you know she refuses to look for anything that isn't acceptable to her.Which is it?

They have a shared care arrangement- he gets all the money for the kids.If you will lose those benefits when moving in together why not let her claim for one child,as suggested?As for that meaning she can claim maintenance at 15% that's not quite the case as reductions would be made.Would it work out less (after reductions) than your OH gives her or would give her in future?At least this way she could provide without you feeling the full drain yourself and not be watching/judging everything she does.

As for the car,how did your OH expect someone on JSA to afford running a car?

She may not be mother of the year but you sound like you want to run her out completely

19lottie82 wrote: »

There is no one else that can do it.

My OH bought her a car so she could pick the kids up from school and drop them off in the morning when she had them, to save her and the kids having to get 2 buses each way. And also because he thought it might help her get back on her feet a bit.

I'm not denying her cash to look after the kids, feed them and entertain them. I would never do that.

I appreciate the fact that she is volunteering and trying to get back in to the working world but as I have already said she refuses to lower her expectations of what jobs she would find acceptable. She is simply not being realistic, and until she becomes so, then I very much she will find work.

balletshoes

19lottie82 wrote: »

I'm not denying her cash to look after the kids, feed them and entertain them. I would never do that.

okay so regardless of what happens when you all move in together and the tax credits stop, your OH will still be giving the girls' mum her full percentage of the child benefit? I think thats fair, and would feed the girls (although it won't stretch to entertaining them).

To be honest your OH has been more than fair up to now, and its not helped (buying her a car etc).

I have to say though, once you live together as a family, your money pooled etc for the household including the girls, you will be subsidising if you like the girls' mum, if your OH continues wanting to buy the christmas gifts etc and pass them off as coming from her. Its an issue of his making, and if he doesn't want to change those arrangements, you will need to deal with this.

We rarely, after our twenties, come into relationships without baggage of some sort or other.

FatVonD

19lottie82 wrote: »

Did you miss the part where I told you she gets far more than it costs to look after 2 kids for 3 days a week?
She buys those kids nothing. She openly refers to the TC's as "her money". She buys a hell of a lot of new clothes and goes on a lot more nights out than JSA would fund, trust me.

Did you miss the part where I explained that not every penny of child benefit can be visibly seen as food on a plate or clothes on their back?

19lottie82 wrote: »

And for the record, I'm not "another new woman". I have been in those kids life a lot more than she has in the last 2.5 years. Maybe you have an ex whose partner you don't get along with, but please don't tar me with the same brush, you know nothing about me.

You couldn't be further from the truth, I've even been on holiday with my ex's partner and both our sons (minus the ex) :rotfl:

For what it's worth I also, in a roundabout way, subsidise my DH's ex in that I pay for everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) to do with the house while he pays maintenance for his kids and, yes, sometimes I do resent it but even I wouldn't stoop so low as to suggest her child benefit a child tax credits be stopped so, yes, I repeat, you should be ashamed of yourself.

mountainofdebt

whether or not this woman turns her life around completely or reverts back to drink, she will be a part of the girls' lives until they chose otherwise or until death separates them

If you can't handle that then I suggest you don't fall for a man with baggage

19lottie82

Shegirl - he paid for the car and it's running costs.

For anyone that is against my negative viewpoint of her.... I would be willing to bet everything I own that if you could see the devastation that she has caused, her utter selfishness and the fact that she had never once put her kids needs before her own and her total in repentedness for any of it (even now), all of you would feel EXACTLY the same.

Also just out of interest I wonder if people would have the same attitude if she was the girls father instead of their mother?

19lottie82

mountainofdebt wrote: »

whether or not this woman turns her life around completely or reverts back to drink, she will be a part of the girls' lives until they chose otherwise or until death separates them

If you can't handle that then I suggest you don't fall for a man with baggage

I want nothing more than for her to be a part of the kids life, I don't know where you picked up otherwise. I also want the kids to be happy and their lives to be as burden and as stress free as possible.

daska

I don't know, I feel for you OP, it is absolutely draining when you end up paying out financially to the non-resident parent and they still don't do anything for their child. We were in a similar position with DSD, paying over and above in maintenance when DSD was spending more than half the year with her dad (3-5 nights a week, every week, during term times and all of every holiday). Then when she was removed from her mum we were still funding all the contact travel (250 miles), hotels, food, contact centre fees and she still claimed she didn't have enough money to come and visit! Having had every penny of the travel and accomodation costs paid for by me! Not even by her dad who had no income of his own. I understand about the car, if he was essentially paying maintenance to her then he might well have expected that she would be able to meet the running costs and, having done the sums myself I know it would have been the cheaper option for us for part of the time given the restrictions she placed on her travelling by public transport - unfortunately she had been several times over the limit when last behind the wheel of a car and had never got her licence back. She too is utterly selfish and cruel, in one phone call to DSD she claimed she couldn't afford to come and visit (DSD knew we had already sent her the tickets and booked the hotel as we had had a long discussion about how to organise it and fix on the dates) but also told her how she'd made a 200 mile trip to visit her family in the last week and was planning to go to Greece in a few weeks time.

OP - personally I wouldn't go down the offering to let her claim CB etc. without checking that it couldn't get even more expensive for you with a potential claim for maintenance.

At the same time, do you really want an alcoholic beating your door down because you've reduced her money? She may be an 'ex' drunk now but in reality that situation often changes, especially if she suddenly has a financial stress that wasn't there previously.

When it comes down to it there is no right answer to your question, no you're not being unreasonable but no, it might not be the right thing to do. As my dad would say "be seen to be on the side of the angels", which in this case essentially means that if you can afford it carry on with the status quo.

shegirl

He bought the car and was going to pay her annual insurance and tax aswell as pay her weekly petrol?

Thing is lottie is you are working on now not the past.The decision was made to allow her to have those children 3 nights a week,if she was truely still utterly awful and not bothered about her kids then it wouldn't be happening would it.So there have to be some positives there.Yes,she made enormous mistakes in the past with alcoholism and that will never be forgotten.But The father is stating,by allowing her to have them for 3 nights a week,that she is fit to care for them.So maybe you should consider that too instead of harping on about the past you were not involved in?

Financially,she needs help to provide for those kids while they're with her.

If the father can see past things and try to help her for the sake of his kids who are you to moan about the past?

19lottie82 wrote: »

Shegirl - he paid for the car and it's running costs.

For anyone that is against my negative viewpoint of her.... I would be willing to bet everything I own that if you could see the devastation that she has caused, her utter selfishness and the fact that she had never once put her kids needs before her own and her total in repentedness for any of it (even now), all of you would feel EXACTLY the same.

Also just out of interest I wonder if people would have the same attitude if she was the girls father instead of their mother?

make_me_wise

OP these are two children you clearly love very much. Yourself and your partner come across as two people who go out of your way to care, love and provide for them. It appears that you have done all this whilst under pretty much unbearable pressure and edured much undeserved nastiness from the girls mum.

How your proceed regarding financial assistance is going to be a minefield. I think in this case it would be very wise to contact a solicitor and legally agree what all three of you feel is acceptable and right. This would then dispell any chance of the girls mum trying to mess you around and move the goal posts in future.

I dont wish to get into the discussion of how I would feel or whether it would make a difference if this was the father instead of the mother. At the end of the day this person, who is causing so much stress and anxiety in your life, is a major part of the lives of two little girls who mean the world to you. For their sakes this whole unhealthy feeling between you all needs to be addressed and resolved. I have lived the life of a child caught in the middle of people who cant tolerate each other and it is awful. I wish you well however you decide to proceed.

balletshoes

19lottie82 wrote: »

Shegirl - he paid for the car and it's running costs.

For anyone that is against my negative viewpoint of her.... I would be willing to bet everything I own that if you could see the devastation that she has caused, her utter selfishness and the fact that she had never once put her kids needs before her own and her total in repentedness for any of it (even now), all of you would feel EXACTLY the same.

Also just out of interest I wonder if people would have the same attitude if she was the girls father instead of their mother?

stop, you're really not doing yourself any favours here. My brother is in a similar situation to your OH, the title of your thread was should you subsidise your OH so his kids can see their mum. In all honesty, unless she is hurting the girls when she is with them, the answer is yes, you should be doing whats reasonable to allow the girls to be with their mum for visitation.

While I'm sure you think that it would all be a lot easier for everyone if Mum just wasn't in the picture (ie if she abdicated all wishes to ever see the kids) thats not going to happen, so you need to work out a practical solution.

You do have my sympathy, its not an easy situation for you, but whether you like it or not, if you carry on in your relationship with your OH, his ex is in your life for the rest of it.