csa grrrrrr

Marisco

FBaby wrote: »

PS; The 50% was half of the cost of the child, not half of the nrp salary in case that wasn't clear.

Ok, so how do you work that out? What if the PWC decides her child/ren "need" horse riding/piano/dance/guitar/whatever lessons, has to go to a private school/expensive school trip, latest iphone, ipad, laptop, "has" to have designer clothes/shoes/bags? What if the PWC can afford and wants that sort of lifestyle on her own, is the NRP supposed to pay half regardless of what he earns?

As I said we'll never agree on this, so rather than go round in circles, I'll leave the thread now whilst we are all still on "speaking" terms

clearingout

Marisco wrote: »

Ok, so how do you work that out? What if the PWC decides her child/ren "need" horse riding/piano/dance/guitar/whatever lessons, has to go to a private school/expensive school trip, latest iphone, ipad, laptop, "has" to have designer clothes/shoes/bags? What if the PWC can afford and wants that sort of lifestyle on her own, is the NRP supposed to pay half regardless of what he earns?

As I said we'll never agree on this, so rather than go round in circles, I'll leave the thread now whilst we are all still on "speaking" terms

the PWC can make these decisions for their children, of course. But the reality is that she will have to pay for it - if the NRP doesn't know how to say no, that's something they'll have to learn! There is no obligation to pay anything over and above child maintenance. Spousal maintenance is increasingly rare so can't really be considered in this department.

There is no suggestion by anyone that the NRP should be obligated to pay half of a lavish lifestyle. It is important to live within our means and to have our children see that. It's good, in my opinion, to be told 'no' sometimes. By the same token, an NRP with a good quality of life and a significant should 'share' appropriately with their children and make sure they have the best possible start - and this might or might not include designer clothes, horse riding lesson and ipads.

We're not falling out, Marisco, we're debating!

clearingout

Cally_Smart wrote: »

I can see both sides but is an nrp never supposed to have a life after divorce.It's particularly hard to condense everything into a post on here .We have always been supportive of children & we had them EVERY weekend for well over 5 years (& I was working all week myself).Was hard work meeting someone with 4 children & I didn't think for one minute it would be otherwise.There are disputed 'arrears' & the pwc has alienated them from us which is very sad for all.

by the same token, I could argue shouldn't the PWC be allowed a life after divorce? For every NRP struggling to make ends meet, there's a PWC going through the same thing. Difference being, if we struggle to go out once a year and moan about it, we get told we should be grateful we receive tax credits and accused of child abuse/alcoholism..... the PWC has no 'right' to a life but the NRP always does? how does that work?

shegirl

clearingout wrote: »

by the same token, I could argue shouldn't the PWC be allowed a life after divorce? For every NRP struggling to make ends meet, there's a PWC going through the same thing. Difference being, if we struggle to go out once a year and moan about it, we get told we should be grateful we receive tax credits and accused of child abuse/alcoholism..... the PWC has no 'right' to a life but the NRP always does? how does that work?

Indeed.God forbid a PWC goes out at any point or even dares to have her hair cut.Naturally,it's paid for by the maintenance so she's spending it all on herself :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Marisco

clearingout wrote: »

the PWC can make these decisions for their children, of course. But the reality is that she will have to pay for it - if the NRP doesn't know how to say no, that's something they'll have to learn! There is no obligation to pay anything over and above child maintenance. Spousal maintenance is increasingly rare so can't really be considered in this department.

There is no suggestion by anyone that the NRP should be obligated to pay half of a lavish lifestyle. It is important to live within our means and to have our children see that. It's good, in my opinion, to be told 'no' sometimes. By the same token, an NRP with a good quality of life and a significant should 'share' appropriately with their children and make sure they have the best possible start - and this might or might not include designer clothes, horse riding lesson and ipads.

We're not falling out, Marisco, we're debating!

I think I spend too much time on DT!

No, the scenario above was in response to Fbaby's post saying what if the NRP had to pay for 50% of the child/ren's living costs. If a PWC and children were use to the lifestyle that was paid for with her money, then if they split and the NRP was expected to pay 50%, would it be fairr for him to pay for a lifestyle he couldn't afford iyswim. Mind, we are going into the realms of fantasy now! :eek:

Cally_Smart

But who said the pwc shouldnt have a life ? The fact that the we had the children EVERY weekend meant that the pwc did have every chance to have a life of her own meeting friends she made on the internet & have quality time to herself.We have been praised by people on both sides of the family for our commitment to the children.It's a bit different as we are contesting 'arrears' that the pwc hasnt exactly been honest about !Bit annoyed that the CSA believe everything the pwc says but we believe in Karma so will see what happens

clearingout

Cally_Smart wrote: »

But who said the pwc shouldnt have a life ? The fact that the we had the children EVERY weekend meant that the pwc did have every chance to have a life of her own meeting friends she made on the internet & have quality time to herself.We have been praised by people on both sides of the family for our commitment to the children.It's a bit different as we are contesting 'arrears' that the pwc hasnt exactly been honest about !Bit annoyed that the CSA believe everything the pwc says but we believe in Karma so will see what happens

My point was financial, seeing as we are focusing on the financial side of parenting post-separation. You can have the children every weekend but if the PWC is struggling to pay for the basics, all the freetime in the world doesn't give her any kind of quality of life.

Cally_Smart

Fair point ..but it's all connected -it would mean that she had two days every week when she didnt have to feed the children or wash their clothes pay to take them out to go swimming ,picnics,mcdonalds, or entertain them generally like we did.

his_wife

some one mentioned earlier , about supporting child through education , and yes so they should, we do support sd through her education, well, not so much the sd, but her mums household.... However, my daughter had to come out of college as, we couldnt afford to give her the bus fare let alone the dinner money, and money to purchase items for her course. So how is it fair, that sd, HAS to be funded, as she chooses to be further ed, as she refuses to work, working is for loosers she says!!!!
Yet my daughter had to come out of college.

I am all for supporting, and playing by the rules, but it should be fairer rules, as my children loose out every single time!!!

Torry_Quine

Personally I think that in many cases (not about anyone in particular on here) a lot more though needs to go into having a second family when there remain obligations to the first.