Should ex pay me child maintenance?

Flyboy152

I think that is the fairest option. You get all the benefits (nothing wrong with that by the way), so do get something extra.

johnnyl

arbroath_lass wrote: »

No, having her half the time means he (probably) pays for her meals when she is with him. It does not, necessarily, mean he takes her out and buys her stuff or pays his way.

no it doesnt, he has to provide accommodation and facilities that are what a person with a child requires. After all the child stays there half of the time.

One rule for one and another rule for another. Welcome to the world of equality.

anonx_2

i think your on a good one really, if i were you id leave it, and just carry on the way you are, he could persue child benefit and ctc (as it has been all over the news that even those on £50,000 can get it ect), seriously i would leave it, he seems like the kind of person who will get her and provide what ever she needs, and what more do you want, x your in a lucky and privileged situation

take care

clearingout

johnnyl wrote: »

no it doesnt, he has to provide accommodation and facilities that are what a person with a child requires. After all the child stays there half of the time.

One rule for one and another rule for another. Welcome to the world of equality.

sorry johnny, but you don't have a clue! I had a so-called 'shared care' situation with my ex and yes, he had to keep a roof over their heads and feed them in the mornings and evenings same as me. But that was the end of it. It was me who paid for childcare (all of it), preschool fees, school trips, school incidentals, school uniform, school lunches, toys (which travelled back and forth), shoes, haircuts, clothing (anything decent disappeared never to be seen again!)....I paid for speech therapy when one of our children needed it, and swimming lessons, and it was me who took time off work in any kind of emergency regardless of who the children were staying with that night. Over one half term, the ex had 21 opportunities to read with his son (who was struggling) and write in his reading record book: he did it once. This is not 'shared care'. This is simply providing your children with a bed and a meal to reduce your maintenance liability (not that he paid maintenance anyway). Needless to say, over time the arrangement has reduced and reduced - at one point he disappeared from the children's lives without any comment for a 15 month period and now sees them once a week (and again, it's me who pays the childcare that night that he benefits from as he picks them up after work rather than straight from school) and has them overnight every other Saturday.

And yes, I did recieve 'all the benefits'. But my ex earned way too much to receive anything other than child benefit (which he wouldn't get today). He also stashed away a considerable sum in his girlfriend's account each month - paying her for a full time job for his company whilst she worked full time elsewhere. He wasn't struggling by any means and could more than have afforded to make a reasonable contribution towards the cost of bringing up our children.

Sorry to say it but experiences like this give 'shared care' a bad name. There was certainly nothing 'equal' or even reasonable about it. You should never assume that 50/50 means exactly that. Indeed, in my experience it usually means that one parent is bearing most of the financial and practical 'burden' of having children whilst the other has all the fun. Not acceptable.

notanewuser

There's something not right here.

How can a mother claim (presumably significant) tax credits as a single parent when she only has the child 50% of the time?!

anonx_2

clearingout you seem like a very angry person inside, everyone has there own circumstances and everyone is different, most pwc and nrp get on very well and have good arrangements for their children, this original post seems like one of them. im sorry you feel the way you do, sometimes its better to let go and live xx

clearingout

anonx wrote: »

clearingout you seem like a very angry person inside, everyone has there own circumstances and everyone is different, most pwc and nrp get on very well and have good arrangements for their children, this original post seems like one of them. im sorry you feel the way you do, sometimes its better to let go and live xx

I live a very happy life, thank you. Fiancially solvent (just about) and building a new career which I hope will secure my old-age. Plenty of friends and an active social life. Even the odd date and a couple of semi-serious relationships since my ex and I split. There is no anger or bitterness on my side of things.

I agree, most separated and divorced couples manage to parent their children to a reasonable standard. Our children are no different. However, that's because I ignore much of my ex's crap and let it go over my head 'for the sake of the children' or we would all go mad. That doesn't mean that I have to accept that he is doing and pretend it's OK. It's not. And I will fight it using the methods that are open to me - which is the CSA which, for the most part, is inefficient and ineffective. But they try and that's good enough!

Confusedmouse

notanewuser wrote: »

There's something not right here.

How can a mother claim (presumably significant) tax credits as a single parent when she only has the child 50% of the time?!

Something similar happened in my family. Even solicitors agree it's a grey area.

Basically if you are the mother and you say the child lives with you, you get benefits. You should in theory state the child is with the father 50% of the time, but in reality people don't.
However, to the original poster, in my opinion, I wouldn't ask for maintenance for the very reason if it gets nasty, he could report you for claiming child benefit when you perhaps shouldn't have been receiving the amounts you were (presuming you were receiving full amounts)

I think you have the perfect relationship with your ex and what a wonderful balance your child has- really good to hear, instead of nasty bitter parents restricting access just to spite the other parent