Bettering myself is better for my ex!

DUTR

Cally_Smart wrote: »

Maybe the other system (pre April 2010)when you had to declare any CM received as & when you got it(on a weekly or monthly basis) ,was a fairer system.I think you were allowed to keep £10 of it or save up to £100 pounds & get it when you returned to work. Fairer for the tax payer to know that moneys recovered from the nrp was going to repay the secretary of state for the service.

The pre 2010 system was flawed though, paying NRPs were just propping up the benefits sytem twice over. I'm not keen on this goverment, but I am pleased about the benefits capping.

terryw

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Most PWC receive a very modest amount of CM and I would bet money that the % of PWC living the high life on benefits and CM payments is really very very small.

Yep. Got to agree.

clearingout

iammumtoone wrote: »

Some lone parents don't receive any maintenance and others like above receive loads - it doesn't seem right.

that's life though, isn't it? why do some people do nothing in life but earn a fortune? why do some people work 80 hours a week but earn next to nothing? We rarely question, for example, why a doctor earns more than a cleaner but for some reason, we expect all lone parents to get the same deal when it comes to maintenance. It's just not possible.

clearingout

Plongeur wrote: »

1. I will be paying about £15-18,000 a year. You can argue amongst yourselves if that it too much money to support 1 child for a year, but many families live on that amount. But you don't - so why should your children not have a fair percentage of your income into their household?

2. My ex lives about 20 miles up the road from me. I know her exact circumstances. Currently unemployed, with a second child, and going through a divorce. No, you don't know her exact circumstances, unless you're some kind of stalker who can't leave her alone! You can't possibly know what she has in the bank, what her outgoings are, what debts she has, why she might have debts etc. etc. etc. That is information that people generally don't share with anyone, let alone an ex partner.

3. The current CSA cap is based net earnings up to £2000 per week.

4. Clearingout. Again you're reading what you want to read, not what I've posted. I'm more than happy to provide anything and everything for my son, however I'm not happy to pay for my ex to have a subsidised lifestyle at my expense.

It is child maintenance. It is not, technically, subsidising your ex's lifestyle. It is money for your child.

Cally_Smart

One of my sons friends mums get £200 monthly,2 friends get between £300-400 and one gets £650- we all chat in the park after school -That's quite a lot of CM for a small group of people ! Some are saving the tax credits for holidays.They know about the rough deal we've had with the CSA and talk to me about it (with sympathy)

HoneyNutLoop

Under CS2 the cap is £2000 a week for net income, not £3000. So the most you can pay for 1 child via CSA is £300 a week, 2 children £400 and 3+ children £500, unless arrears are owed.

However, once someone hits the net income cap, the PWC could apply through the courts for a top up order.

Does anyone know if there is an income cap under CS3?

Alpine

clearingout wrote: »

It is child maintenance. It is not, technically, subsidising your ex's lifestyle. It is money for your child.

You couldn't be more naive. Do you honestly believe it is all being spent on the child?


The ex has to provide a house, heat and power for herself. What is the marginal cost of having an extra room for a child? Looking at rental differences where my ex is, it's around £150 and power and heating might add an extra £15 a month. Food and domestic stuff for a child of 14 is around £120 per month. Clothing would work out around £40 per month over the course of a year. Pocket money and entertainment, about £75 if the child is lucky.


So that's about £400 a month to support the child. What do you think the PWC would be spending the remaining £850 a month on? I doubt very much it is all spent on the child, or saved away for driving lessons, a car or university support when they are older.

Alpine

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

Under CS2 the cap is £2000 a week for net income, not £3000. So the most you can pay for 1 child via CSA is £300 a week, 2 children £400 and 3+ children £500, unless arrears are owed.

However, once someone hits the net income cap, the PWC could apply through the courts for a top up order.

Does anyone know if there is an income cap under CS3?

CS3 has a gross income cap of £3,000 per week.


Info here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2008/6/schedule/4

FBaby

your child absolutely has a right (legal and in my opinion, moral) to benefit from the success of BOTH his parents and benefit from an increased income in exactly the same way he would have done had you remained together. This is a completely different point to your affirmation that you don't have a problem paying for your child.

But the child IS getting the benefit of an increase in his lifestyle, because maintenance has increased AND because his dad can afford to pay for things outside of maintenance that he wouldn't otherwise benefit from.

The issue is that why should the ex have total control of how this benefit their common child way above what is meeting his standard needs? and more importantly, why should she directly benefit from it? The reality is, it is highly unlikely the full maintenance is going only directly to the child. However much you want the child to enjoy a lifestyle in line with the maintenance received, there are limits to it. You would expect the child to be doing expensive activities, being sent on a number of organised group holidays (through the activities he does), enjoy expensive equipment, go to an excellent school, either local, or if not available locally, privately.
Is this happening?

Let's face it, if a pwc is struggling going through a divorce, not working with another child, is she really going to provide all the above for her oldest child because of the maintenance she gets for him and him only, and see her second child get nothing as such because that child is not getting as much from his dad? This is not a matter for the OP. He doesn't have to care about fairness amongst the children of his ex, he has to care about his son benefiting from what he provides for him.

clearingout wrote: »

that's life though, isn't it? why do some people do nothing in life but earn a fortune? why do some people work 80 hours a week but earn next to nothing? We rarely question, for example, why a doctor earns more than a cleaner but for some reason, we expect all lone parents to get the same deal when it comes to maintenance. It's just not possible.

This is absolutely not comparable. A doctor will have worked hard to have his career and there are very good reason why he will earn more than a cleaner (starting with the massive difference in risk!). People getting different salaries have/had a choice, a nrp doesn't have any say when it comes to maintenance. It's not about all pwc getting the same rate of maintenance, it's about them benefiting directly from money that has nothing to do with them.

Plongeur

Well put FBaby. While my income may seem excessive to many, I've worked long and hard to get where I am, and do a hard and dangerous job that very few people in the world would do for 10 times that amount.

I'm uses to the 'have nots' expecting the 'haves' to support them. Unfortunately it seems to be the way this country has gone in so many aspects of life.