Husband's ex wife wanting more money

Pollycat

I posted this earlier:

Pollycat wrote: »

I would not - in any circumstances - hand over £150 without knowing to the penny what it is going to be spent on.

Melaniep
Are you sure that the uniform costs £300?
Your second post I've quoted seems to indicate that there may be some doubt about it.

Melaniep101 wrote: »

Found out this evening that the total uniform bill was £300 but she was happy to split the bill in half... Not sure why she didn't ask a few weeks ago.

Melaniep101 wrote: »

No, ex wife has asked for £150 as she says the uniform will cost £300. That's not establishing that the uniform DID cost £300 at all.

Also:

Melaniep101 wrote: »

Not sure why she didn't ask a few weeks ago.

If I were your OH and he decides he is going to pay this £150 (regardless of the reason), I would tell my ex to give more notice for one-off requests for additional money.

Good luck - I think some posters have been unnecessarily nasty to you.

CH27

Wow so much bitterness & axe grinding in one thread

paulineb_2

People are second guessing both ways. Ive seen comments about what the OP and her husbands circumstances are financially when she made it clear in her first post that they have a large mortgage because they could only get a 19 year mortgage, I assume because he made the decision to leave his child in the house he grew up in.

And yes she paid 30k of a mortgage but a 30k mortgage on a house thats worth 300k, I think thats a good deal.

And comments like child can go without for all you lot care, thats actually not the case.

As I said above, I grew up in a house where my father contributed the bare legal minimum to me and my mum had to go to court to get him to pay that. He was working full time and over the years his career advanced to the point where he was earning more than my mum, they both work in education. I got nothing from him apart from that, not one birthday card, not one christmas card, nothing. Not a single penny.

And my mum worked full time, but shes never been on a massive salary and as I said above in those days there were no working tax credits and no child tax credits.

She got on with it, she had to. I dont think for a minute that a father should be put in a position where they have to hand over cash when the mother is short when they already pay £450 a month and gave over the bulk of an asset which is now worth 300k which was paid for by him when they were married.

If the maintenance isnt enough, then say so. Ask for more money every month. I dont think for one nano second all her spare cash is going on booze and fags but if someone wants more money, its really not unrealistic to ask, why are you struggling?

On this thread it just seems like there have been a lot of assumptions made about the OP and yes the ex wife as well, its what we have to do with limited information.

But this isnt a father who pays nothing for his child, he does more than the 450 pounds a month, he travels a long distance to see him, he buys him clothes, he takes him on holiday.

This isnt someone who has no interest in providing for his child. And we dont know what his outgoings and debts are either.

The OP has said this isnt the first time shes asked for an expensive item at short notice, the last time it was money for an x box.

Is an x box really necessary, Id say probably not.

clearingout

yes, it's reasonable to ask why are you struggling, of course. But should an adult be forced to discuss their financial position with someone who will then judge whether or not the child (not the adult) gets the money that is needed? that's a massive, massive control issue...kind of having to go begging cup in hand to the ex and his wife and have them look kindly on you or not.....and it's still a child who is going to (potentially at least) go without.

I guess the question to be asked is how often does she ask for additional money?

clearingout

and I don't accept the argument that she has capital she didn't work for argument. The courts view marriages as homemakers having made equal contributions. Indeed, many stay at home parents contribute huge amounts to their partner's careers by simply being available and on-call 24/7. To suggest she should have walked away with nothing or very little from the marriage because she didn't work wouldn't wash in the courts so why on earth it should wash here is beyond me.

Skinto_7

Clearingout,

The OP's OH pays £450 a month child maintenance, seems to be an active presense in his kids life, and paid off a large chunk of the mortgage when him and his ex split up so that his kid would remain in their child hood home.

The OP has had a moan about the ex now wanting adhoc payments, when her and her OH dont have the dissposable income to cover things like that at such short notice.

So what part of that do you think is unreasonable?

paulineb_2

Melaniep101 wrote: »

I know! I couldn't believe her cheek to be honest. My stepson always comes to us with clothes that are too small for him, and his school shoes on. Seems she wont even buy him a pair of decent trousers and trainers... We've bought him a load of new clothes that actually fit him and make him look like a young man. No idea where her money is going...

It doesnt look like hes going without. Going around in clothes that are too small for him and his school shoes on and its fallen to the OP and her husband to pay for clothes and trainers that fit?

But these new clothes dont seem to be getting bought by the mum.
So if someone wanted to ask a question, what is she spending her money on, I think thats entirely justified.

Because if you are getting £450 a month in child maintenance and you cant buy your kid clothes that fit and trainers as well, then its either time to be honest that you are struggling and ask for more money or sit down and do a bloody budget plan, because something isnt right

And I dont think its the case that every kid needs to be kitted out in the newest labels either. Some parents cant afford it and thats why you have shops such as Tesco and asda who do cheaper school clothes, shops like primark or even somewhere like sports direct, you can get low cost (and brand) trainers in there.

No way do you need to spend £300 kitting out a child from top to toe in school gear unless you have a school that insists that their uniform is bought for them.

And the phrase you cut your coat according to your cloth springs to mind, if this woman really is struggling she can be honest about it and she could also make some decisions about selling the home and downsizing depending on where she lives in the country.

Because if I were in !!!! financially and was living in a 300k house that I might get more for on the open market, I might sit down and think, its time to downsize. I appreciate the child has known this as a family home, but people do move when they have to.

We dont know enough about either of the family circumstances really, but someone who pays 450 quid a month when they already have large outgoings and it seems that housing is a large outgoing, doesnt come across as someone who doesnt care or who isnt interested in providing for his child. Far from it.

paulineb_2

clearingout wrote: »

and I don't accept the argument that she has capital she didn't work for argument. The courts view marriages as homemakers having made equal contributions. Indeed, many stay at home parents contribute huge amounts to their partner's careers by simply being available and on-call 24/7. To suggest she should have walked away with nothing or very little from the marriage because she didn't work wouldn't wash in the courts so why on earth it should wash here is beyond me.

Someone made a comment that she bought him out of his portion, she didnt. She paid 30k on a house thats worth 300k and he paid for the mortgage when they were living there.

No one said that she should have walked away with nothing. But she certainly hasnt walked away with nothing has she?

And Id never devalue what stay at home parents do. But some women and men who are single parents dont have an option of being stay at home parents, because they cant afford it.

Its not beyond the realms of possibility given that the boy is 12 and is at school most of the day that the woman could increase her hours at work or look for additional hours elsewhere.

clearingout

it is unreasonable that the mother's life has been picked apart and her every motive and move brought into question...it is unreasonable it is assumed she can afford her child's school uniform at this precise moment in time without knowing the finer details of her finances. It is unreasonable that the OP judges her without knowing her and attempts to pit her life against the ex's wife's because it is done only to try and make the ex wife look unreasonable.

What happens if this money isn't found? Is the child going to go without? What if mum really doesn't have it before the 1st September...what will happen? Is dad going to discuss it with mum sensibly and come up with a plan between them or does he let his current wife tell him the child can go without, backed by people on an internet forum when none of us are in possession of the facts?

paulineb_2

clearingout wrote: »

yes, it's reasonable to ask why are you struggling, of course. But should an adult be forced to discuss their financial position with someone who will then judge whether or not the child (not the adult) gets the money that is needed? that's a massive, massive control issue...kind of having to go begging cup in hand to the ex and his wife and have them look kindly on you or not.....and it's still a child who is going to (potentially at least) go without.

I guess the question to be asked is how often does she ask for additional money?

But that goes both ways. The OP pays a bigger mortgage now on a property that he bought when they split because he and his new wife could only get a 19 year mortgage. The OP made it very clear in the first paragraph that their mortgage takes up a huge chunk of their earnings

So why should it be automatically assume that the man has excess money to give every time the ex wife asks for it?

Because I think some people in this thread have assumed that and didnt read the part in the opening post where the OP made clear just how much money they pay out every month in housing costs.