Travel costs and NRP?

Jigglo

Hi please be gentle with me as this is my first post.

Who is responsible for covering travel costs for the NRP to see the children?

Brief outline. I'm the resident parent and I moved 100 miles away, NRP wasn't seeing the children and hadn't for 5 years, his decision not mine. He started seeing them and travelling to my house but not on a regular basis. About 2 and a half years ago it was decided that he would have the children one weekend a month providing I could share the travelling,yep not an issue. The contact dropped to just school holidays and that was only every other one. In that period maintenance dropped by half to £160pcm as he had a child with his wife(on CSA1).

Last few weeks it has been discussed about starting regular contact up again but as maintenance has dropped I can't afford to do the travelling as maintenance just covers dinner money.

Should I be paying out of my own pocket or should the NRP pay for the contact?

lazer

In general I would say, whoever moves away pays.

However as he had no contact when you moved away, then I don't think this really applies.

I think the fair thing is to share the travel costs - your ex is paying child support as agreed by the CSA based on his income, so is contributing what he should be, so the fact it has dropped is irrelevant.

He could go for a variation based on travel costs, not sure how it works with CSA 1 though, and if he did then he would be responsible for the full travel costs IMO, but if he hasn't then you are both equally responsible for the costs.

CSAworkerx

If hes claiming s/c on the case, we wont look at travel costs, but as its only 2 nights per month he probly doesnt have a s/c allowance, Meaning he could apply for a variation, but it rarely reduces the CM amount by much.

From a personal perspective, I think it depends on both your situations, if the nrp is struggling to support himself but desprately wants to see his kids, i think id pay half for him to do that, but this is just my personal view, what you do is up to you.

justontime

It is CSA 1 so the NRP could apply for a departure (the old term for variation) based on his actual travel costs to maintain contact with the children. If he does this the NRP will have a chance to object and unless there is a written agreement in place it will probably be based on the frequency of contact in the previous 12 months, they usually take the word of the PWC for this (that was our experience anyway). Assuming that the departure is allowed they allow the travel costs to be included in the NRPs exempt income, therefore the CSA assessment is made on a smaller amount of income. The NRP will pay less, but it will not decrease significantly (if the contact costs are £30 it does not mean that the amount the NRP has to pay to the PWC will reduce by £30).

The NRP can not force the PWC to take responsibility for transporting the children to or from contact visits, but in order to make things easier for the children many parents manage to work out a compromise which involves a bit of give and take on both sides.

jacklink

ive just goolged and got travel costs for driving 100 miles and its £19 one way so about £40 there and back, i dont think £20 will break the bank for the kids to have a relationship with their father, but just to say as he's been unreliable in the past i would pay if hes consistent, but if he drops off the map again i wouldnt give him anything

clearingout

jacklink wrote: »

ive just goolged and got travel costs for driving 100 miles and its £19 one way so about £40 there and back, i dont think £20 will break the bank for the kids to have a relationship with their father, but just to say as he's been unreliable in the past i would pay if hes consistent, but if he drops off the map again i wouldnt give him anything

how on earth could you judge whether £20 will 'break the bank'? You know nothing of either the PWC or the NRP's finances in this case and what impact any additional costs may have on either of them. £20 is a lot of money to some people, particularly in the current economic climate, and there have certainly been times in my life when it would have broken my bank to have to find it in addition to everyone else.

jacklink

omg clearing out get real, if you cant afford a £20 a month then you shouldn't be having kids in the first place should you, get a job

clearingout

jacklink wrote: »

omg clearing out get real, if you cant afford a £20 a month then you shouldn't be having kids in the first place should you, get a job

assuming the 'get a job' was aimed at me, I work full time in a professional position, thanks. I pay three different types of childcare for three children so that I can do my job. £20 is a lot to me for many reasons, but one of those reasons is my ex doesn't pay maintenance. For some of us, every penny is placed within a strict household budget and carefully accounted for at the end of the month. Your lack of understanding of how some people live is, as always, outstanding. Perhaps when my ex left I should have put my children into care since I clearly am no longer in a position to support them?

jacklink

....................

clearingout

jacklink wrote: »

sad that you feel a need to pay 3 lots of different childcare when your ex pays nothing, therefore i assume he doesnt work, sad that he doesn't have access to his children to provide that child care, i cant imagine for one moment you choose to have 3 children with a person who doesnt care and isnt able to provide that care, what with you being a professional worker

my ex is a self employed professional who should know better. He also has plenty of access to his children. It does nothing for his, or countless other similar NRP's, consciences.

I don't 'feel a need' to pay childcare. I have no choice. I could be sitting around on benefits because I have a child under the age of 5. what has my being 'professional' got to do with it? You assume that professionals aren't capable of having multiple children by multiple fathers? or of needing benefits? I sat on benefits for quite some time when my ex left because at that point I was a stay at home mum. Took a while to get my act together. Fortunately, I had an education to fall back on and plenty of experience to manipulate it all into a new career. Not everyone is quite so lucky. Plenty of professionals earn a pittance and still need to account for every penny even if they do receive maintenance.

No two situations are the same. But assuming that people fall into some kind of stereotyped category according to what they earn, where they live, or what job they do ensures that countless 'single mums' experience ridiculous levels of prejudice in all walks of life. Amazing how your tune has changed, isn't it?