CSA question

turtlemoose

I think what your ex does is pretty much none of your business.

Let's flip this situation with a hypothetical scenario - you're the one with a new partner, who happens to be a billionairess, and she shares her wealth with you. Your ex is still liable to pay you csa even though it may cause her to struggle financially, even though you don't need it.

Quite frankly you sound bitter that your ex has had a baby with somebody else, and you sound money-grabbing.

GwylimT

I didn't realise men didn't have the option of giving up work to look after their children.

CSA might change, it depends on the individual circumstance, basically she will be 'given' 15% of her wage for her new arrival, this means your CSA claim will be based on 85% of her wage.

FBaby

Don't make it a gender issue. My ex and his partner decided to have a baby together (despite both having 2 each already that neither was supporting).

They made the decision that she would go to work whilst my ex would stay at home to look after the baby. It is becoming more and more common that the mother is the one that goes back to work so the father avoids paying maintenance.

What is unfair is that the same rule doesn't apply to partners of pwc who are considered fully responsible for their step-children. I don't understand that as spending more time with children doesn't forceably correlate with a more responsible relationship with them. My kids get along well with my husband, but consider their dad as their father. If something were to happen to me, they would move to live with their father. Yet, my partner is expected to contribute towards them when their dad isn't.

It's not fair, but life is too short to dwell over what you can't do a thing about (and there are many of them!!!).

fabforty

lincsdan86 wrote: »

What I mean was, the father is never likely to get pregnant and then stop working so there is more chance that they will work for the majority of their lives and therefore his new family unit would be liable to pay for maintenance whereas a woman can have another child, stop working and therefore that family unit does not have to pay maintenance.


Of course this is based on traditional family roles for which I am likely to get slated for but it is possible..

There have been plenty of threads on here where the father has either stopped worked or reduced his hours, when a new baby has come along, thereby reducing or stopping his CSA payments to his ex. It might be worth asking your ex what she plans to do - you seem to be assuming that she will avoid supporting her son if at all possible.
When my partners ex found out that I was pregnant, she walked around !!!!!ing and moaning about her children getting less money blah, blah blah. We had already decided that her payments would not/should not be affected.

FBaby

I didn't realise men didn't have the option of giving up work to look after their children.

Of course men have that same option. The csa could do something if they felt that the nrp had voluntarily given up work for the sole purpose of avoid paying maintenance, but if he does so because he becomes a stay at home dad so that his wife can go to work (especially if then earning more than he would), they wouldn't do a thing about it.