Child benefit tribunal help

Caroline_a

OP - my ex fought me for what was then called custody for my youngest daughter. it was the worst 12 months of my life. He was on full legal aid, so it cost him nothing, whereas I was working and had to pay. Eventually, after him appealing the judges' decision 8 times, the judge said he was going to make a final ruling. He ruled that my daughter lived with me. My ex then let the marital home go downhill so that when it was sold it went for around 30% less than it was worth. He refused to pay any maintenance for my daughter.

For me it was very hard to act as if all was ok in front of my daughter, but I did my very best to keep the nasty parts from her - some was unavoidable, as the Welfare Officer coming to talk to her prior to making reports (there were 2 due to the continual appealing).

My daughter is now an adult. She has always cared for her dad and put him on a bit of a pedestal - until he let her down bigstyle this year (long story, but I wasn't involved at all). She now realises why I left him, and although I haven't told her many details as she doesnt need to know, she has some understanding of what he put me through.

Their relationship due to his bitterness will never be the same. Try not to make the same mistakes my ex did.

Indie_Kid

moodycow2 wrote: »

I do hope this never happens to you

It won't. Been told I can't have kids.

jayII

Indie_Kid wrote: »

It won't. Been told I can't have kids.

I'm sorry to hear that, it's not nice to have such a big choice removed from you.

lazer

Your situation is exactly why the system is unfair.


You are doing what many people (including those on this forum) say fathers should do - you are extremely involved in your Childrens lives - that is a wonderful thing.


However, due to the financial situation you can't afford to spend as much time with them as you would like, or treat them how you would like to treat them when you have them.


Children of separated parents regularly spend time with with both parents, staying overnight with both. However it is only one parent (PWC) that is entitled to help with housing costs, it is the same parent that is entitled to all child related benefits.


Then to top it all off, they can claim CSA of the parent that has to pay for all the housing costs, and receives no child related benefits.


Example:


Father (NRP)
Father earns £200 a week
maintenance - £30 a week (20% for 2 children, with a 2/7 reduction for having children 2 nights)
Remaining - £160 a week


Rent a room would probably be about £70 a week, but he can't be in a shared house to give his children somewhere nice to stay when they visit, so rent will probably be well over £100 a week (even for a decent size 1 bed place).
Remaining money - £60 a week to pay Council Tax, Utilities, travel to work, food for himself and the children, travel to collect children etc.


Mother (PWC)
Earns £200 a week
Maintenance £30
Benefits £242 (As per turn to you - assuming over 30 hours and in Birmingham)
Total income: £472


Expenses Rent - £100 (as per father)
Child related expenses (School trips, clothes, fees for x,y,z, prescriptions etc) - lets be generous and allow £100 a week for expenses the father doesn't also have.


This leaves £272 for Council Tax, Utilities, travel to work, food for herself and the children.


This is not fair.


This could be exactly the same situation if the father had the children 3 nights a week, or even 3.49 on average.


This is how I believe it should be worked out, as the children have the benefit of both parents income regardless of what parent they are with:


NRP Child Support Amount:
Earning * 20%
ie: £200 * 20% = £40


PWC Child support amount:
Earning (including benefits) - (Set amount for costs only resident parent has) * 20%
ie: (£472 - £72) * 20% = £80


Actual amount due - reduced for number of days with each parent


NRP - owes 40 * 5/7 = £29
PWC - owes 80 * 2/7 = £23


NRP only pays £6 to PWC.
And if he had the children 3 days would actually receive £11 from the mother!

thorsoak

SnooksNJ wrote: »

So whose fault is it you had unprotected sex, made babies, and have decided not to get an overnight job somewhere.
Actually you are lucky because I know a lot of father's who have their kids 2 nights a week and pay child support.

My nephew is working as a support worker, on NMW, pays his ex voluntarily £250 every month for their 1 daughter and has her for two nights every week plus two weeks in the summer holidays. He's never complained about this - says he's her father, so why should he not pay?

FBaby

The problem is not that nrp's have it too hard, it is pwcs who have it to easy! They can make a lifestyle of having children, be it being in IS for as long as they make babies, or working the minimum 16 hours and still doing very well thank you. Then you get the nrp who start their 'it's not fair, I want to do as little as possible too'.

How about both parents work as many hours as they can and both support their children? Both could work full-time with the children either going to after school clubs (very soon only required for one of the children), or making arrangement to work longer hours on the day they don't have the kids and shorter hours to pick them up after school on the days they have them.

SnooksNJ

thorsoak wrote: »

My nephew is working as a support worker, on NMW, pays his ex voluntarily £250 every month for their 1 daughter and has her for two nights every week plus two weeks in the summer holidays. He's never complained about this - says he's her father, so why should he not pay?

Father's should pay for their kids and I'm glad your nephew is doing the right thing.

clearingout

moodycow2 wrote: »

so if ex earns £500 a week gets cb and working tax credits and family tax
im employed but on minimum wage
ex can then get csa involved just to rub salt into the wounds

plain and simple
all im trying to do is make people aware of this situation.

so...you should have no financial obligation to your children if your ex has more money than you?

Regardless of the legal argument, the moral argument should always be that you have a financial obligation towards your children no matter how much or how little you earn.

Whilst I can see your predicament, I am afraid that you are not going to win this one with the authorities. Somehow you need to find it in you, for your children's sake, to move on from this and re-build your life as best you can. I say that as someone who was left a stay at home mum with no income by a very high-earning, self employed ex with 2 children under 5 and one on the way. Over 6 years later, I own my own home, work full time in a new career, have good friends around me, money in the bank and a car on the driveway. 6 years ago I was at rock bottom - I couldn't see a way through and I certainly couldn't envisage a time when life would be OK again... but with determination, I have got there. And I don't receive financial support from the ex. It would have been easy to sit back on benefits, particularly with a baby (in fact, I would only now be obliged to go onto JSA and seek work), but I made a decision that wouldn't be my life.

Life is what we make it. Don't let this define you. Find the positives and move on.

moodycow2

Thank you Lazer.
At last somebody who finally gets it

tomtontom

moodycow2 wrote: »

Thank you Lazer.
At last somebody who finally gets it

Lots of people 'get it', but the advice does not change - in the given situation you are not entitled to claim CB. As suggested several times, you need to come to agreement with your ex (either through mediation or between yourselves) as to how the child related costs can be shared more fairly.