ex wife wants more money following court order

DUTR

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

its not 15% for one child if this will be a new case to the CSA. I cant find the figure (only calculators) but the % is now based on GROSS income (15% was based on NET income). Best thing is to run your hubands details through the online calc to get an idea how much the CSA will expect him to pay.

It's 12% gross for one qualifying child.

duchy

Most children of high earners do have a level of expectation that their parents will offer some level of support at university and when parents stay together this is usually the case. When parents separate however it is a different matter-which is a shame.

I do feel if you raise your children with expectations of higher education then married or not the obligation to support for both the RP and the NRP -based on income should be there , Just as it would be had the parents not split up. Rather than the child get to cherry pick which parental income they use for public purse support -it should be spread between the parents based on individual income. After all CSA is based on the assumption that your children are still your children and there is logic in that same thinking continuing to HE funding too.

shoe*diva79

DUTR wrote: »

It's 12% gross for one qualifying child.

Cheers - I thought that was it but didnt want to confirm without being 100% sure

tomtilly

Thank you again for your replies. On a practical note, could my husband apply for a variation to take account of the money he pays to the children at university?

RuthnJasper

DUTR wrote: »

Help me out here.... as the highlighted bits seems to suggest that the family were just seeing the donor as a cash cow?
Why has the PWC got nothing?

Not at all; she was much in love with her ex until she saw his true colours and it was an enormous wrench and massive lifestyle adjustment to summon up the courage to leave.

She doesn't want his money and neither, particularly, do their children. But I don't think it is just seeing someone as a "cash cow" - surely it's right to hope that a father might contribute something to the university fees and marriages of his own children? Even if it's just paying for the wedding cake or a small offering? That's all she was hoping for.

shoe*diva79

tomtilly wrote: »

Thank you again for your replies. On a practical note, could my husband apply for a variation to take account of the money he pays to the children at university?

Very much doubt it. They are adults and will be expected to use their grants and part time earnings.

DUTR

RuthnJasper wrote: »

Not at all; she was much in love with her ex until she saw his true colours and it was an enormous wrench and massive lifestyle adjustment to summon up the courage to leave.

She doesn't want his money and neither, particularly, do their children. But I don't think it is just seeing someone as a "cash cow" - surely it's right to hope that a father might contribute something to the university fees and marriages of his own children? Even if it's just paying for the wedding cake or a small offering? That's all she was hoping for.

It's probably not the thread to debate this, I disagree though, it still reads as if the family only remember the father when some financial issue comes about. People often only see the things as right when it is not them having to work or pay for them.
They don't need Dad, so they don't need his help for uni and weddings etc.

TBagpuss

Unfortunately, the system is flawed - when the CSA was introduced it explicitly removed the court's power to deal with child support (except where the CSA has no jurisdiction, such as with a paying parent who lives abroad)

There are ways to try to work around this but these are not cast iron and generally are only possible where the order is being made by consent.

I don't think your husband will be able to get a variation as he is not legally obliged to support the older children. It may be that from a practical point of view, he will need to pay the CSA rate for the youngest, and reduce the amount to the older two, and encourage them to speak to their mum to see whether she can help them out to make up the shortall, if he is not able to stretch any further.

RuthnJasper

DUTR wrote: »

It's probably not the thread to debate this, I disagree though, it still reads as if the family only remember the father when some financial issue comes about. People often only see the things as right when it is not them having to work or pay for them.
They don't need Dad, so they don't need his help for uni and weddings etc.

Although that is not the case with the family to whom I refer in my posts, I do think that you are generally right. It certainly seems the case from what has been posted here that Mr. Tomtilly's ex-wife sees him as a bottomless pool of cash. I cannot feel that this attitude is correct - parents, whatever the marital situation, do have a joint and equal responsibility for any children of the partnership. This also includes the ex-wife NOT using said children for the purposes of bleeding her former husband dry or as sticks with which to beat him.

Which is why I am glad that the OP's husband does seem to be doing his best; I am sorry that his former wife seems so grasping; it's very unpleasant.

Every good wish.