CSA and working nights.

nannytone_2

if you want her to have them 5 nights a week AND to share the debt ... then maybe you should be sharing the child tax credits and child benefit with her?
presumably she feeds them when they are with her and yet you receive the benefits?
can you not see that may appear unfair by her?

not sure how the new CMS works out, but under CSA she would have to pay you 20% of her income for 2 children.
but this would be reduced by 5/7 because of the nights they stay with her.
so you'd get very little indeed and cause an awful lot of problems in the process.

how were the debts accrued and what were they for?

pmlindyloo

nannytone wrote: »

if you want her to have them 5 nights a week AND to share the debt ... then maybe you should be sharing the child tax credits and child benefit with her?
presumably she feeds them when they are with her and yet you receive the benefits?
can you not see that may appear unfair by her?

not sure how the new CMS works out, but under CSA she would have to pay you 20% of her income for 2 children.
but this would be reduced by 5/7 because of the nights they stay with her.
so you'd get very little indeed and cause an awful lot of problems in the process.

how were the debts accrued and what were they for?

Plus whose name are they in?

You said you get working tax credits? Which of you gets child tax credits?

DUTR

nannytone wrote: »

if you want her to have them 5 nights a week AND to share the debt ... then maybe you should be sharing the child tax credits and child benefit with her?
presumably she feeds them when they are with her and yet you receive the benefits?
can you not see that may appear unfair by her?

not sure how the new CMS works out, but under CSA she would have to pay you 20% of her income for 2 children.
but this would be reduced by 5/7 because of the nights they stay with her.
so you'd get very little indeed and cause an awful lot of problems in the process.

how were the debts accrued and what were they for?

What does it matter what the debts are for? If the genders were reversed then your tune would be different, give the guy a break! You get NRPs like me that pay their CSA and the hungry PWCs still asking for more money when they do not work and have all the excuses under the sun why they should be a precariat. The OP's ex has a new partner, perhaps he can help out with the costs (perhaps he is we don't know.)

nannytone_2

if the debt is for a car that YOU are in possession of .... or for furniture that is in YOUR house, then clearly, it is your debt and no longer a joint one.
you can't expect your ex to be contributing towards things she has no use of

my opinion has nothing to do with gender, but is to do with fairness.
the NRP is clearly doing as much as she can, and now the additional costs of having the kids extra nights a week ( without the help of benefits) could quite easily lead to her being unable to afford the amount previously given to the OP

DUTR

nannytone wrote: »

if the debt is for a car that YOU are in possession of .... or for furniture that is in YOUR house, then clearly, it is your debt and no longer a joint one.
you can't expect your ex to be contributing towards things she has no use of

my opinion has nothing to do with gender, but is to do with fairness.
the NRP is clearly doing as much as she can, and now the additional costs of having the kids extra nights a week ( without the help of benefits) could quite easily lead to her being unable to afford the amount previously given to the OP

If if if!, what if the debts are from costs to do with the children?
I'm not even sure why you are trying to side track the OP's issue?

nannytone_2

DUTR wrote: »

If if if!, what if the debts are from costs to do with the children?
I'm not even sure why you are trying to side track the OP's issue?

me side tracking?
you were the one who asked why what the debts were for was relevant!

as i said ... if the debts are for things like a car or furniture, which the OP has possession of ... then i wouldn't blame his ex for not wanting to split the repayment!

and the costs involved with the extra care of the kids is also relevant.
if they need to spend more on the basics for the kids ( for which the OP receives benefits) then they are going to have less money to contribute towards the debt

davesbigsack

pmlindyloo wrote: »

Plus whose name are they in?

You said you get working tax credits? Which of you gets child tax credits?

actually i think its child tax credit i get, non of us get working tax credit.

nannytone wrote: »

if you want her to have them 5 nights a week AND to share the debt ... then maybe you should be sharing the child tax credits and child benefit with her?
presumably she feeds them when they are with her and yet you receive the benefits?
can you not see that may appear unfair by her?

right, although she has them to sleep 5 nights and tea 3 nights, the tea usually consists of tinned curry or some such concoction, she rarely cooks for em.
if they didn't have decent school dinners i would feed them those 3 nights too.....
and yea, our debts are for stuff like holidays, cloths ect
i buy all their school clothes, i do the school runs and ive just had 2 weeks off work and she has seen her kids twice, so i don't think im been unreasonable to ask her to pay her bit.

swingaloo

Does your ex work?

davesbigsack

swingaloo wrote: »

Does your ex work?

yup, she works for the guy shes seeing.

merlin68

She obviously has them more. When mine were at secondary school they didn't get home till 4 30 and you state that they go home 2 hrs before bed.
So 9-8 in the morning is far more than the 4 and a half hrs that you have them for.
Or am i missing something.
Are the debts in your name of joint?