Csa brackets??

Options
I have an agreement with my ex that he has our 2 children, Friday after school till Monday before school every second weekend and 5 nights for 5 weeks in the school holidays ( 1 Easter, 2 summer, 1 autumn & 1 Xmas) total number of nights 103.
The CSA have based their assessment on that, the payment bracket being 52-103 nights.
My ex is now saying on that basis he will only agree to have the children 52 nights a year. Friday & Saturday every other weekend returning them at lunchtime on the Sunday and no holidays.
I'm a self employed educator in the beauty industry and teach courses every second Sunday and Monday.
I know he is only doing it to make my life difficult. Can I legally make him stick to our original agreement?
«13

Comments

  • Caz3121
    Caz3121 Posts: 15,561 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    was the agreement through the court or a personal agreement?
  • LJD1973
    Options
    We had a legal separation agreement as we were separated for 2 years...I went back to him in January so the legal seperation would be void...and then left again in July. We agreed to keep the same arrangement verbally but he's not happy with what he's being asked to pay by CSA.
  • FBaby
    FBaby Posts: 18,367 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    It sounds like you he believes that your purposely worked out the nights for him to have them to maximize maintenance via csa, so he is now getting back at you for it. He couldn't do anything csa wise, you can't do anything contact wise. How sad that he can't be grateful that he gets to his children that many days, how sad that you couldn't reach a private agreement between yourself reflecting that he is having the children that many days.

    In the meantime, you have children in the middle, hopefully to young to appreciate that their parents are fighting each other for who gets to have them the least often :(

    I suppose in this situation, the only compromise is to review the arrangement so he has them 75 nights...
  • Lunar_Eclipse
    Options
    If it's a legal arrangement, you could take him to court.

    It's a little sad that he is thinking about contact from a financial point of view (doesn't he want to see his kids?), but the 103 days exactly does sound a bit orchestrated (though I think that's also natural since you're probably in a very tight financial situation as a single parent and thus reduced flexibility comparatively when it comes to earning power.)

    So tricky. Good luck.
  • Lunar_Eclipse
    Lunar_Eclipse Posts: 3,060 Forumite
    edited 16 September 2015 at 6:34AM
    Options
    FBaby wrote: »
    In the meantime, you have children in the middle, hopefully to young to appreciate that their parents are fighting each other for who gets to have them the least often :(.

    That's not true though, caus he does, by quite some margin. He is the only one trying to have them as little as possible within a CSA bracket, which I agree is really awful.

    There may or may not be a huge amount of calendar manipulation on the OP's side to max out the contact days within a range, but even so, I don't view this in an equally bad light because there are two parents here, both of whom need to earn a living and one parent who is doing much more 'childcare.'
  • System
    System Posts: 178,104 Community Admin
    Photogenic Name Dropper First Post
    Options
    If it's a legal arrangement, you could take him to court.

    It's a little sad that he is thinking about contact from a financial point of view .
    I think it's a little sad that the OP was thinking about the financial aspect with going for the top end of a lower bracket to maximise CSA, when NRP possibly wanted more. Did he want more access thus putting him in the next bracket and CSA dropping for the OP.

    What is happening here is the ex is now looking to do the minimum needed to maintain the payments at the current rate whereas the OP had managed to get the maximum child offload to achieve the same thing.

    I understand the ex now kicking back and wanting it his way for a change or is the OP willing to give him more time with the children?


    Did he by any chance ask for extra days? and this has caused the problem because OP is not willing to agree to that and see CSA drop?
  • Caz3121
    Caz3121 Posts: 15,561 Forumite
    Name Dropper First Anniversary First Post
    Options
    would you be prepared to offer an additional 1 night per year to take it into the next bracket? how does the loss of 1/7th CSA compare to the loss of earnings if you were unable to work those days or have to pay for childcare?
  • FBaby
    FBaby Posts: 18,367 Forumite
    First Anniversary First Post Combo Breaker
    Options
    Caz3121 wrote: »
    would you be prepared to offer an additional 1 night per year to take it into the next bracket? how does the loss of 1/7th CSA compare to the loss of earnings if you were unable to work those days or have to pay for childcare?

    Indeed that would be an easy way to sort out the conflict if it's about fairness and not maximising money. Alternatively they could have shared care each claiming for one child and agree no maintenance exchanged.
  • summerspring
    Options
    FBaby wrote: »
    In the meantime, you have children in the middle, hopefully to young to appreciate that their parents are fighting each other for who gets to have them the least often :(

    I agree. The poor kids are being pushed from pillar to post while the 2 parents argue over how to take responsibility for their kids at the least inconvenience to themselves.

    I, too, wonder how old they are.
    The report button is for abusive posts, not because you don't like someone, or their opinions
  • Guest101
    Guest101 Posts: 15,764 Forumite
    Options
    I can see both sides of this:

    1: the NRP should really cherish all the time he can get with his kids.
    2: it does sound like the PWC has arranged it so that she gets maximum money, whilst ensuring the NRP also has maximum spend with the kids. (51 extra days costs).
    3: the logical solution is to agree 104 days - which normalises that. The NRP gets 2/7 contact. The PWC gets the right amount of money. (currently saving 51 days costs potentially)
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 343.8K Banking & Borrowing
  • 250.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 450K Spending & Discounts
  • 235.9K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 609.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 173.4K Life & Family
  • 248.5K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards