Consent order breach??

FBaby

Could it be that he is frustrated with her lifestyle? A car and £400 school trip could be seen as an unecessary luxury. Was the decision to buy a car/go on the trip discussed with him? Still puts him in the wrong not paying though!

Guest101

Floxxie wrote: »

Of course, I agree but I think a NRP would struggle to prove that the money is not being spent on a child: costs involve a wide range of expenses. I would be interested in knowing exactly how many have managed to get 'sole custody' based on the expenditure of child maintenance!

Well strictly speaking the expenses of raising a child are fairly straight forward:


A portion of the rent or mortgage. - For example a 3 bed property with 1 child would be hard pressed to say that half the rent is solely the expense of the child. - and then factored that upto 1/3 of the time the child wont be there.
A proportion of the food costs - Again it would be a very difficult argument to suggest that half the bottle of wine was for the child. Or more commonly child is vegetarian, so no meat products could be counted. (similarly 1/3 of the time child not there)
A proportion of utilities - this would exclude council tax obviously, and as the child would typically stay with the NRP at least some of the time, the utilities would likely be 1/3 to 2/3s.
Clothing - Fairly self explanatory, but the PWC shouldn't order from high interest catalogues on BNPLs for example and then claim the full cost.
Transport - This can be tricky. In most circumstances the cost of the parents private vehicle would be excluded - and the cost for the most cost effective way would be counted.


Once those basics are covered you look into wider costs. For example birthday presents. Unless it's agreed with the NRP that a gift would come from both parents, it would be quite immoral to use their money to provide a sole parent gift.


However, as I say in most cases by circumstance the maintenance is used up on costs.


I'm talking about families where the PWC has serious difficulties (possibly drink, drugs or other vices) and where the child as a result does not have double the maintenance spent on them, their wellbeing or for their benefit.


I wasn't suggesting that custody would be based purely on the way the money was spent, just that there would be serious concerns if the money spent on the child didn't add up to at least the maintenance payment, and realistically if it didn't add up to double the payment.


Obviously if NRP is earning £200k+ a year, this isn't really applicable.


But for the average income families this would I think bring some concerns.

anna_1977

FBaby wrote: »

Could it be that he is frustrated with her lifestyle? A car and £400 school trip could be seen as an unecessary luxury. Was the decision to buy a car/go on the trip discussed with him? Still puts him in the wrong not paying though!

No he's just being incredibly difficult now she's turned 18. He's not had a problem with supporting their lifestyle up to now, nor continuing to support eldest. He seems to think now she is 18 he doesn't have to support her. I did try explaining that as she's in FT education he does but he didn't want to hear.

It was his idea for me to look at new cars last summer when she turned 17 as her sister had the use of a car when she was living at home.

It's the equality for how he's treating them that's frustrating....

Floxxie

Child maintenance is worked out on the NRPs income - there is no formula for deciding how that payment should be used. If I broke down the costs, the child maintenance I receive would not even cover their housing requirements. I am one of the fortunate ones. I have heard of people receiving £5 a week - that might stretch to a bottle of wine

The issue is that the NRP cannot decide what the payments should be and where they should be spent. The payments are based on their income (minus allowable costs) and number of children up to the age of 19 if in full time education.

After 19, there may be a case for that adult child to ask the courts to continue maintenance direct.

OP my ex only wants to pay child maintenance until the children turn 16. He doesn't care that it is 19, so I too will be using the CMS next year.

anna_1977

UPDATE:
Very impressed with Child Maintenance Service! I registered a claim monday and have come back from lunch today and have emails from the ex and his girlfriend; they received the letter today advising he has to pay me £105 per week!
Needless to say the ex is fuming and has emailed to say he is coming round to discuss me selling the house and splitting the profit - no chance, i bought him out when we divorced and that part of the consent order is legal and enforceable
Very long and nice email from his girlfriend begging me to be reasonable to go back to the original agreement. I have replying stating that's all I ever wanted and I hope to see the £240 in my account by the end of the day.

Brighton_belle

I hope he sees sense and gets back to supporting his 2nd daughter in the way he agreed to and morally should.


Did you tell the girlfriend how your ex had made his daughter feel? I bet she has no idea what has been going on and what he has been up to.

anna_1977

I didn't reply to my ex husband, I replied to the girlfriend very nicely explaining the implications of him not paying me. I did explain how my daughter was feeling and how stressed she was about it, i hope that gets passed to him!

Guest101

Hope it gets sorted.


Did they apply it for 2 children? £105 seems a lot, but I suppose his income could be much higher than previously discussed.

anna_1977

no it was for the one child, his income is £46k and I can only assume he doesn't contribute to pension scheme - he has a baby at home too

HoneyNutLoop

£105 a week is correct for 1 child based on an income of £46k, but it doesn't take account of your ex's other child. When he gives them the child's details, the figure will come down a bit, to around £94, so your initial estimate in post #45 was pretty spot on.