Government petition to make the parent receiving child maintenance provide receipts

Fission

How would it be possible to factor in (and provide receipts for) the child's "share" of housing costs, council tax, oher household bills, domestic fuel expenditure, family meals, family transport costs (petrol, etc)?

Short answer: it isn't possible.

It is simply unreasonable to expect no part of child maintenance to go on the "ordinary" things and for it all to be spent exclusively on the child or children involved, as though the child's needs were completely separate from the rest of the household.

eve31

jondav wrote: »

Which he does and always has. But the children are being brought up by another man and he is being refused access to them....so if the new man wants to take the children on as his own, then he should pay for them. My partner has no idea regarding the childrens welfare, schooling, nothing.


I understand both sides of the argument but you seem to assume that all mothers are good mothers and do what's best for the children, but believe me when I say this one is not. I am sure that for the most part that the mothers are honest about their circumstances but in this case she is not and that is where this system falls down because it always assumes that the mother is the honest party and the father is simply trying to get out of paying, which is not the case

I still can't see the issue. I disagree the amount he pays is irrelevant especially as your argument is that he is being screwed over. If he pays less than half of what it costs to raise his three children and all the associated costs then he's not being screwed over, if he is paying an extortionate amount and your partner is worried that this is funding his ex's lifestyle fair enough, I get that. It really does help with context to know how much he pays. Strange that people complaining about paying won't disclose how much they actually have to pay.

His ex having a new partner and not having access to the children is a separate issue from maintenance. I don't know what you mean about the most part mothers being honest about their circumstances. Such a vague comment. Why is the child maintenance system failing your partner?

Your ex's new partner has no financial obligation to his children, the same way you are not liable to pay maintenance. Lots of people go on to new relationships it doesn't absolve the father of financially supporting his children. I have a new partner he doesn't pay a penny towards my two children and neither should he.

Frogletina

eve31 wrote: »

Also you say children and then say his ex wife has 4 children by 4 different fathers, so I'm a bit confused does he have more than one child with his ex wife?

It's possible he adopted two of his stepchildren. In such cases, parental responsibility is moved from the natural father. Both birth parents have to agree to the adoption and the court will decide if it is in the child's best interest.

13Kent

duchy wrote: »

This petition smacks of using the child to try and control an ex partner - Very unhealthy.

I agree, this is exactly what the PWC has done to us by

Dictating when we are allowed to see the children and for how long.

Not sending them with any clothes so we are forced to go out and buy them clothes, shoes and even coats.

Arranging a date for us to have the children and then changing her mind even after we have left the house on our way to pick the children up.

Agreeing to let us take the children on holiday, which we book and pay for and then at the last minute change her mind and say we can't have them, so we end up two adults on a family holiday aimed at entertaining children, and out of pocket into the bargain as we can't get a refund.

Refusing to bring the children to us - or even meet us half way - even when it means a 4 hour round trip on a Friday and Sunday every time we have the children for the weekend.

Agreeing to let us pick the children up from school only to find when we get there the school refuse to let us take the children as the mother has not put Dad on the list of people allowed to pick up the children resulting in huge upset and embarrassment.

Not telling us when parents evenings are,or passing on school reports.

Not telling us when the children have something on at school like a concert or sports day, and then telling the children Dad couldn't be bothered to attend.

Ringing the children when we have them for the weekend to tell them she's been shopping and bought them an expensive present resulting in the children not enjoying the time they have with us, but being desperate to go back to the Mother's so they can have their new toys.

Booking exciting things, or having visitors during the weekend we have the children so that the children don't want to come to us because they are missing out on something.

Sadly I could go on.

jjj1980

jondav wrote: »

Can I just say that I am not trying to argue with you here, quite the opposite, I am finding exchanging opinions very interesting because as I've said before, I understand that everyone has different circumstances so I do not want to appear argumentative.


I am trying to keep it accurate but vague because this is a public forum and it's difficult to explain without giving too much away. You are correct in saying that he pays the amount set by the child maintenance service (so the minimum required which is easy to look up) however, he has very serious doubts as to the honesty of the mother due to past experiences. So without any contact at all with the children, there is no way for him to verify what is actually going on with regards to what the child maintenance service are being told by the mother. She has given false information to them in the past and also lied about the family circumstances to claim benefits fraudulently, so that is where the doubt comes from.


I am in no way at all suggesting that the father shouldn't pay for his children and I have no issue with him paying for them at all, I never have and never will.


But the fact is he misses them terribly and I'm sure that they miss him too and it frustrates me that for this particular mother, the only thing that matters is getting the money from the father and not the fact that their children are being affected by not being allowed to see their dad.

Regardless of the moral rights or wrongs of any comments made by her, the mother's financial situation has absolutely no bearing on the calculation done for child support. It is purely based on number of children, number of overnight visits and the NRP/paying parents income.....

FBaby

I totally agree with the concept that an nrp should have the right to request to know how maintenance paid is spent IF they can evidence in court concerns that it is not spent on the children.

The amount is irrelevant. You would hazard a guess but you do not know for sure how the money is being spent and you don't know the people involved and therefore shouldn't assume that they are doing the right thing with the money - many don't do the right thing.

I don't agree though that the amount is irrelevant. There are fixed costs that every pwc will have no matter what, food, clothing, electricity to wash their clothes, heat their room, petrol to take them places, school related expenses etc... pwc should not have to justify how they spend maintenance that falls at or under this fixed amount, unless the nrp can evidence some level of neglect.

However I do agree that a nrp who pays significantly above this fixed amount per child, who has concerns that the money is going on luxuries that benefits the mother rather than the children should have to right to know how it is spent, not in terms of receipt, that is ridiculous, but in terms of budget.

I am a pwc who hasn't received a penny from my ex for over 10 years, and who has never denied access to his children (they go to see him every week) and I would have been more than happy to receive anything and justify how it was spent. In the end, it is not my children who are doing without, but me who had to make cuts. That's why he isn't bothered. I have chosen not to pursue it because if I did, he would take his frustration and money trouble on our children and I want them to suffer no ill effect at all as a result of our separation, so here I am!

CakeCrusader

This is bonkers. Maintenance goes into the house kitty, so if your child needs shoes, the RP buys them and this comes out of the kitty. If the RP is lucky enough to have some left to buy a bottle of wine, they fab! It doesn't mean that you've paid for the wine or a night out, you've contributed towards the cost of raising your child (which won't be 50% of how much it actually costs as it never is). Why should she show you receipts? Your child is fed, they are looked after, they have shoes and clothes, and this is what you're contributing towards.

A petition to make them show receipts is petty to be honest. You can see that they are looked after, can't you? I'd like to see a petition to prosecute absent parents who evade paying maintenance though. If the RP didn't feed their child they would be prosecuted for child neglect, so why is it OK for some NRP's to avoid paying for their child to eat? This is something that you should be getting hot and bothered about, not receipts.

FBaby

Your child is fed, they are looked after, they have shoes and clothes, and this is what you're contributing towards.

Because most good parents, when they can afford it, want to provide a lot more than the bare minimum. I would be furious if I worked hard and contributed a sum that should allow my kid to enjoy much more than just the basics, but didn't get any luxuries because their other parents would rather keep that money to enjoy for themselves.

Unfortunately, there are mothers who do see maintenance as income for them to dispose as they wish. They are usually the ones who then cry being victim of the system when the children turn 18/21 and there is no more maintenance to play with.

jjj1980

jondav wrote: »

So by your logic it would be fine for my partner to falsify information given to the CMS to reduce his payments, the same way that the mother does to increase her payments?? It is not a moral issue, it is falsification of information which is a criminal issue. If it is fine for the mother to lie, then why not the father??? How do you justify that??


I'm leaving this post alone now, some people are beyond.......well......never mind, let's just say the lightbulb will never go on for some people!

It's not a case of it being "by my logic" though. There is a set method of calculation that the CMS follow. The only part where the resident parent/mother in your case could have an influence is regarding no of overnight visits.

CMS will not ask the resident parent for information regarding their finances. When my claim first started I was not working but later returned to work. This had no effect on the calculation as that was/is based purely on my ex's income.

I'm getting the feeling you are confusing two matters that are completely seperate. If you think the childs mother is lying to claim benefits, then that can be dealt with but it won't change any part of the calculation done by CMS.

yan101_2

Id love to know how anyone could prove what money from which source went to what. Surly the pwc would just put rent. Which in most cases covers the entire nrp csa payment and then some. What my sister gets in csa payments lasts about a week, trust me. You're paying alot less than what you would be if you had the child