Is this right?!
Options
Comments
-
Well you're obviously far better at organising your children's clothes than I am!
But in our house yes, sometimes there is just their jumper to wash if a dark wash has already been done that day, or sometimes it's not until bedtime that I discover that a sweatshirt needs washing .
As a case in point, only this morning my eldest informed me that he couldn't wear his sweatshirt as the boy next to him was bleeding on the desk yesterday and my son took it upon himself to wipe it up using the sleeve of his school sweatshirt. Luckily I had a spare clean sweatshirt for him to wear (not ironed but clean in the laundry basket). If I had only had one sweatshirt surely you wouldn't suggest that I send him to school in one with blood all over the sleeve? Yes in theory one sweatshirt might be enough, but things are not always so black and white - life gets in the way of that!
However, we digress, and this really is not relevant to the OP's original post asking for advice. I feel you are not offering any constructive advice and just playing "devil's advocate" contradicting all his statements.
Obviously everybody's home circumstances are different, as are they way people organise their time and their household responsibilities, and also their opinions differ depending on their experience and which side of the fence they are sitting on, and how good/bad their relationship with their ex is.
You obviously seem to have everything sorted with your ex and your children and I wish you well.
I hope the OP also manages to come to a satisfactory conclusion, and I continue to hope the same for our situation (although sadly approx 15 years on from the CSA's initial involvement we are still finding it difficult despite our best efforts).0 -
Well you're obviously far better at organising your children's clothes than I am!
But in our house yes, sometimes there is just their jumper to wash if a dark wash has already been done that day, or sometimes it's not until bedtime that I discover that a sweatshirt needs washing . - But that's just poor planning. If it's so common why not check earlier and wait until after school to do the washing?
As a case in point, only this morning my eldest informed me that he couldn't wear his sweatshirt as the boy next to him was bleeding on the desk yesterday and my son took it upon himself to wipe it up using the sleeve of his school sweatshirt. Luckily I had a spare clean sweatshirt for him to wear (not ironed but clean in the laundry basket). If I had only had one sweatshirt surely you wouldn't suggest that I send him to school in one with blood all over the sleeve? Yes in theory one sweatshirt might be enough, but things are not always so black and white - life gets in the way of that! - But why would your eldest not tell you this? and why wouldn't you prepare the uniform in advance if the eldest is still young enough for that to happen?
However, we digress, and this really is not relevant to the OP's original post asking for advice. I feel you are not offering any constructive advice and just playing "devil's advocate" contradicting all his statements. - Not at all. But I'm unclear on what advice the OP wants. A change to the system, speak to his MP. A way to avoid paying extra? Go to court.
Obviously everybody's home circumstances are different, as are they way people organise their time and their household responsibilities, and also their opinions differ depending on their experience and which side of the fence they are sitting on, and how good/bad their relationship with their ex is. - I fought a Non-mol (and won) does that not give some indication?
You obviously seem to have everything sorted with your ex and your children and I wish you well. - It is sorted now, but doesn't mean there weren't difficulties.
I hope the OP also manages to come to a satisfactory conclusion, and I continue to hope the same for our situation (although sadly approx 15 years on from the CSA's initial involvement we are still finding it difficult despite our best efforts).
I agree I hope that all parents get to a situation when things are sorted.0 -
As I said initially
"You're obviously far better at sorting your children's clothes than I am!!!"
I know in theory the things that could be done and in a perfect world I would do that, but I forget, he forgets, we're rushing out to do other things after school, that's just our life and we deal with it our way as I am sure everyone else does.
0 -
As I said initially
"You're obviously far better at sorting your children's clothes than I am!!!"
I know in theory the things that could be done and in a perfect world I would do that, but I forget, he forgets, we're rushing out to do other things after school, that's just our life and we deal with it our way as I am sure everyone else does.
Fair enough. Each to their own, I was simply pointing out how 1 uniform can be used 3 days, or longer.0 -
The one comment I'll make is don't be afraid of it. If you can budget some money for advice, then do that. I can recommend a decent family solicitor that got me more than any other dad I know. If I couldn't have afforded it, I would have gone it alone. I don't know if every experience in court is the same but the magistrates I had were clearly experienced and could easily tell what kind of person my ex was - or maybe she was just rubbish at concealing how vindictiveness was at the core of all her issues with the childcare arrangements...
I was afraid of losing everything but ultimately they were on my side.
It's just a shame the CMS/CSA don't care about anything a court in the land has said.
Thanks for the advice, what were their reasonings for not giving you true 50/50 if you don't mind me asking? It is such a big step to take and right now I just pay extra things she asks for just to keep the peace (my fault i know). Just scared as it is 'only' 6 days difference a year, and don't want to make things any less amicable.0 -
That is such a poor comment. - Is it? Yes.
As everyone else says, CSA is biased and unfair against the paying parent. - Not everyone says this. It's neither biased nor unfair, it's just a system designed to ensure children have enough financial support to survive.
You do not seem to understand the meaning of biased or unfair.:
1. Only my income is taken into account.
2. As i said before, she has him 6 nights more than me a YEAR. For this i pay 2000. If i was to have him just 1 more night every 3 months, i would be 5000 better off (2000 less csa, 1000 CB, 2000 from his mum) (I obviously would not need or accept any money from her, or the CB) - CSA decides she no longer needs support and i do over 4 nights a YEAR.
3. Bob next door has a wage which is double that of mine. The CSA say he must pay double what i do for his son for the same nights. Therefore the CSA are saying it costs twice as much to look after his son than mine. The CSA is extremely biased and unfair.
How much do you pay? Now double it. Does that cover the cost of half of everything whilst he's in her care?
Why double it? do you mean the six extra days she has him over me, which works out about 335 a NIGHT.... or for the full 185 days she has him? if the latter, how much do you think it costs for the 179 days i have him, for which i receive nothing, as well as pay her? when her house bills are approx half of mine?
And before you start quoting with more silly comments, I know it isn't the CSA's fault that she doesn't use all the money on him, but it is their fault that i pay so much more than what is required. - How is it their fault?
They are the ones who say I must pay that amount based solely on my income.
2000 on uniforms, i provide childcare anyway, what else can she spend all that on that i dont provide when he is with me.....? - What childcare do you provide? You pay £2000 a year? £38 a week? You think it costs less than £80 a week to look after your child? Or do you think that in 6 months, the financial impact of having a child is less than £4000?
Luckily my parents help out when needed. i know exactly how much it costs to look after a child as i have him only 6 days less a year. Not including my house bills (which i would have regardless if i had my son or not) i myself live off a lot less than 80 a week for food and clothes.
a court order for what? custody? the judge could easily say he must stay with her as she lives closer to his school, an me just be a weekend dad. meaning i see him even less. Court is what I am trying to avoid. - Well then deal with it. Courts do not make dad's - "weekend parents." You would likely get 5/6 days a fortnight. And save £160 to spend on your son, on those days.
So your saying i should go to court, likely 5/6 days a fortnight would mean simple maths i have him 130/156 nights instead of the 179 i have currently. You really do just respond with rubbish.
Time to grow up a bit and stop worrying about 'fair'
Love this one... the whole thread is talking about what is right/fair. - Life isn't fair. I'd have thought you knew that
Again, another negative comment just for the sake of it. My thread wasn't about life, it was about the CSA being fair/right.0 -
Well you're obviously far better at organising your children's clothes than I am!
But in our house yes, sometimes there is just their jumper to wash if a dark wash has already been done that day, or sometimes it's not until bedtime that I discover that a sweatshirt needs washing .
As a case in point, only this morning my eldest informed me that he couldn't wear his sweatshirt as the boy next to him was bleeding on the desk yesterday and my son took it upon himself to wipe it up using the sleeve of his school sweatshirt. Luckily I had a spare clean sweatshirt for him to wear (not ironed but clean in the laundry basket). If I had only had one sweatshirt surely you wouldn't suggest that I send him to school in one with blood all over the sleeve? Yes in theory one sweatshirt might be enough, but things are not always so black and white - life gets in the way of that!
However, we digress, and this really is not relevant to the OP's original post asking for advice. I feel you are not offering any constructive advice and just playing "devil's advocate" contradicting all his statements.
Obviously everybody's home circumstances are different, as are they way people organise their time and their household responsibilities, and also their opinions differ depending on their experience and which side of the fence they are sitting on, and how good/bad their relationship with their ex is.
You obviously seem to have everything sorted with your ex and your children and I wish you well.
I hope the OP also manages to come to a satisfactory conclusion, and I continue to hope the same for our situation (although sadly approx 15 years on from the CSA's initial involvement we are still finding it difficult despite our best efforts).
Thankyou, sadly from how the ex is, and me paying just to keep things amicable instead of starting world war 3 (my fault i know), i don't see anything being satisfactory unless the ex suddenly stops trying to punishing me by using my son.
Sorry you have had to put up with it for so long, but Im sure if your children ever find out, they will respect you for it and loose empathy for the other parent..... they are the ones who will loose out in the end.0 -
To me, the CSA/CMS or whatever they like to be called, are unfair and biased.
I think, if sadly when a relationship fails and the parents cant agree, there should be automatic 50/50 custody assumed (excluding situations where one person is just not capable of looking after them).
It can then be for the parents to say how much they can have him/her.
If the father says for whatever reason he will only have them 2 nights a fortnight, then he must pay for the difference in nights he has them less. (52 nights a year, means the other parent has them 261 more times)
There should then be a standard cost worked out of what it costs per night which is the same for every child regardless of income. (eg 10 pounds). More for special circumstances like disability etc.
the cost of a uniform (eg 200) divided by 2 and added to the total
school dinners etc halved and added
cost of any clubs/fees the child was involved with when the relationship failed halved and added to that total.
The outcome of that would be a lot more fair, instead of how the system is now.0 -
To me, the CSA/CMS or whatever they like to be called, are unfair and biased.
I think, if sadly when a relationship fails and the parents cant agree, there should be automatic 50/50 custody assumed (excluding situations where one person is just not capable of looking after them).
It can then be for the parents to say how much they can have him/her.
If the father says for whatever reason he will only have them 2 nights a fortnight, then he must pay for the difference in nights he has them less. (52 nights a year, means the other parent has them 261 more times)
There should then be a standard cost worked out of what it costs per night which is the same for every child regardless of income. (eg 10 pounds). More for special circumstances like disability etc.
the cost of a uniform (eg 200) divided by 2 and added to the total
school dinners etc halved and added
cost of any clubs/fees the child was involved with when the relationship failed halved and added to that total.
The outcome of that would be a lot more fair, instead of how the system is now.
£10 for care for a child?! - didn't realise I was speaking with someone of a significantly diminished IQ.0 -
That is such a poor comment. - Is it? Yes. - In what way
As everyone else says, CSA is biased and unfair against the paying parent. - Not everyone says this. It's neither biased nor unfair, it's just a system designed to ensure children have enough financial support to survive.
You do not seem to understand the meaning of biased or unfair.:
1. Only my income is taken into account. - Correct, as it should be. YOU are not the PWC, you are the NRP.
2. As i said before, she has him 6 nights more than me a YEAR. For this i pay 2000. - Correct. which means your actual liability is £4000, divided by 50% (+£7). You receive a discount if you will of £2000 If i was to have him just 1 more night every 3 months, i would be 5000 better off (2000 less csa, 1000 CB, 2000 from his mum) - no you wouldn't. You would still not be the PWC. Being the PWC is not based purely on the time you have a child. (I obviously would not need or accept any money from her, or the CB) - CSA decides she no longer needs support and i do over 4 nights a YEAR.
3. Bob next door has a wage which is double that of mine. The CSA say he must pay double what i do for his son for the same nights. Therefore the CSA are saying it costs twice as much to look after his son than mine. The CSA is extremely biased and unfair. - wow.
How much do you pay? Now double it. Does that cover the cost of half of everything whilst he's in her care?
Why double it? do you mean the six extra days she has him over me, which works out about 335 a NIGHT.... or for the full 185 days she has him? if the latter, how much do you think it costs for the 179 days i have him, for which i receive nothing, as well as pay her? when her house bills are approx half of mine? - What do her circumstances have to do with it? Its for your child, not her.
And before you start quoting with more silly comments, I know it isn't the CSA's fault that she doesn't use all the money on him, but it is their fault that i pay so much more than what is required. - How is it their fault?
They are the ones who say I must pay that amount based solely on my income. - No the government say that. petition your MP to change it.
2000 on uniforms, i provide childcare anyway, what else can she spend all that on that i dont provide when he is with me.....? - What childcare do you provide? You pay £2000 a year? £38 a week? You think it costs less than £80 a week to look after your child? Or do you think that in 6 months, the financial impact of having a child is less than £4000?
Luckily my parents help out when needed. i know exactly how much it costs to look after a child as i have him only 6 days less a year. Not including my house bills (which i would have regardless if i had my son or not) i myself live off a lot less than 80 a week for food and clothes. - But you cant exclude bills, etc. That is part of providing housing for your child!
a court order for what? custody? the judge could easily say he must stay with her as she lives closer to his school, an me just be a weekend dad. meaning i see him even less. Court is what I am trying to avoid. - Well then deal with it. Courts do not make dad's - "weekend parents." You would likely get 5/6 days a fortnight. And save £160 to spend on your son, on those days.
So your saying i should go to court, likely 5/6 days a fortnight would mean simple maths i have him 130/156 nights instead of the 179 i have currently. You really do just respond with rubbish. - You said weekend dad. I'm saying courts don't do that anymore. Otherwise put up and shut up.
Time to grow up a bit and stop worrying about 'fair'
Love this one... the whole thread is talking about what is right/fair. - Life isn't fair. I'd have thought you knew that
Again, another negative comment just for the sake of it. My thread wasn't about life, it was about the CSA being fair/right.
It's £38 a week. Life's too short. Grow up and concentrate on your son.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.8K Spending & Discounts
- 235.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards