Changes in child maintenance - BUT have a consent order

Red-Squirrel_2

gla98avb wrote: »

Thank you



Would not dispute if the money went to the kids!

You are aware that's a total deadbeat dad clich!, right?

ViolaLass

gla98avb wrote: »

Thank you



Would not dispute if the money went to the kids!

Are your kids the ones who do the shopping?

thorsoak

gla98avb wrote: »

Thank you



Would not dispute if the money went to the kids!

So, you would be happy for your children to arrange their own housing/living expenses/education?

badmemory

Presumably once the consent order is cancelled by the CMS order then you can go after a share of her pension. My agreement stated a fixed amount for 5 years with a lower fixed amount for the rest. Of course he managed to renege on the higher amount for almost 4 of the years, but I didn't go after more for the rest. Some of us actually stick to our agreements.

Rubik

. Presumably once the consent order is cancelled by the CMS order then you can go after a share of her pension.

The CO wouldn't be "cancelled" if one party approaches the CMS. Nor would approaching the CMS entitle that person to request a variation in the other clauses in the CO. All other clauses remain as they are in the CO.

badmemory

Rubik wrote: »

The CO wouldn't be "cancelled" if one party approaches the CMS. Nor would approaching the CMS entitle that person to request a variation in the other clauses in the CO. All other clauses remain as they are in the CO.

What you are saying then is that no-one should sign a consent order because the provisions (well the ones that suit them) can be overridden by the CMS.

HoneyNutLoop

Nice twist, but no, that’s not what they are saying.

They are saying the part of your consent order that specifies your child maintenance obligation can be overridden by an application to CMS after 12 months but not any other part of your order.

Presumably you either didn’t get legal advice at the time or your solicitor failed to point this out to you?

Rubik

badmemory wrote: »

What you are saying then is that no-one should sign a consent order because the provisions (well the ones that suit them) can be overridden by the CMS.

No, that's not what I said at all. Please don't try to misconstrue my words.

Rubik

Nice twist, but no, that’s not what they are saying.

They are saying the part of your consent order that specifies your child maintenance obligation can be overridden by an application to CMS after 12 months but not any other part of your order.

HoneyNutLoop, that's exactly it in a nutshell (no pun intended), thank you.

ThePants999

But badmemory is correct nonetheless, right? Clearly it's plain silly to make any concessions in other areas in return for reduced child maintenance, since the reduced child maintenance can evaporate a year later but the concessions you made in return are permanent. If the OP was actually following professional advice to do that then it was frankly negligent!