Child maintenance payments to child

elsanto

HampshireH said:

Paying your child money is an allowance or pocket money 

Child maintenance is to contribute to the roof over their head, the bills and food as well as the things you mention such as courses/personal care and clothes.

Like I responded on my previous comment, the mother does not need my money. She wants me to pay out of spite. There was a time when I was on the verge of poverty, she re-married a rich guy and she still went to CMS asking them for money from me. She knew that the Ancillary Relief proceedings left me on the verge of bankruptcy and her wealthy. You should know how fathers are treated by the English courts.

elsanto

kimwp said:

You can give your child money on top of child maintenance that you pay to her mother.

NO, I cannot duplicate the payments and I hav given the other reasons I do not want to pay the mother.

elsanto

elsien said:

Sibling did that, but only when the child went to university as the agreement was to pay until they had  finished education. He would not have done it while the child was under 18.

There was a court order, however he was banking on the fact that she would not go back to court because the money was clearly been used to benefit the now adult, this was the child’s preference to pay for housing et cetera. and the person was rarely at his mother’s house anymore. 

Your situation is different because the mother is clearly paying to house, feed and clothe the child still, regardless of your opinion of her financial skills. And as long as your child is adequately housed closed and fed etc, it’s not your business how that money is spent.

And if you are concerned about parental alienation, mother complaining to daughter that you have stopped paying for her is not going to help.

You did not read what I wrote. It IS my business hoe my money is spent on my daughter. And the mother's parental alienation is already there, it would not be new.

elsanto

I am interested in the comments relating to a court order. There is not one and I would like to hear more about how I can do this because there is no court order forcing me to give the money to the mother.

elsien

elsanto said:

elsien said:

Sibling did that, but only when the child went to university as the agreement was to pay until they had  finished education. He would not have done it while the child was under 18.

There was a court order, however he was banking on the fact that she would not go back to court because the money was clearly been used to benefit the now adult, this was the child’s preference to pay for housing et cetera. and the person was rarely at his mother’s house anymore. 

Your situation is different because the mother is clearly paying to house, feed and clothe the child still, regardless of your opinion of her financial skills. And as long as your child is adequately housed closed and fed etc, it’s not your business how that money is spent.

And if you are concerned about parental alienation, mother complaining to daughter that you have stopped paying for her is not going to help.

You did not read what I wrote. It IS my business hoe my money is spent on my daughter. And the mother's parental alienation is already there, it would not be new.

I did read what you said but it is not unfair on the non-resident parent to have to pay a contribution to the other parent towards their child's upkeep, whether the NRP is a man or woman. And regardless of how much other money is coming into the house - that is the system that we have. 
Ref your court query, in my sibling's case maintenance was agreed through a court order as part of the divorce financial consent order as agreement was not able to be reached any other way. This may be different to your situation. 

marcia_

elsanto said:

marcia_ said:

elsanto said:

I have been making payments to my child's mother's bank account and now I want to pay my child directly. Does anybody know if it is possible? This could be done in a number of ways:
a) Pay into child's savings (Child Trust Fund) or current account.
b) Changing the Direct Debit from the mother's account to another thing that needs to be paid regularly.
c) Getting a list of things my child needs, I buy them and get them sent to her (or memberships, courses, etc)

The reasons:

1- My child is now 16.

2- The mother is totally irresponsible and greedy with money. The maintenance payments are wasted with her.
3- My child would know that her dad is taking care of her because the mother will not tell her about the child maintenance I pay and she has a parental alienation campaign with her. This is damaging.

4- My child is 2 to 3 years away from college and she is certainly going to need the money.

5- My child can start learning about taking care and being responsible with her money, which she will not learn from the mother.
I am giving the reasons, here, in case I have to give them to the CMS or tribunal.

 Child maintenance is paid so the resident parent can pay to raise your child. Paying it into a child's account won't allow them to do that. 

I have already clearly said that my child is now 16 and, at that age, she is already more responsible than the mother. She can buy things that she needs with the money.
The CMS refuse to accept the information I gave them that the mother does not need my money. Between the money she got from me in Ancillary Relief and her new husband's money, she has about 4 times the money I have.

 🙄 16 is not an adult and you legally have to pay maintenance if she is still in education. How much money the mother has or how she spends it is non of your business so long as your child adequately housed clothed and fed. 

 I hope the mother tells the CMS who will probably backdate what you owe, that you claim to have paid to date.

elsanto

elsien said:

elsanto said:

elsien said:

Sibling did that, but only when the child went to university as the agreement was to pay until they had  finished education. He would not have done it while the child was under 18.

There was a court order, however he was banking on the fact that she would not go back to court because the money was clearly been used to benefit the now adult, this was the child’s preference to pay for housing et cetera. and the person was rarely at his mother’s house anymore. 

Your situation is different because the mother is clearly paying to house, feed and clothe the child still, regardless of your opinion of her financial skills. And as long as your child is adequately housed closed and fed etc, it’s not your business how that money is spent.

And if you are concerned about parental alienation, mother complaining to daughter that you have stopped paying for her is not going to help.

You did not read what I wrote. It IS my business hoe my money is spent on my daughter. And the mother's parental alienation is already there, it would not be new.

I did read what you said but it is not unfair on the non-resident parent to have to pay a contribution to the other parent towards their child's upkeep, whether the NRP is a man or woman. And regardless of how much other money is coming into the house - that is the system that we have. 
Ref your court query, in my sibling's case maintenance was agreed through a court order as part of the divorce financial consent order as agreement was not able to be reached any other way. This may be different to your situation. 

Well, that is it, an agreement was not made so I will have to go to court and present my arguments.

elsanto

marcia_ said:

elsanto said:

marcia_ said:

elsanto said:

I have been making payments to my child's mother's bank account and now I want to pay my child directly. Does anybody know if it is possible? This could be done in a number of ways:
a) Pay into child's savings (Child Trust Fund) or current account.
b) Changing the Direct Debit from the mother's account to another thing that needs to be paid regularly.
c) Getting a list of things my child needs, I buy them and get them sent to her (or memberships, courses, etc)

The reasons:

1- My child is now 16.

2- The mother is totally irresponsible and greedy with money. The maintenance payments are wasted with her.
3- My child would know that her dad is taking care of her because the mother will not tell her about the child maintenance I pay and she has a parental alienation campaign with her. This is damaging.

4- My child is 2 to 3 years away from college and she is certainly going to need the money.

5- My child can start learning about taking care and being responsible with her money, which she will not learn from the mother.
I am giving the reasons, here, in case I have to give them to the CMS or tribunal.

 Child maintenance is paid so the resident parent can pay to raise your child. Paying it into a child's account won't allow them to do that. 

I have already clearly said that my child is now 16 and, at that age, she is already more responsible than the mother. She can buy things that she needs with the money.
The CMS refuse to accept the information I gave them that the mother does not need my money. Between the money she got from me in Ancillary Relief and her new husband's money, she has about 4 times the money I have.

 🙄 16 is not an adult and you legally have to pay maintenance if she is still in education. How much money the mother has or how she spends it is non of your business so long as your child adequately housed clothed and fed. 

 I hope the mother tells the CMS who will probably backdate what you owe, that you claim to have paid to date.

If you want to support or represent the mother (you may be a mother extracting money from your ex-husband yourself) feel free, I will give you her phone number 

marcia_

elsanto said:

elsien said:

elsanto said:

elsien said:

Sibling did that, but only when the child went to university as the agreement was to pay until they had  finished education. He would not have done it while the child was under 18.

There was a court order, however he was banking on the fact that she would not go back to court because the money was clearly been used to benefit the now adult, this was the child’s preference to pay for housing et cetera. and the person was rarely at his mother’s house anymore. 

Your situation is different because the mother is clearly paying to house, feed and clothe the child still, regardless of your opinion of her financial skills. And as long as your child is adequately housed closed and fed etc, it’s not your business how that money is spent.

And if you are concerned about parental alienation, mother complaining to daughter that you have stopped paying for her is not going to help.

You did not read what I wrote. It IS my business hoe my money is spent on my daughter. And the mother's parental alienation is already there, it would not be new.

I did read what you said but it is not unfair on the non-resident parent to have to pay a contribution to the other parent towards their child's upkeep, whether the NRP is a man or woman. And regardless of how much other money is coming into the house - that is the system that we have. 
Ref your court query, in my sibling's case maintenance was agreed through a court order as part of the divorce financial consent order as agreement was not able to be reached any other way. This may be different to your situation. 

Well, that is it, an agreement was not made so I will have to go to court and present my arguments.

 No Court will accept your argument that mother has more money than you so you shouldn't have to pay, you fathered a child and have a responsibility in Law to provide for that child until they leave education. 

 

Spendless

elsien said:

elsanto said:

elsien said:

Sibling did that, but only when the child went to university as the agreement was to pay until they had  finished education. He would not have done it while the child was under 18.

There was a court order, however he was banking on the fact that she would not go back to court because the money was clearly been used to benefit the now adult, this was the child’s preference to pay for housing et cetera. and the person was rarely at his mother’s house anymore. 

Your situation is different because the mother is clearly paying to house, feed and clothe the child still, regardless of your opinion of her financial skills. And as long as your child is adequately housed closed and fed etc, it’s not your business how that money is spent.

And if you are concerned about parental alienation, mother complaining to daughter that you have stopped paying for her is not going to help.

You did not read what I wrote. It IS my business hoe my money is spent on my daughter. And the mother's parental alienation is already there, it would not be new.

I did read what you said but it is not unfair on the non-resident parent to have to pay a contribution to the other parent towards their child's upkeep, whether the NRP is a man or woma should n. And regardless of how much other money is coming into the house - that is the system that we have. 
Ref your court query, in my sibling's case maintenance was agreed through a court order as part of the divorce financial consent order as agreement was not able to be reached any other way. This may be different to your situation. 

No, it's not unfair. You are the parent too so you should contribute to child's upkeep. Why should Mum bear 100% of the costs involved regardless of how much she earns. 

Its also not possible for a child to live at home and not cost the RP anything. They eat, need clothing, use utilities, need a lift somewhere or something replacing etc.