Threats

Carl536373 · 10 February at 1:42PM

Hi Everyone

I'm being told by my ex that she will reduce the nights I have with my son because I'm trying to reduce the payment as per CMS. I recently moved in with my new partner and her daughter so I'm paying towards her too. This is deeply upsetting to me. It's obviously financial related. I don't feel like I have any say in this and I don't know who to turn too. Does anyone have any advice?

MalMonroe · 10 February at 6:30PM

Hmmm, that is called using your child as a pawn. If you want to see your son then that's your son's right and has nothing to do with your ex. She has no right to stop you seeing him. (Unless there are special circumstances, of course.) Years ago my husband left me for a woman with children and I wanted to stop him having contact with our small daughter but it was explained to me that not only was that a terrible thing to do to my daughter but that she would probably hate me for it when she was older. As my daughter grew older she did became really upset about the fact that her dad was living not only with his new woman but also with two children who weren't his, while she only saw him at weekends, when she was forced to mix with his new family, rather than see her dad on her own. Children never fare well in situations such as this. Worst of all was that her dad's marriage to this woman failed after ten years. Her stepmother was always jealous of my daughter's close relationship with her dad and wasn't very pleasant anyway but what a waste of time and energy. (He's now on his fourth marriage. . . we don't think it's going to last!)

Your ex really should be bending over backwards to ensure that her son has as much time with you as possible and not making him suffer because she feels vindictive. I started to enjoy the time my daughter spent with her dad. It was a bit of a break for both of us and her relationship with me was all the better for it.

Don't you have a legal agreement? You shouldn't be paying towards your partner and her daughter at the expense of your son though and I hope CMS doesn't agree to a reduction for that reason. Your partner should have her own agreement with her daughter's father - or if he isn't around then she should carry on with the arrangement she had before she met/moved in with you. Your first responsibility has to be to your son.

If you want to see your son, and he does deserve that, you are going to have to step up to ensure that your ex doesn't use him in her game. Even if you have to consult a solicitor.

First you could try Citizens Advice. But don't let your ex use your son to get back at you. Your relationship breakdown wasn't his fault and he still needs two parents.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/contact-us/contact-us/contact-us/

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/family/making-agreements-about-your-children/your-child-arrangements-arent-working

Clearchem · 11 February at 1:02AM

As per malmonre do you have a child arrangement order in place for contact. If not in theory there is nothing for her to reduce. The child has the right to equal time with you both. You are also not obligated to accept reduced time, you don't have to hand over the child on demand. A child is not a piece of property. It is very strongly suggested you get a child arrangement order rapidly based on the time shared now before any change resulting from, not to mince words, abusing the child, which is what making it into a pawn in a financial brinkmanship game is, becomes the new normal.

Also note there is an additional reduction to child maintenance to reflect the fact you are now supporting a new child to which you also have a duty.

turnitround · 11 February at 7:17PM

But this other child is not yours so you do not have an obligation to pay to support it.

I detest the parents who withhold access to a child to be vindictive but looking at this from your ex's point of view could it be that she is angry that you are reducing payments to your child because of this second child for whom you are not responsible?

I can see why she would be unhappy.

Carl536373 · 12 February at 3:49PM

Thank you for your responses.

This other child lives with me, as per CMS I can and should reduce the payment.

I once had my son 5 nights a week before she decided I should only have 3 nights a week and couldn't have anymore and I had no say in the matter. Again financially motivated I think.

She likes to be in control and threatens reduction of nights everytime there's a disagreement. It's not right at all.

Twixty3 · 12 February at 7:04PM

turnitround said:

But this other child is not yours so you do not have an obligation to pay to support it.

I detest the parents who withhold access to a child to be vindictive but looking at this from your ex's point of view could it be that she is angry that you are reducing payments to your child because of this second child for whom you are not responsible?

I can see why she would be unhappy.

This is interesting.

Here we have a single parent and a non resident parent who love one another and wish to move in together. The single parent is ready to accept her partner has a child and will welcome them to stay 3 nights per week because she loves her partner.

I find this heart warming and I wish them the best of luck. They deserve the chance to make it work as they are many, many happy step families up and down the country. Not all of these relationships work, such is life, but at least it should be tried.

Like it or not he is entitled to reduce his payments. It is written into the law.

He will not be paying CMS for his new partners child obviously. He however does have to contribute to that household just as the childless partner of a single parent would. One is ok but the other isn't because of attitudes towards non resident parents.

Being upset is not really a good way to justify it as I am sure she won't be happy when her energy bills increase in October, would you understand it if she then put contact to zero so that she could get more CMS to pay those bills? This is what can happen when it is more about money. Budget better is what most other people on this forum are often told when income reduces or is lost.

If he lost his job, got hours reduced or died she would get less or nothing. It is not a fixed amount that never changes.

My eldest son invited his step sisters to his wedding and whilst they were here my younger son drove them about as they had never been to this part of the world before. I was very proud of my lads. I never had or claimed child maintenance. It is many years since I divorced their dad but contact is and has always been there. Do you understand that?

turnitround · 12 February at 7:43PM

Twixty3 said:

turnitround said:

But this other child is not yours so you do not have an obligation to pay to support it.

I detest the parents who withhold access to a child to be vindictive but looking at this from your ex's point of view could it be that she is angry that you are reducing payments to your child because of this second child for whom you are not responsible?

I can see why she would be unhappy.

This is interesting.

Here we have a single parent and a non resident parent who love one another and wish to move in together. The single parent is ready to accept her partner has a child and will welcome them to stay 3 nights per week because she loves her partner.

I find this heart warming and I wish them the best of luck. They deserve the chance to make it work as they are many, many happy step families up and down the country. Not all of these relationships work, such is life, but at least it should be tried.

Like it or not he is entitled to reduce his payments. It is written into the law.

He will not be paying CMS for his new partners child obviously. He however does have to contribute to that household just as the childless partner of a single parent would. One is ok but the other isn't because of attitudes towards non resident parents.

Being upset is not really a good way to justify it as I am sure she won't be happy when her energy bills increase in October, would you understand it if she then put contact to zero so that she could get more CMS to pay those bills? This is what can happen when it is more about money. Budget better is what most other people on this forum are often told when income reduces or is lost.

If he lost his job, got hours reduced or died she would get less or nothing. It is not a fixed amount that never changes.

My eldest son invited his step sisters to his wedding and whilst they were here my younger son drove them about as they had never been to this part of the world before. I was very proud of my lads. I never had or claimed child maintenance. It is many years since I divorced their dad but contact is and has always been there. Do you understand that?

I will try to assume you are not trying to be patronising there.

I understand more than you will ever know.

I was a single mum because my first husband ran off with a person I thought was a friend and while I struggled to work and never got any maintenance I watched him take her 3 children abroad every year.

I am step mum to my second husbands children and at times they have lived with us. That tended to be when one of the mums got a new boyfriend (which happened often) and wanted the child out of the way for a while. One lived with us all the time. I welcomed them with open arms and I 'm proud of my children as well and like you one of mine had all his step siblings to his wedding.

The other mum who is mum to my stepdaughter is now one of my best friends. She didn't use her daughter as a pawn and things were much better all round for all involved.

Obviously if the other parent died she would get nothing but the fact is that he is not dead. He is living with someone else and the first mum may well feel that her child is being deprived because of the new child. Hopefully she does not pass this feeling on to the child and hopefully she will feel better about it in time.

So I have seen it from all sides. Do you I understand?

Twixty3 · 12 February at 11:18PM

turnitround said:

Twixty3 said:

turnitround said:

But this other child is not yours so you do not have an obligation to pay to support it.

I detest the parents who withhold access to a child to be vindictive but looking at this from your ex's point of view could it be that she is angry that you are reducing payments to your child because of this second child for whom you are not responsible?

I can see why she would be unhappy.

This is interesting.

Here we have a single parent and a non resident parent who love one another and wish to move in together. The single parent is ready to accept her partner has a child and will welcome them to stay 3 nights per week because she loves her partner.

I find this heart warming and I wish them the best of luck. They deserve the chance to make it work as they are many, many happy step families up and down the country. Not all of these relationships work, such is life, but at least it should be tried.

Like it or not he is entitled to reduce his payments. It is written into the law.

He will not be paying CMS for his new partners child obviously. He however does have to contribute to that household just as the childless partner of a single parent would. One is ok but the other isn't because of attitudes towards non resident parents.

Being upset is not really a good way to justify it as I am sure she won't be happy when her energy bills increase in October, would you understand it if she then put contact to zero so that she could get more CMS to pay those bills? This is what can happen when it is more about money. Budget better is what most other people on this forum are often told when income reduces or is lost.

If he lost his job, got hours reduced or died she would get less or nothing. It is not a fixed amount that never changes.

My eldest son invited his step sisters to his wedding and whilst they were here my younger son drove them about as they had never been to this part of the world before. I was very proud of my lads. I never had or claimed child maintenance. It is many years since I divorced their dad but contact is and has always been there. Do you understand that?

I will try to assume you are not trying to be patronising there.

I understand more than you will ever know.

I was a single mum because my first husband ran off with a person I thought was a friend and while I struggled to work and never got any maintenance I watched him take her 3 children abroad every year.

I am step mum to my second husbands children and at times they have lived with us. That tended to be when one of the mums got a new boyfriend (which happened often) and wanted the child out of the way for a while. One lived with us all the time. I welcomed them with open arms and I 'm proud of my children as well and like you one of mine had all his step siblings to his wedding.

The other mum who is mum to my stepdaughter is now one of my best friends. She didn't use her daughter as a pawn and things were much better all round for all involved.

Obviously if the other parent died she would get nothing but the fact is that he is not dead. He is living with someone else and the first mum may well feel that her child is being deprived because of the new child. Hopefully she does not pass this feeling on to the child and hopefully she will feel better about it in time.

So I have seen it from all sides. Do you I understand?

I was most certainly not intending to be being patronising, more questioning.

The main difference between us is that financially they more or less just had enough for their family of 5 and I more or less just had enough for us so to expect him to spend the same on all 5 kids when some of their income was his partners was in my opinion unfair. He got nothing at all for my kids even when a few times he had them for 4-5 weeks in the summer.

Each family will budget and spend their money differently and the decision would have been hers as well as his. I was able to take our kids abroad once and they never managed to take theirs for example. I doubt they would have been able to afford to take all 5 children away together.

Both of us were on tax credits.

I was not going to take money of a family on tax credits. Hell, no! Many may not agree but I felt it was not right to do so and still do.

What their kids got was much more of his time and if he lives with them 24/7/365 that is unavoidable . We lived many miles away. There is no bad feelings over that, it was what it was kind of thing. I also feel that broadly there was not a vast difference in what I was able to provide for my kids monetarily compared to them theirs.

How I would have been if my ex had have been wealthier than I I do not know for certain as it never happened but I feel I would have been similar. I have long felt child maintenance just makes bad/sad situations worse and could be done better.

ZaSa1418 · 14 February at 1:01PM

Carl536373 said:

Hi Everyone

I'm being told by my ex that she will reduce the nights I have with my son because I'm trying to reduce the payment as per CMS. I recently moved in with my new partner and her daughter so I'm paying towards her too. This is deeply upsetting to me. It's obviously financial related. I don't feel like I have any say in this and I don't know who to turn too. Does anyone have any advice?

Do you have these threats in texts/ emails so you can use them in court if need be?

MSE Forum

Threats

Replies

Energy cap to change every three months from Oct

Homes, hornets & high heels

Kids eat for 'free' or £1 this summer