Ex has her own business that I’m helping to fund via CSA
October 24, 2010
Working for your children…..
Having not had any contact with my child for over a decade, i was very pleased to find my ex wife has signed onto “Facebook” and had made the common error of setting her account security to it’s lowest.. It was nice to see that she was doing fine.. Back from her forth holiday this year.. new iphone 4 ….and going out shopping for some new fittings for her new hair salon in Leeds.
I had been looking for my child for sometime and did believe that tales of her moving to another country and stayed, were true. It did puzzle me that 18 months ago the CSA had within 4 days sent me a letter of arrears payments, a DEO to my work and increased an initial calculation of the amount owing to £17,000 from £2,500…
I phoned the salon, you know “touch base” see seemed suprised to hear from me even asked me what I wanted. “Do you think I might talk to you about this CSA claim” I said. After a few moments a male voice comes to the phone, the new husband. After an exchange of hellos and the like, he told me he was in the same position as me and owed his ex-wife £17.000 in CSA arrears. Never got to speak to my son though…..Why does a does a 15 year old boy need £150 a week. ?
Comments
61 Responses to “Ex has her own business that I’m helping to fund via CSA”
Got something to say?
Child Support Agency Poll
Loading ...Recent Forum Topics
-
Brand new forum
by
Michael – CSAhell.com staff
1 month ago
-
Brand new forum
by
Clothes, food, roof over his head (ie mortgage or rent, council tax, electricity, gas, water, school trips, school uniform, pocket money, holidays….. the list goes on!
Does the £150 include payment towards the arrears that have accrued?
you are a man hater sarah your telling me a 15 year old kid needs 150 pounds a week plus his mums money to live on a week your a dreamer
look at it this way when you were together did you spend 150 on him a week ( i think not) csa is a joke
Im not a man hater – but I hate men who delibrately try and shirk their responsibilities. If you add up all the household bills including ensuring your child is fed, watered, dressed, school trips etc I think you will be surprised how much it costs to raise a chilld!
I would love shared responsibility for my children. However I strongly object to being seen as purely a source of financial support for a life style my ex thinks she should have for the children she never lets me see.
Completely agree Duncan. While I wouldn’t suggest that children should be on a ‘pay as you go system’ with fathers paying for the children based on how many times they see them, mothers who refuse access to the fathers, deliberately cutting them out of the children’s lives, should also be prepared to cut out the financial support.I understand too that when the mother is in receipt of benefits the CSA wants to claw back the money the government gives to her from the father – but perhaps if the mother refused the father access and found she was also cut off from benefits there would be more fathers having access to their children, and no need for the CSA to chase fathers who just want to be a part of their children’s lives.
For the love of my children i live in my car! The csa's deo has left me no money to live on despite hilding sown 2 jobs! While my ex is remarried and has children with her new husband, refuses to let me see my children and has completely poisoned them against me. Fir the csa to work both sets of parents should be means tested. I want to see my children but cant afford a lengthy legal battle and dont thibk its fair putting my children in that position.
£150 per week??!!! honestly..if that is supposed to be the father's contribution (after all, it is supposed to be a contribution) then the mother should also be paying £150 per week.What child costs £300 per week??
The average cost of bringing up 1 child from birth to 21 years old is £184 per week. This includes education, clothing, food and childcare but does not include all the little bits that people will forget – like gas, electricity, TV License fee etc etc etc Im sure if you asked a PWC how much cash per week they have spare after paying for everything with no help from the NRP it will be a very very small amount. A 50% share of my living costs alone amount to £975 per month – mortgage, gas, electricity, water, Phone/Internet etc etc. And then on top of that I have to buy food, pay for school trips, after school clubs, childcare, clothing, entertainment etc for child. I really dont think 15% is very much to contribute to the upbringing of your own flesh and blood when the PWC will be contributing a hell of a lot more!If your salary is that high that 15% is £150 (does this include arrears?) then why would anyone begrudge a better standard of living for their child. It is very sad when PWC use children as weapons and restrict contact for a higher amount and this is where NRP need to take legal advice and ensure a contact agreement through a court is arranged.However, regardless if the PWC has stopped contact – the child will still need feeding, clothing, roof over their head. I am actually on the old rules so my income is taken into consideration when the CSA worked out how much my ex partner needed to contribute and both our out going's are taken into consideration which I think is fair.
Blimey..I have 4 children, and I defintitely don't spend near on £800 per week on them. I don't have that kind of money, and never would. Who, in the every day world, does? this is a serious question.I wouldn't put mortgage/utilities and council tax into the equation as those would have to be paid whether there were children living there or not, although granted you may need to pay a little extra for children being there..but not a great deal more?The whole point of child support is, as the CSA rightly say, a contribution from the NRP. I fail to see how one child can cost more to raise than any other.
You wouldnt put keeping a roof over your childs head in the equation? WOW… If I wasnt to pay my mortgage my child would have nowhere to live. If I wasnt to pay my gas or electricity my child would freeze. If I wasnt to pay council tax then my child would go without in other areas as I would be forced to pay court fines or have baliff's at the door seizing goods. If I didnt pay TV License my child would go without TV and again, without in other areas because I would be paying fines…. need I go on?That cost is for 1 child – but costs lower for subsequent children as people tend to re-use stuff like clothing gets handed down, childcare there is often a discount for second child etc. Also, this was a AVERAGE cost. You can read the full article here:http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/feb/23/child-cost-inflation
Also Lorraine – if I didnt have my child I could live in a smaller property where my mortgage or rent would be cheaper then me requiring a larger property so my child has their own bedroom. I just had a quick look at rental prices of 1 and 2 bed properties in my area and its around £175 a month extra for a 2 bed property. So altho I understand what your saying that rent/mortgage would still need to be paid if the child was not there, it might not be as expensive!
I'm astounded..lol..no seriously, this is why I didn't put housing costs into the equation because I would be paying them anyway. I guess another reason why I don't is because my ex has those expenses too.We were lucky because we didn't involve the CSA. We sat down and worked out a contribution which helped me to raise the children as I had them basically full time, with contact every other weekend for dad (his choice, I would have preferred shared residency) anyway, I wanted to make sure he had enough for a roof over his head, food on the table and money to treat the kids when he had them.Shool trips, pocket money & holidays are considered treats which I have always paid for..or not, if I couldn't afford them. I also took into account that I received the child benefit & tax credits. I totally see where you are coming from Sarah..but I also have to see that in the real world, no NRP would be able to afford half a PWCs living costs as a contribution.
funny how it costs £150 a week for 1 child yet csa find it reasonable 2 leave myself, partner n 2 young children £76 a week 2 live on….thats 2 buy food, clothes etc…..wow!! maybe i should have involved the csa for my 5 kids….they wld b minted lol…but would rather pride myself on being a n independent woman n bringing my kids up myself n not living with the guilt of destroying a father thro the CSA!!!
I didnt say half the PWC living costs, but I think half the cost of bringing up the child is fair. Took 2 people to bring the child into the world. Sadly my ex decided that he no longer wanted any contact with his daughter when he left and on that basis refused to contribute so I had no choice but to use the CSA. In 12 years he still has no contact with her but he does pay via the CSA. I understand what you say about the NRP having living expenses as well but not all cases are black and white – what about when the NRP lives with a new partner so living costs are halved? This is what i liked about the old rules (and why I have stayed on them) because both our circumstances are taken into consideration – him and his new wifes salaries/living expenses and mine and my partners salaries/living expenses. Even if a NRP is on the new rules and live with a partner they can still be 'better off' as such because their partner could be earning £20k a year (below average salary) and thats not taken into consideration.The CSA can make peoples lives hell – but from what I see posted on here its largely NRP who havent paid and then are stung for arrears. When a relationship ends the responsibility for the child dosent and it makes me so cross to read posts of NRP asking advice on the best way to avoid contributing for their offsprings upbringing. I wonder how many of them currently complaining about the CSA and avoiding payments are putting some kind of payment aside for their child in a bank account for when they are older? Or to help pay off the arrears that are building up…..The agency does need a big shake up, but there will always be someone who disagrees with how things are handled. If both parents of a child could be mature enough to work out a arrangement without intervention it would be so much better – but just like nightmare PWC who go to the CSA in the hope of getting more funding they currently receive – there are NRP refusing to contribute so PWC have to use the agency……And who sufffers in the end… The kids
Someone give Mandi a medal!!!! Lucky you being able to afford 5 kids on £76 a week.
at the end of the day love is wot children need far more than money….we survive on love alone…….his ex robbed him of that with his kids
u do make me laugh!!! i have 5 kids yes…..i have brought up 5 kids yes……..but 3 now have their own houses n i have only the 2 younger ones at home……..n everyday is a struggle due 2 csa n my kids go without but u know wot……..they got loads of love n that means more 2 them
I totally agree..cannot stand the idea of anyone not wanting to help support their children either financially or emotionally.of course things are not black and white, but unfortunately the CSA works on a 'one size fits all' policy which will never work, no matter how hard they try!My husband was stung for arrears because he naively paid his ex through a private arrangement without thinking that by her only accepting cash, this would mean the CSA never counted it as maintenance. There are many NRPs who build up arrears through their own ignorance, yet for every one of those there are going to be quite a few who have been treated badly. CSA created arrears are no joke, but are a reality.I won't take the hand-me-down scenario as an excuse to say that one child is more expensive than another. Of course they are not..you will always have to buy new things..and to be honest, one of my children's hand-me-downs were only fit for the rag bin
Indeed, life would be so much better if parents worked together and refused to satisfy the Gestapo in their insatiable quest to put both PWC and NRP into poverty…
I actually think that the old rules can be quite unfair as they only give the NRP a fraction of their housing costs if they don't have children living with them full time. This has meant that if they don't get into a new relationship with existing children or have new ones, they are severely out of pocket. Plus, only 50% of pension contributions are allowed..which is ridiculous!There are good and bad sides to both systems..however I would say I prefer the new rules as a flat % has been easier to work out and allows less room for arrears..after all, it wasn't unsual to wait 6 months and beyond for an assessment due to too much working out under the old 'formula'. I know my husband was appalled to learn that under a court ordered agreement to pay spousal maintenance, the CSA wouldn't take it into account as it 'wasn't in their formula'! this was never assessed as PWC income..in fact she was deemed as having no income at all as she was on income support.However, my income was assessed..as was my child maintenance & tax credit!
I agree, every case should be looked at on a individual basis. The new rules of a % of salary I think is quite fair – 15% for example for one child I dont think is bad. And the fact it can only be backdated to when the PWC put the claim in so being stung for lots of arrears when a private arrangement is in place wouldnt occur. My partner has 2 sons with his ex and has for the last 2 years paid by private arrangement. In July he lowered the payment after working out maintenance on the CSA website. She didnt like that the payment had dropped by £90 a month so went to the CSA. They worked out the same as he had and it took them just 3 weeks to arrange the assesment. When partner received the forms from the CSA he called them to query as having the private arrangement in place and they advised him to stop paying this and wait for the assessment to be completed. He had already paid July's payment to her and they assesed him from something like 18th July so he had to pay 18-31st July again as such but didnt really mind. And her payments will go down further as we are expecting a baby in 5 weeks. What we 'lose' paying to his ex we gain from my ex so dosent make to much of a difference – altho the CSA screwed up doing a reassesment for me so I havent received anything since March, altho this starts again from 1st Nov. However, over £3500 worth of arrears have built up in that time and I would bet my last £ that my ex has not bothered putting any money away for these missing months so now has to pay £146 a month on top of the usual amount to clear the arrears. He might surprise me tho and have put the cash by and pay in one hit! I see mistakes from the CSA from all areas, but on occasion (as in my partners case) I think they have done okay.
i totally agree lorraine, we have tried to have a reasonable adult conversation with his ex…..she can't!! n just comes back with immature comments about us…we want 2 pay maintenace but it should be worked out so none of the children suffer…my partner had 2 stop payments as he was in hospital n out of work CSA tried charging him arrears for this time due to him not contacting them….( he was in hospital with infection on his brain n didnt even know where he was or wot day it was ) CSA's answer to that!! not their problem no matter what he needs 2 contact them…wonder wot qualifications u need 2 work with the CSA……nursery graduation??? thw whole system is a farce to both sides!!
Mandi, serious question, does your partner now work, and if so but he isnt paying any maitenance, is he putting money by for his children?
I think its totally disgusting that Tax credits are taken into consideration as a income on the enw rules. Taking money meant for children in one household to ensure they are not going into poverty and giving it to a child who most likely already received tax credits in that household! Ludicrus!!!!
Oh crikey can you imagine them working it out on an invidual basis, when the 'one size fits all' isn't working either? get rid and send it back to the courts..it was the only way you can fairly assess each individual case.So many times the agency has been deemed 'unfit for purpose' yet they continue to put money into creating new systems which still don't work..and yet, it appears it's the NRPs who already pay, and in a lot of cases have always paid, who foot the bill. The real 'deadbeat dads' will continue to be just that.
Lorraine – on housing costs under old rules a 'departure' can be added to the claim. In my case my ex has very high housing costs, but because he lives with his partner and she has a income she is deemed to be contributing to the costs (which are to high for someone on his salary!) hence a departure put on the case. For example, my ex weekely income after tax and NI is £689 per WEEK and his assessment is £82 a week. However, with the departure it pushes it up to £105 a week. He also has £34 a week arrears to pay. So he still has £550 a week to live on – plus his partners income. I think thats fair and if he choses to live a very extrvagent lifestyle (he has a yacht, drivers a expensive car etc) its not my problem £550 a week is a massive amount to live on… I cant afford to and am bringing up his daughter single handed!
yes my partner now works n he also pays maintenance…..through the CSA they do not take into account our rent, council tax, gas, elec, bills etc but yet they do take my child tax credits……they have put us in a situation where for the sake of my children we would be better off in benefits….where is the justice in that when a man works n wants 2 provides for all n it would cost the goverment more 2 keep us as a family of four if we were on benefits!! also wot about trying 2 keep people of the dole n in work?? wen they cant afford 2 survive if they work due 2 CSA we have tried explaining this 2 his ex n come 2 a fair n reasonable arrangement…….but she doesn't care if she only gets £5 a week maintenance thro benefits…….she just wants 2 c him out of work n destroy him!!
Indeed Sarah! and how come the tax credits are considered income for me (all £40 per month of them) yet her £150 per week isn't for her? doesn't make any sense to me at all..Oh, and another thing to make you smile..hubby's ex has just split from her second husband. He isn't paying maintenance because he has just lost his job and is on jobseekers. When my stepdaughter asked her how she was going to cope with less money she replied ''oh it's ok, your dad pays enough for the both of you''.Sheesh, my husband is thrilled that he is paying for a child who isn't even his..even though sometimes he barely has enough for his own!!!
Gosh, my spelling is terrible! Apologies – am knackered! haha!
Yep Sarah, I knew about departures..however if the NRP is single with no children, only they are there to be responsible for their housing costs..and it often leaves them with so little money for rent that they end up in a bedsit..with of course no room for contact…see where I am going with this?
Mandi – this is where you should be getting a contribution for your 2 youngest children (assuming they are not your current partners kids…) because why should your ex not pay. Its not just the government putting your kids in poverty, its their natural father (again, I am just assuming this isnt your current partner) and your pride………
Lorraine, even if on job seekers he should be paying £5 a week taken directly from his benefit? I see where you are going yep
I think the CSA should be used as a advertisment of contraception!
Well yes, he is paying a fiver a week..however stepdaughter gets EMA as she is at college, and has been told she now has to pay for all her things herself. The CSA payments my husband's paying is used more for the second child, according to stepdaughter! she is even having driving lessons paid out of the savings account we set up for her…
Thats disgusting Lorraine. Shame PWC dont have to show what the cash was spent on after reasonable living expenses have been taken into account. Mandi – like many posters on here have experienced, just because a NRP contributes, does not mean access has to be granted. 2 very seperate issues so Im afraid Ill have to disagree with you – you dont have to let your ex see the kids but you are still entitled to a contribution from him.
n i agree that pwc should have to show what the cash is spent on n that this should be wot benefits the children not the pwc or their partner
Mandi, i think your missing my point – your ex does not have to have access – but why should he not pay? The way you have explained things soon the taxpayer will be paying for all the kids – your current partners kids and your kids because you will all be on benefits. Your ex contributing to HIS children rather then you relying on the state to help fund them. To be fair, with the current spedning review changes which are going to happen you will be even worse off on the state and maybe pride will take a backshelf and you will apply for what is rightfully yours.
I dont think it matters if its £5 a week or £500 a week your ex would have to pay. Responsibility is the same.
yet if your unlucky enough to get made redundent and you claim job seekers allowance you ger roughly £65 per week to live on yet a child needs 150 per week sarah ger real and crawl under the rock were you come from
as I said every situation is different n rights are not taken away easily n courts n lawyers do not recommend u leave the csa n maintenance out it for nothing!! sometimes things are best left alone!!
Trevor – your the exact kind of 'dad' that many despise, so I think its you that needs to crawl under the nearest rock until you have something sensible to contribute. Your lack of intelligence astounds me as you obviously havent read the entire thread as nowhere in it does it say a NRP should contribute £150 per week if he was on JSA. No one can contribute what they truely do not have and as I have confirmed, at no point have I said otherwise!To clarify… ger in your 'statement' I assume should be 'get' and 'were' should be 'where'
Only you can make the decision Mandi, but you have to understand that if you post how your currrent partner has to pay yet your ex dosent and state its cause you 'did it yourself' but complain at lack of income people (like me!) will challenge.However, no-one knows everybodys true circumstances and as Lorraine and I commented, not everything is black and white, hence why a 'one for all' does not work.I hope everything works out for you Mandi – and you to Lorraine!
no its not always black and white n im sure if people knew my circumstances they would not challenge a mere £5 a week and this is not about that my current partner has to pay as he wants to pay……this is about how the CSA work it out n leave put children into poverty when they state they are fighting child poverty….they need 2 have a fairer system n taking child tax credits from 1 family 2 give 2 another wen they also get them is 1 of the changes they need 2 make…I personally couldn't rob other children of their tax credits
Mandi, I think just about everyone if they are a NRP or PWC agree with the tax credit thing. Its stupid!
yeah it is n can have a big impact on the children…..after all this should all b about the children on both sides…..why should any of them have to suffer through money or contact…..n sometimes the love a nrp can give is worth far more than money, some nrp are crying out to see their kids n the pwc only stops contact thro spite, which is terrible for the children….we can only hope that 1 day the CSA will b abolished n a fairer system in place
I'm havin the same issue about tax credits with the csa & have written to our local MP on behalf of my partner's caseMandi, I totally agree with your last post……I'm a strong believer that a bond should not be broken between any child & their parent over bitterness, jealousy or money. It's the children that suffer in the long run. Yes, everybody has a different situation & there's always two sides to every coin but what everyone has in common here are the children, they have feelings & emotions too & no matter how young they are they still understand what is going on. My partner's ex screeched to a halt outside our house when we were outside with my children, winds down the car window with their 7yr old son in the car & shouts "this is what your f***in son looks like you w***er!" and promptly drove off. It was her who stopped contact in the first place & when abuse is given out like that in front of all the children, they don't forget something like that. We are hoping that everything has calmed down a bit now that she's expecting & can finally get access sorted without any problems. I've always put my children & their feelings first & their dad & I have a really good friendship because of this & my fiance wants the same with his ex. Money is a bonus at the end of the day, you've either got it or you haven't.
i never said 150 per week if on jsa i said does a child needs 150 per week to live on i think not i was comparing the amounts so why dont you read things properly you are a man hater and i can see why your x got of and left ya dont blame him in the slightest with a chip on your shoulder that big you are just out to get as much as you can of your x and the state why dont you get of your fat arse and get a job typical scorned woman get on with your life and stop trying to hail the csa as the best thing ever because there not
Trevor, I currently have a fat arse because I am 8 months pregnant – in a few weeks ill have my lovely slim body back, but you will still be a prize cock. I am employed full time and claim no state benefits. This is because I done well in education and have a very well paid career. Im not a scorned women, I have no major problem with the CSA – I get a contribution for the child I have with my ex – he is the one missing out on a amazing relationship with his daughter because its not something he wants. I really think you need to go to specsavers or something because again, where on earth was it said the CSA are the best thing ever? You really are deluded!Id be very interested to know if you contribute anything towards your children. I think probably not. You shirk your responsibilities blaming everyone else but yourself. Maybe you need to start looking at your own situation and making amends before judging others who quite frankly you have no idea whatsoever! All your doing at the moment is making yourself look like a complete twat on most your posts! PS… My fella (yes, I am such a man hater that I have a fella!) says my arse is just perfect and for you to stoop so low with such personal comments shows what very low intelligence you have! Ill in future be ignoring your posts because all they do is spout the same crap! Maybe you can find a new hobby!
Sarah-Jayne – going back to your earlier point about departures. Is that only under the old system? I presume I'm under the new system since only been going through CSA for the last few years. My ex tells the CSA that he earns only £46 a week through his self employment but attributes his lavish lifestyle (Porsche/BMW/luxury docklands apartment/frequent foreign holidays etc) to his parents or his high earning girlfriend. I've resigned myself to the fact that this is a loophole CSA will never have any power over. Departures would suggest otherwise? Does the new partners wage or the inconsistent lifestyle ever get taken into account under the new rules?
Hi KatyUnder the new rules, what is called a 'variation' can be applied for. Give the office who handle your case a call and see what you need to do. The CSA automatically put the departure on my case back in 2004 (took from 1998 to sort maintenance out!) and its stuck ever since. Good luck!
Hmmmmmmm! critisisms of others spellings and grammar appears to have inconsistency where as comment made by a certain individual as follows… copied and pasted for confirmation of my response following extract from a posted comment made by someone who may thing I'm being derogatory in some form……"This is because I done well in education"… this post was towards Trevor evidently!!!!!I do believe however this comment should be (This is because I DID well)…!!!! Please!!! prior to engaging in any critisism, be of no fault in your grammar or spelling also… so how well DID you do with your education…Clearly!!!!!!!!!! of cause with sarcasm!!!! what else would you expect of me….lolDoes anyone see my point here?????Well said….. this I compliment to Lorraine and Mandi!!!!!! Maybe now she sees the womans point of view and by my understanding you are both the NRPP's…..I'v been trying to get this comment into her head…. about the greedy selfish arrogant PWC's….. and their attempt to point score causing NRP and NRPP's plus NRP and NRPP's children to suffer financially especially with the issues involving WFTC and child benefits….
As you may see in some comments made in post by sarah-jayne pettimore to myself, she would like to believe that I'm attacking all PWC's….. however! I always refer to a certain select few who think more of the money than the child!!!!! and that's my beef!!!!! The fact that the reality is that there are PWC's intent on causing financial suffering to their NRP's new extended family unit!!!! That's wrong and also immoral…
and I also agree that a roof over head and electric gas water should not be taken into consideration as you would still need to put out without children in the equation, the most important issue for CSA donations is for clothing and footwear, the rest is easily covered in your basic income or learn to budget as effectively who are not as well off!!!Poverty is only created by the spender!!!! If ou have more than the government says you need to live on and therefore more than those on benefits… how is it that those on benefits can afford to live above the poverty line yet as boasted pettimore on a well paid job finds it hard to budget without the tax free additional income that other people do not have the privelege of????
I agree that a mortgage/rent, council tax, water rates and home insurances shouldn't be applicable because regardless of if, or how many, children lived with you they would still be the same. But gas and electric?? And more importantly food??? My kids are constantly on their laptops or game stations when they are in the house, tv and music is on far more than when I'm home alone and my daughter baths at least twice a day. The heating and hot water has to be on more often because, whilst its ok for me to sit in the cold, I wouldnt allow my children to. Then there's the washing, drying and ironing to take into consideration. All of these things would be far less and gas/electricity costs a lot lower if I was on my own. As for food, it costs £8.50 per week per child for school lunches and my weekly shop is at least £150 a week, this is not because we eat like kings but merely because the cost of living has increased so much over the last few years. These are not extravagant 'wants' but the needs of any normal child these days.No PWC should expect full assistance with these costs, but NRPS must also accept that children do not flourish on love alone and these costs are very real and should be taken into consideration. Poverty is not always created by the spender, there are some people that live above their means or have addcitions and habits that cause them to have a low standard of living but proverty is also created by minimum wage jobs, phenomenal increases in fuel costs, and ever increasing food prices, NRPS that DO NOT contribute to the upkeep of their child also have to take responsibility for causing financial difficulties.As for what the government says we need to live on (i.e.benefits) everyone knows that this is a ridiculous and unrealistic calculation. And then fact of the matter is very few people on benefits can AFFORD to live, they have a roof over their head thanks to community housing and housing benefit and their utilities are more often than not budgeted for by token meters etc. Most of them are in debt with catalogues, loan sharks and buy monthly agencies. But ultimately this a life they CHOOSE to live.PWCS that get of their arses and get well paid jobs do not have the luxury of the benefits and tax credits that those on lower incomes have to bump up their weekly wage. They also have to juggle those well paid jobs with child care issues and costs and with regards to the 'additional tax free income' this is merely a contribution to the actual cost of raising a child by the NRP, and if that payment is made by way of private arrangement or via the CSA, it is still there and available to all PWCs regardless of their employment status or annual income, quite frankly I do not see it as a privelage that both myself and my ex could not sort our differences and have denied our children the stability of joint parenting, I see it as a complete failure on our part!NRPs have mortgage/rent, utilities, food and clothing costs for themselves they also have PROTECTED income of 60% of their net income. If you have a child/children from another relationship you get a further 15/25% allowance before maintenance is calculated so all of the NRPS living expenses have been taken into account and allowed for using the same government benefit calculations as mentioned above yet quite often they complain about the 15/25% calculation made.So taking this into consideration, if a NRP has more than the government says you need to live on and therefore more than those on benefits… how is it that they still claim not to be able to make an acceptable contribution to they upkeep of their child??None of my income is protected and I would never say to my children 'I'm keeping 60% of my wages to enable me to live my life, and if I CHOOSE to have another child with my new partner I'll keep another 15% to support that child and you can have whats left for food, clothes and general living' yet many NRPS feel thats a perfectly acceptable stance for them to take and then theres those that refuse to pay at all!!!
I don't know how those figures have been worked out, Charmaine..my husband certainly wasn't given 15% off his calculation when we had our daughter, nor 25% when we had our second daughter. We were given all our mortgage cost, but only because we had children. If we didn't have children he would have been given housing benefit rate for one person..that's great for contact with his first daughter (not!).I just found it rather disturbing that I had to work in order to clothe & feed my children, yet his ex wife didn't..
Allan, yes I am a NRPP and a PWC..although my ex husband and I have never used to CSA, thankfully. We were both more interested in what was best for our child..and the CSA will never be best for any child…
Charmaine, the only thing I would say about not including rent/mortgage and water rates in monthly outgoings is because if for example you have one child, you need a 2 bed place to live. If You have no children you can live in a one bed, or studio flat, shared accomm – so housing costs do go up having children. The council tax – fair enough, got to be paid anyway. With water, I am on a meter (standard practice I believe these days?) and you would be surprised how much the bill comes to having someone else around – having baths/showers, leaving tap on when brushing teeth despite me saying until I am blue in the face not to, the additional washing (which as you pointed out costs electric) but it also costs water. I think you have made some excellent points in your post above and on the whole agree with you.
TV licence is something you have without children… honestly… TV licence to be paid for by NRP???? ridiculous!!!!
I myself happily provide clothing and footwear… easier when its sat in my bank rather than my PWC's account!!!!!
some women cannot budget & certainly depend upon regular maintenance to help finance their living costs. Why should any ex pay for rent/mortgage, gas/electric?? If you have 3 children or more water rates can be capped. I have never depended on maintenance from my ex, & why should I ask him for more just so they can play on the xbox or watch tv a bit longer, that's a PRIVILEGE in my house not a necessity that their dad pays for, because when they stay with him I'm sure his electric & gas would be more due to playing on the laptop & xbox there!!! My maintenance pays for their hobbies, school trips, clothes, shoes (my god do they go through them), parties & a little towards food. My partner & I choose to live in a big enough house & we pay all the bills, so why should we pay towards someone else's bills or expect my ex to pay towards ours?!?!?!? Some people have the most ridiculous way of thinkin & it certainly doesn't seem to be about their children
Totally agree with you Angela, that is also my way of thinking