We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show (non-) personalised ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Please don’t take this the wrong way as I collect maintenance from my ex through csa but why should his new partner whether he lied about knowing her or not why should she pay for his abd your children??
It’s is not her responsibility to pay for your children in any way whatsoever it is down to you and your ex. Why the hell should she! They are not her children regardless of what happened between you and your ex. Women like you really give other women a bad name
It’s all about money with people like you! Women like you are more concerned with trying to financially ruin there ex than what’s good for your kids!
No it won’t take into account his new partners earnings, would you expect another woman to pay for your children? Seriously get a grip of yourself, sounds like your annoyed at your ex for moving on, good luck to him I say, why not get a job and stop expecting other women to pay for you not to work!!!!
Take no notice of vile comment from Simon Scott. His comment reflects what is happening with his ex and he is obviously bitter for having to look financially after his offspring. In regards to your question, it will only have an effect if your ex and his new partner will have children of their own. Then the payments will decrease as new children will be taken into account. Hope this helps and good luck!
Yes damn right it shouldn’t take her earnings into account. The same way a NRP payments don’t go down when you move a bloke in who may be contributing to your household!!!!
I have no problem with looking after my children financially! I do have a problem when the payments I and others make are not used for the care of children but used as a income for someone’s lifestyle! Or as a weapon to hurt their ex!
Erm NO why should she pay for your kids you want more money go make it your self .
I thought the time of “greed is good” was long gone. The CSA is such an antiquated organization.
Fuck em Ruta x
Simon scott, you sing same song as every other bloke who is paying alimony..
omfg hahahaha noooooo what planet do you live on thats her money not yours for crying out loud
This topic has two answers, the correct answer will depend upon which set of rules the case is under, if it is pre 2003 and on original rules then YES the new partners income could be brought into play, if the case is after 2003 and on 2003 rules (CS2) then NO, the new partners income is not at all relevant.
To Caz Charlie Dormer – actually if they had a business together and she would be claiming higher earnings – her earnings would be taken into account omfg hahahaha nooooo what planet do YOU live on?
Can you evidence this?
They dont have a buisness tho so get your facts straight and i live on planet dont use men as cash machines for your information ok 😉
@ Cheryl
You hit the nail on the head, this one wouldn’t expect her CSA to decrease if she moved in a working partner, but thinks its acceptable for his partner to top up her CSA payments…cheeky mare.
And go away Ruta bute….this is another money grabbing so and so that thinks the world..it’s dog and her ex owes her a living…..well it don’t……ALL NRP’s who post on here…ruta bute is quite clearly a Nrp hater, if you happen to be a man. So let whatever she says go in one ear and out the other. By her replies to this thread she quite clearly likes condones the idea of an ex’s new partner paying for the pwc kids as well.
Gonk
Simon scott
I take the same view as you. The Nrp hater Ruta will never see your point.
My child was taken from me when she was 3 because her mother couldn’t keep her legs closed.
Whilst I have no problem contributing towards my child. It should be my perogative to decide how I spend that money on my daughter, she would not go without ever. I object to it being forced out me and given to her mother to do exactly what she wants with, and I know she does not spent the entire £300 a month solely on my daughter as she should. Instead it tops up her benefit booty and her partners wages.
Oh and subsidises her other daughter as well, since her dad pays f**k all CM
But the man hater Ruta will see no wrong in any of what I say. As I said….I do wish she had met or meets a guy that has baggage and is milked by the ex and CSA, and it had a direct impact on her household. She soon change her attitude then.
And Bill…please feel free to pick holes in my written English…lol….I am trying my best
Gonk
@ kylie Doran
Language please on a public forum Kylie, but how old are you and are you pretty? Let me know and I will think about and I am flattered by your offer thank you xx
Gonk
Guys
Ruta cannot grasp the simple moral issue here. I will try spelling it out to her and the other one kylie.
It’s nothing to do with how and if or could or would ruta…the point every one is trying to make is his kids are nothing to do with this lady so WHY should she be obliged to help pay for them ? No more than the pwc would expect her CM reduced if she had a full time live-in working partner contributing to her household.
In your world it’s quite obvious there’s one rule for the nrp and another for the pwc.
He gives and gets nothing. She takes and wants more…sounds fair lol
Gonk
@Gonk
I know when my partner was with his ex, she had 3 kids to another man, who paid via the CSA. His ex used to say “when I get my CSA money off so and so I will get my hair done, then we will go out for a nice meal and night out”!
You can imagine how my partner feels now when he is paying his CSA contributions to her. He knows damn well it isn’t going on the child!
How is this right, perhaps NRPs would be a little more happy to pay if it was actually going on what they are supposed to be paying for!
Hi Cheryl
Yes yes yes…..these knumpties on here who’s names I won’t repeat just cannot see the basic point most NRP’s dislike about the way the money is taken and no checks in place that ensure his money is spent on whom it should be spent.
My blood boils to think that my ex gets £300 a month from me for 1 daughter whom she took from me because she decided I was surplus to requirement, ” nothing I need or want from you anymore” ………oh reallly but she sure as hell wants my money each month and uses my daughter as the perfect excuse to get it. She and the arshole she left me for, are both laughing their arses off at the silly mug of an ex that tops up their income each month. And what f**ks me off is these greedy arsed cows that expect more money just because the ex has a working partner move in with them, BUT they don’t see it fair if they moved a new working partner in and who contributes to their household and therefore her CM reduced… Oh no..that’s not fair in their eyes.
Gonk