Seeing kids and spreading CSA payments

I don''t think she will contest my time with them but may make it harder for me to have them so much in the future. I am just wondering what the CSA will say about the school holidays, I have them for scattered days equating to 3 weeks out of the 6 weeks hols, do I have to average days per week and pay that amount to her??

I wouldn''t take the reduction.
At the end of the day you have a major falling out over a 15% reduction (2/7) of 20% .Is it really fecking worth it for 5% of your overall take home pay?
Ok It''ll probably save you £100 a month.
Use this argument to make sure that she''s clear that as she''s used the kids to extort money out of you then there will be no other contributions when it comes to the other favourites they use as top money extractors "for the kids" you know school trips,clubs,uniforms bla bla bla.

All the best
HRH xx

listen wrote:

How will CSA police this if I pay my ex directly?

If there is a CSA assessment in place and you don''t pay the full amount they will police it by slapping a DEO on you straight away and chasing you for the arrears.

If CSA have assessed, even if you pay the assessed amount direct to your ex, you need to get a re-assessment before changing the amount you pay. They will do assessment based on average number of nights throughout the year.

£100 is a lot of money to some people. It''s hard to see the CSA taking the "why bother with the hassle" line. The percentages are there for a reason and i think what is needed is legislation to deal with wayward mothers. The system should never have been designed around the number of nights.

As to the point about maintenance contributing to the ex''s lifestyle, i don''t understand why this isn''t policed. If you are disabled, or have a disabled family member, you have to have a separate bank account from which only payments for care can be taken.

It is about time that the same thing was implemented for parents with care. I pay £1000 a month. My kids do not wear designer clothes, they live in her new partner''s council house, they don''t do expensive activities. I don''t believe that they are costing that much.

James.

Csa cant police what the maintenance is paid for because it contributes to so much. They already struggle doing a good job as it is, can you imagine what it would be like if we all have to justify what we spend our maintenance on? Although in my case, it wouldnt take much justifying what my £30 a week is spent on!!

Also, cm isnt something you qualify for, its your childrens right to be supported by both parents and in all fairness, if your entitled to 50% responsibility you should provide 50% financial support.

I can understand its frustrating to see your ex living a lifestyle you feel is not justified. My ex has used this line many a time for various things but like i said, £30 a week wouldnt fund any type of lifestyle for me! You stated your ex has a new partner who no doubt is contributing to her lifestyle as well as many other possibilities.

Raising children can cost an awful lot and so much of that cannot necessarily be seen.

-Edited to say 50% responsibility, not access. I acknowledge that contact and maintenance are two very separate issues.

I''m sorry, but i don''t agree with this oft trotted out argument that "children cost more than you think".

I raised my kids for 14 years before my relationship broke down.

Whilst it is very, very clear that you can''t raise a child on £30, it is equally clear that many of us are subsidising our new partner''s lifestyles.

In my case, after my (very real and not made up) travel expenses are taken into account, my 70+ hours a week work, and my partner''s 30 hours a week work, deliver us the same income that my ex and her partner enjoy.

In her case, she lives in a council house. She works 24 hours a week. Her partner doesn''t work. Their rent (per court documents) is £380 per month.

The system is supposedly about prioritising the needs of the child as your own response implies.

Instead, a system has been created that:
1. Refuses to acknowledge reasonable costs incurred by fathers/NRPs in earning their living
2. Lets children down by ensuring that there is no mechanism in place to prevent parents with care from prioritising their own lifestyles
3. Makes very little attempt to deal with the 40% of fathers who regularly avoid making any payment at all, instead preferring to clamp down on the compliant
4. Creates a situation where a mother is incentivized to prevent access to the children, often using allegations of violence, even when there is no evidence of such
5. Cracks down heavily on non compliant NRPs, but allows PWCs to ignore court orders with impunity

My ex, although she has become more reasonable of late, is of the view that the children are entirely my responsibility and that i don''t pay enough maintenance. I''m not sure what her definition of "enough" is....presumably 70% of my income. Where is her contribution? 24 hours a week? Pah.

If the sitaution was reversed and i worked 24 hours a week she''d have something to say i am sure.

With respect to your view, each of us is different. I do not need reminding of my obligation to my children and i can assure you that i, and every parent i know, contribute as much or more than they are legally obliged to. I would happily see defaulters slapped in jail but there does now need to be some recognition of the fact that fathers are entitled to a lifestyle too.

James.

Your totally right, each of us are different.

My situation is the exact opposite of yours. My stbxh works a full time job and a cash in hand job that pays very well, lives with his OW who works full time in a management role in childcare, they live in a not very nice council house with a low rent and OW''s ex husband supports her children very well.

I have been in full time education for 4 years now after stbxh heavily encouraged me to do so. At times when i felt it was appropriate to leave to get a job and help out financially i was more or less blackmailed into staying. Now it doesnt make sense to leave as i only have a year left and good career prospects at the end but due to the nature of my degree and childcare issues i''m left to rely on very little income each week.

When my stbxh missed payments the CSA would readily accept excuses such as his car tax was due (second week of the month? Dont think so!) he had been off work sick (when he had taken a fully paid holiday) and other utility bills were due. Everytime the began the process to deduct his payments from his wages he would pay a token amount so they would back off.

Even now he refuses to provide simple things like sun hats and sun cream (which resulted in a hospital visit for heat exhaustion and a very poorly child), rain coats, wellies etc relying on me to attempt to provide for every eventuality as he pays me so much each week.

I was criticised for my lifestyle when i purchased a new car using the money my nana had left me when she passed away. Did he know where the money came from? Nope. Did he know how much i spent? Nope. Did he realise the newer car was cheaper to run than the older one? Nope.

I think we are all biased towards our own situations and i apologise if you took offence to my previous post. As you said, we are all different and have different situations.