Child Maintenance Avoidance Via High Earning Spouse

A question about : Child Maintenance Avoidance Via High Earning Spouse

Does anyone have experience of my predicament? My previously self-employed ex has remarried and now avoids paying any child maintenance by claiming that he lives solely off his high earning wife's wages. The current rules deem neither of them have any financial responsibility for his dependent child and the CSA refuse to investigate further and have closed the case. I have written to Maria Miller via my MP who has confirmed that these rules are not going to be reviewed any time soon. My son's father is now beyond investigation and he and his wife (a high profile magazine editor) enjoy an ostentatiously lavish lifestyle while my new partner and I work full time and struggle to provide the basics. I think this situation is being endorsed and fuelled by the government's current policy on tax avoidance and ultimately children like my son are being deprived of the financial support. The United Nations Convention on The Rights of the Child declares that the upbringing and development of children and a standard of living adequate for the children's development is a common responsibility of BOTH parents and a fundamental human right for children. I intend to use my case to try and get some publicity for this loophole and was wondering if mine is an isolated case?

Best answers:

• Not isolated from what I have seen. Many NRP become 'stay at home' parents with their new families if their new partner is the higher earner, or don't work at all even when no new children involved in cases where their new partner is a high earner like in your case.
  Its not fair. Does he have contact with your child?
• Were you ever married? Could you go down the court ordered spousal support route?
• Ive just had a look online and you may be able to get a court order for child maintenance. This route can be used when the CMS cannot help.
  https://www.adviceguide.org.uk/scotla...e_to_start.htm
• Apologies for the delay. I'm new to this forum and went to work after posting! Thank you for your replies )
  We weren't married so spousal maintenance was never an option.
  My son used to spend every other weekend with his father but when he reached the age of 10 he decided he didn't want to go anymore. At 14 the lines of communication are open but it is my son who decides what level of contact he has. I had to defend myself in court against his father's accusations of parental alienation and in doing so spent a considerable sum on legal representation.
  I will check out the link from the CAB now although I think I've probably exhausted all the options and am seeking now to get the law changed by making the anomalies in the system more public. It seems very odd to me that my son's father and his partner can turn their back on any financial responsibility whilst my partner who is not my sons father is obliged to support him from our joint salary. If I remained a single parent the shortfall would be compensated for by tax credit payments but once I cohabit the responsibility for my son became my childless partner's obligation. We both bring home a modest salary working in the care sector and I wouldn't blame him for considering the prospect of coming home to a hormone-fuelled, carbohydrate-munching teenager must sometimes feel like a luxury he didn't bank on budgeting for. My argument is that it should not be the case that a responsible parent should ever be able to walk away from their financial obligations. Surely this is the same as deliberate impoverishment?
• I agree with almost everything you say. The only thing I would say is its not your ex's new partners job to support your son anymore then it is your partners job (but he does because he lives with you). Its your ex's and yours.
  Hope that comes across correctly and good luck! I think you will need it!
• [QUOTE=shoe*diva79;66907652]I agree with almost everything you say. The only thing I would say is its not your ex's new partners job to support your son anymore then it is your partners job (but he does because he lives with you). Its your ex's and yours.
  Yes I entirely agree. My argument is not that my sons fathers wife should be made liable but that my sons father should not be allowed to abandon all responsibility and use his wife to sheild him in that charade. There are no children in their household and neither is my ex in any way incapacitated so there is little excuse for him to choose not to work when he has a dependent child. It doesn't seem a very good message to be sending out to say that you only have to support your child if you can be bothered to get off your !!!! and get a job!
  I think that the law should be altered to say that if you are a fit and healthy non-resident parent and you take the decision not to make yourself available for work , then in that instance you will be liable to have your joint income taken into consideration. The discrepancies in my case are particularly dramatic as my ex lives in a gated docklands apartment and used to turn up in a porsche! One of my objections is that I firmly believe that my ex-partner is working but the CSA (or CMEC) will not even consider any further investigation presumably because it would be so difficult to investigate him without investigating her.
  I wish the tax credit office were so sensitive about my partner's privacy instead of assuming that he will be happy to work his butt off to support a child who's own father evades all responsibility. It's a situation which would test the strength of commitment of any well-meaning 'step-parent' and which explains why so many single parents choose to remain single!
• Many kids are not supported by both their parents. My ex pays nothing towards our children be sees weekly. I know I wouldn't get anything out of him so no point to get into a battle. It's even worse when they get to enjoy and benefit from the visitations. That's life though and easier to accept and know that at least tout ate found the right thing by your child.
  I do agree with the rationale that it is not for nrpps to support their step kids but don't agree at all that the rule doesn't expand to pwcs who are expected by the government to pick up the tab when the children own parents don't.
• [QUOTE=Comfortably_Numb;66910019]
  Quote:
• Plus one for Marisco. While It may seem unfair that he isnt paying what he should, to suggest his wife should be responsible for your children is ludicrous. Also you need to see it the other way. You could have married a billionaire while he may be paying to support his new wifes children AND pay you.
  I suggest the above scenario because its not too far from what i have been doing for the past 15 years. I pay maintenance AND support my step daughter. The system is an !!!, but it is the system we have.