Holiday CM

Hi..my husband and I are getting a DIY-divorce which so far is going ok. We have agreed that I pay him CM as my daughter (6yo) lives with him during the week (I work shifts and her school is near his house). We have agreed between ourselves that I pay hiim £25 pw as I earn considerably less than him, am single, he is co-habiting with a contributing gf and my daughter comes to me at weekends.
My question is: in July I am taking my daughter away for 3 weeks..is it therefore fair that I only pay for the week that she is with her Dad?? He is then taking her away for 2 weeks with his new gf which I am assuming I will still pay him for her maintenance??

Thanx in advance

That depends what you agree!

If maintenace is paid via the CSA or under a court order then usually you pay the same rate all the time - in effect, the amount you pay is averaged out over the whole year.

However, there would be nothing to stop you and your ex agreeing that you would not pay him for any week in which she spent more than (say) 3 nights with you. The disadvantage of this is that it may make him less willing to agree to her haveing visits with you, if he thinks it will affect his own income.

I think TBagpuss made a vaild point about your ex being less willing about further visits if his income is affected, however as this is a private arrangement it will depend on the relationship you both have as parents.

It may help in the way you approach it as well, you already mention he has a larger income and a partner....maybe if you talked or wrote to him asking if you could give your daughter the money direct as spending money for her holiday he may not see it as a threat to your agreement.

It will probably depend very much on how important the money is in the fmailys month to month living costs.
Myself raising three children, i would struggle to pay bills etc if monies were stopped for 3 weeks, because maintenance is for the whole living costs of the child and bills dont stop when they aren't there.

However your ex wouldn't feel obliged to provide any spending money himself....so it could be a compromise.
xx