CSA Vs Maintenance Order

Having been recently granted LTR my wife has now had to apply for a Maintenance Order as the CSA no longer has Jurisdiction if the Resident Parent lives overseas, and the NRP refused to pay anything for the children.
What we thought was a simple application has stirred a hornets nest. The Father saying that he now has so much debt (due to fighting original application) that if he now paid maintenance he would not be able to afford to pay to see the children.
It was agreed by consent at the final hearing who would pay for what flights where contact is concerned. The Father is maintaining that the Mother also agreed to waive maintenance payments and has now gone around the back door with a maintenance application. This is not true, the Father (through his Counsel) refused to talk about maintenance at the previous hearing instead opting for the seperate hearing took place.
The Mother self represents as she cannot afford the likely high costs, whilst the Father still refuses to discuss payment(s) for the children and yet it appears he would rather throw money away using solicitors and barristers defending what I believe is a reasonable request.
We've just had the Directions hearing, the Father has changed solicitors so previous correspondance/history was not related to at the hearing (I think this was a ploy all along by the Father)
Am i going mad, or is it wrong to think that a Father should pay maintenance for his children??
We have agreed by consent to contribute to contact costs (albeit not equally).
We are not asking for any additional money than previously paid after a CSA ruling.
We have tried to use the CSA as a guideline for future maintenance, but the Judge was all to happy to point out that the CSA bore no relevance to our situation.
No doubt this situation will spark a healthy debate from our male/female members!

I'm not sure what sort of response you hope to illicit.

Are you saying the father was wrong to spend so much money trying to stop you taking away his kids? Is the bit of money you might be able to take from him worth more than them actually seeing their real father?

Or, do you just need a bit of validation. Someone to come along and give you a tap on the back. I can't oblige, there is something stomach turning about your posts.

I beleive as the children have moved abroad as far as the CSA are concerned no child support is due. While yes I think a father should help support his children if they are moved abroad then I don't see that there is anything you can do to force him to pay.

When one parent lives abroad the CSA does not have jurisdiction, the courts do. Therefore it is open for your wife to apply to court for child maintenance.

Although the courts starting point might be CSA rates the judge is directed to consider the financial circumstances and resources of both parents, so the amount awarded can be more or less than CSA rates.

Both the fact that the father and mother are contributing towards the expenses of contact will be considered but rarely, if ever, do the costs of contact completely negate child maintenance.



PS Relocation is an emotive topic, but at the end of the day the only opinion that matters is that of a judge making the final decision.

Where the child lives abroad, I believe contact costs are an allowable deduction from CS.

I'm not quite sure what kind of response I hope to illicit either. Obviously I'm slightly biaised in my opinion, but I am trying to remain impartial as well. Hence my post in the first place. There are always two sides to every story......
I don't want to delve into every last detail either, as i posted I originally I thought it was a simple question should a Father pay maintenance for his children or not? Clearly, there is more to the question than meets the eye, so I was hoping to get some opinions from both sides of the coin.
I think that most Fathers would fight to stop their children leaving the country if they were honest with themselves. I am one as well.
I'm not so sure I would stoop so low as to wait until the last minute to stop an intended move, but these tactics are also not beyond comprehension to me either. The simple fact remains that most LTR cases are granted and the situation is unlikely to change anytime soon.
Having been through it all for over a year now, what shocks me is how the law clearly references the Welfare Check list and childrens best interests etc, but bizarrely rarely do these words get mentioned (if at all) in the ensuing arguments and Court appearances.
We were basically advised (which we did) to offer twice as much contact as previously enjoyed and pay for the majority of the contact costs....the Father disagreed, simply stating they shouldn't move at all (his choice, and a similar choice by many in the same situation is my guess). He then settled for far less contact and to pay for contact costs as well. I'm not going to say anybody is right or wrong in this situation, but i'm pretty sure if you turn things around and say fight the case with a high possibility of losing and in the meantime pay out your annual salary, or the equivalent of 5 years worth of contact costs....most Fathers might just think again??
By the same token, if you had the choice to have twice as much contact in their country of residence or half as much in your country of residence for the same amount of money, which would you choose?
I'm firmly of the opinion that all Father's should pay something towards their children even if it is a token effort. What's left over should then be put to best use in maintaining contact etc.
I also happen to believe that no-one should be critisized for decisions they make, for whatever reason, we all try to do the best we can at any given time, given any particular situation. I was always taught to stand by those decisions made.
I am also acutely aware that the CSA has no jurisdiction outside of the UK, but a Maintenance Order is valid regardless of country of residence.
I have no particular desire to stick another nail in the coffin as it were, it's not my choice anyway, and of course a Judge would have the ultimate say anyway......
What does appear to be the trend whoever I speak to is that generally court costs escalate quite quickly beyond control with neither party benefitting in the main, and it's the children that suffer, when all the while everyone is trying to do their best for the children?!? If only it were that easy that in all cases both sides could resolve their differences amicably.....meanwhile back in the real world....

By the same token, if you had the choice to have twice as much contact in their country of residence or half as much in your country of residence for the same amount of money, which would you choose?

Can only speak for myself, but I would want the option that allows the children to share in my life, that would include my home and country.

LB