CS Overhaul - No CM calculation proposals ???

Hi KWall, I'm a parent with care receiving 20% CM ... how do you factor in the reality that PWCs actually "need" more than 20% of their own income to provide for the children and of the PWCs that I know personally none live extragavant self centred lifestyles as described by some NRPs here in wikiland although I do accept that some PWCs appear to be living the high life (sorry but I just don't know any personally)

Just as a matter of interest I have calculated that my basic running costs in providing a home for the children etc runs to 84% of my income .... would be the first in the queue for a spa day if I only had to utilise 20% of my own income in providing for the children.

Again just a rough calculation I have worked out is that ex keeps 39% of his income for his own use and enjoyment (have included the costs incurred by him when the children are there and housing costs generally for the overnight stays) wheras I have 16% of my income plus the majority caring responsibilities even when the kids are in his care eg I still have to take time off work to care for ill children as he simply refuses to do so.

For the record I work full-time.

Thank you Mummybear for your post and I understand the concept you are trying to state. NRPs who play no part in their childs life, will be only paying 20%, but for all NRPs who share care then they will be paying considerably more, in your case you seem to have calculated this at 61%. This is the nature of high earners who do have more % disposable income than lower earners.

Sherbet, if your NRP earns 5x what you do, you would not be having any money deducted, although you would receive slightly less than the current arrangements. I do understand the issue regarding buying all the clothes,haircuts, parties etc and think this area really should be tied up in the legislation to avoid the clashes that occur both ways in the numerous threads here.

However how PWCs can think it is not right to have to pay for the nights the children don't stay with them, yet happy to accept the money for the nights the children do stay with them then that is in my opinion extremely contradictory. Surely all responsible parents should contribute towards the nights their children stay with the other parent. This is my fundamental point I am raising here.

I still state that the current arrangements are logically unfair for cases of shared care arrangements and that there should be a different calculation for cases such as these. It is only because most PWCs earn less than NRPs that this is tolerated as much as it is.

To highlight this I ask you to consider NRPs and PWCs who have similar wages (lets say £2000/month each)and they share care with say a 2/5 split. In this case the NRP would have to pay CM of ~£300/month. Leaving their respective totals at £2300 against £1700. The PWC would have the children for an extra 12 days in the month and receive an extra £600 compared to the NRP, meaning that the PWC has £50 for each extra day to spend on the children. When you factor the CB and CTC this rises to a difference of over £1000/month or ~£100/extra day !!! This is calculating the cost of raising two children at £36,500/year!........I don't think there would be many couples earning £2k/month each that would consider having kids if this is a realistic cost !!

The more I discuss this matter, the more I feel that the CM payment scheme is grossly unfair. The only arguments against this seem to revolve around cases where parents who earn different amounts of money and seem to think this is fundamentally unfair (that is just the nature of a capatalist society) and where NRPs are criminally dodging the CSA or the rules on income.

I would receive less blimey they accept shirt buttons in shops these days ??


So I have even less than the current 20% of his earnings anyway and then i would get deducted even more - yup thats fair alright .

for me

Nights with PWC 356
Nights with NRP 9

Works abroad

In your case sherbert, the NRP is not sharing care enough to have days/week registered under his care, so he would be expected to pay the full 20% without any reduction.


However this is not really about indivdual cases, but more about the principle that each parent should make a contribution when their children are being cared for by the other parent.

Sherbert and mummybear, can I ask you, do you think it is right that you should pay for nights when your children are being cared for by the other parent ?

In my case yeah .

He has no over heads to fork out for he takes them to a family member that family member buys the food anyways otherwise he should be paying lodge and board should he not and he don't!!

He also does'nt ever put a washing machine on to wash the kids clothes , also I don't get rent reduction when only one person is staying here , the amount remains the same I still need to pay it and the kids need somewhere to live for 356 nights per yr .

Ok so I'm a Non resident parent.
Courtesy of my wifes affair.
I had a 4 bed detached house worth £400k all paid for.So no living expense because of me not her.
Now she has that with the new fella claims benefits fraudulently has her income his income.
I now have to pay £800 a month rent and another £400 for the kids.That leaves me £400 a month for gas, electric, council tax, travel to work, food.
We split the weekends and holidays and there's the paying for everything on them weekends too.
Is that fair?? Not really.But thems the breaks.
All the best
Pete xx

All cases are very different Haway , mine is nowhere near like your's .

I pay rent , I work around my children best I can .Today is yet another inset day think they have 5 per yr I have to fork out yet more money for someone to look after them so I look upon what he pays me for when he has those 9 nights helps me cover the cost of inset day too .