Maintenance Order which has an extra of Educational costs

Thirsty said:
Child maintenance is based on both parents income.

It is not based on the "costs" of the child.
Click to expand...

Someone sounds mighly jealous to me. Disney trips, house bought in cash, bigger house versus 2 bed, in pricer town. I'd guess that's at the root of this.
 
"There is NO childcare"

So the child is left alone to wash, dress, get themself to school, do homework, cook meals, shopping, go to dentist etc., with no adult care or supervision?
 
* All of the below should be read bearing in mind that we have a 3rd party account of one side of an emotionally fraught story..... *

With the above borne in mind and just commenting on the 'evidence' to date.... I am surprised at some of the responses on here.

Fair is fair.

This relationship dissolved for whatever reason.

Now shouldn't both of the separated parties just be able to go on and live happy, content and fulfilling lives???

Yet we have posters saying the Father involved shouldn't be having more children while simultaneously handing out money to the Mother who has 400K cash to buy houses, jets of to Disneyland on a whim etc but at the same time misrepresents underwear as educational expenses?

Regardless of whether its the male or female protagonist here - Whatever..... this whole discussion should revolve around practicalities and making sure the child is adequately provided for.

Certainly neither party should endure undue and unjust financial strains while the other profits handsomely.
 
"...making sure the child is adequately provided for."

And in making the court order, it would seem to me that that is what the judge in question was seeking to do.
 
Ah look people - this is getting out of hand. He could afford another child at the time. The ex came after him AFTER the new sibling arrived. he always wanted a family - the new partner and her income was not asked for as far as I know - she owns her own home. The new partner earns half his income and pays 50/50 because from what I gather - she is decent. Bronte - we know the ex lied - you just need to take that as a given and treat my post as such. Cash came from a sale of one of her houses, and partly from a squirreled away inheritances. She also has another house and land. The income of ex 'girlfriend' is not spent on the house as she bought for cash. Lads - if you knew this man - you'd change your mind. I can't give all the figures out publicly - but I know this chap and he's as straight as they come and one positive is that the siblings are mad about each other - so that's one good thing for them in the future when the parents dead and gone. Thirsty that's a good idea to agree annual educational estimates - I can't see her agreeing to it though. She refused for years to share the child's clothes - he would be dropped off at the fathers in a t-shirt and jeans, no jackets, no sports gear - he'd then have to go off and buy uniforms, helmets, hockey sticks, everything on the double, even school books/bag etc
 
MangoJoe, Child well looked after, and a balanced young lad - your last line cinches what I was very badly trying to say!
 

That was because the OP told us how wonderful the Father is and how awful the mother is.

But I agree with you, what is important is the needs of the children (both) first and then of the adults and as amicable as possible.
 

How is the inheritance 'squirrelled' away.

A) So Wife 1 has a house worth 400K with zero mortgage. She has another house and land. She has an income equal to the father. Was all that disclosed in court?

B) Father owns a house, with a mortage. His income is equal to his ex, plus there is another half income there.

You could give us rough figures to work out without divulging anything that might identify.

Your last paragraph if true, and I don't doubt you, she is a piece of work.
 
Bronte I'll have to PM you the info. Judge nor solicitors wanted to know anything about the new partner's income (They're not married yet) - only relevant aspect considered was We'll call him Ed - was Ed's outgoings for the new child. I've seen the last paragraph in action - one weekend we were all heading off to a sports camp event we'll call it - my son's similar age - the child arrived close to bare!
 
Thirsty said:
"There is NO childcare"

So the child is left alone to wash, dress, get themself to school, do homework, cook meals, shopping, go to dentist etc., with no adult care or supervision?
Click to expand...
@Lone Star How can you 'like' that post?

This is getting sillier by the minute.

Of course the new partner's income isn't considered - you can't be dating someone and discover the next month that you are considered to have a financial responsibility for their child.

Here's the thing - the law can only do so much. Parenting is down to parents and they can make a good job of it or a lousy job of it; but no amount of law can make it happen.

At the end of the day, it's all just stuff - and when you die all your 'stuff' will likely end up in the local charity shop or landfill.

People matter, children matter, stuff doesn't matter.
 
Last edited:
Bronte, just read your earlier post - No jealousy at all - he's glad to be rid of her. The father is happy that she finally bought a decent house. He bought a house straight away for the son and himself after the split. Thirsty - No childcare as in no paid babysitter or childminder (the mother and father obvs look after him) Mother leaves him alone in the house though.
 
I have no idea why I hit like - call it a senior moment on the phone pad.
Look as Mango Joe put it -
Certainly neither party should endure undue and unjust financial strains while the other profits handsomely.
That is the thrust of the whole thing. I have to get back to work. ​
 
Bizarre thread. From what I have seen both sides in every separation always think they got the worse end of the stick when it comes to these arrangements. I presume your friend has legal advice? And what was that advice? If he feels that strongly, there is nothing stoping him from going back to court for an adjustment order. Let him make the claims of hidden income etc there. Yes it will cost money but if what you say is true, then it will save him the long term.

Having said that, sending a receipt for socks is just petty if she is earning a decent wage.
 
You can pm me the figures if you want. And what figures the judge based it on. But it would be beneficial to others if we could understand how the courts are working these things out.

And I'm sure the judge must have looked at all Ed's outgoings. otherwise how could he decide how much he can afford.
 

I've been out of Ireland a while but I understood the judges need to look at all the income coming in and out. Here there is a second child which impacts on Ed's ability to pay. This is not about dating. There is a steady living together with child relationship.
 
When my husband travelled extensively for business there was no paid babysitter or childminder. So clearly he as joint parent was doing an equal share of the looking after while he was in the US or China. And it was just as cost free as my equal childminding.

What house did they live in before the split?
 
Hm.. I thought it was the mother's partner lone star was referring to?

Either way, I've had enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register