jonnyonions
Registered User
- Messages
- 22
I understand what it means.Child maintenance is not based on the childrens "costs".
My point there was I have always paid for 80% of my childs costs/expenses/whatever/pocket money/club memberships/etc/etc - none of this was raised by my solicitor and the judge treated me like scum. Told me I couldnt speak - she was allowed have her say - and afer her solicitors were high fiving each other - and she called me after to say she was sorry she didnt ask her solicitors to treat me that way.Child maintenance is not based on the childrens "costs".
You are expected to maintain your children; there's no medals for that.my childs costs/expenses/whatever/pocket money/club memberships/etc/etc
My post above #9 was not my opinion it was a quote from the website of the Legal Services Regulatory Authority. There link is given.How is this even remotely possible in a contentious family law situation where so much depends on the attitude and approach of the other side and is therefore unforeseeable with any level of certainty?
Just because it's there doesn't necessarily mean anything, especially if it's possible to tick as "not applicable" .My post above #9 was not my opinion it was a quote from the website of the Legal Services Regulatory Authority. There link is given.
It is hardly the only legal requirement that seems impossible.
To me that doesn't sound unrealistic if both parties can't agree between themselves.the 15k is so far without any of the issues really being dealt with
I never said I wanted a medal. If maintenance is to pay for your child and the court order money to be paid to the mother for your child without factoring in anything else then it’s not right.You are expected to maintain your children; there's no medals for that.
Again - child maintenance is based on your income & outgoings, nothing to do with "costs".
You've already been to court?
Thanks and yes it’s not a good situation to be in but it is helpful to hear different views and perspectives even if only based on the limited information I’ve shared here.Hi jonnyonions,
FWIW, and that's probably not a whole lot, I just want to say that I sympathise with your position. You come across as reasonable to me and it is a real problem when you employ a solicitor who isn't great for something like this. I can see how a weak solicitor could end up clocking up loads in fees for a poor outcome. Obviously, this lose-lose result is very frustrating. I'm sorry but I can't even propose a decent solution as I'd imagine switching horses mid-stream has more than its own difficulties.
If I understand youcourt order money to be paid to the mother for your child
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?