Tertiary Education

Hi - we are very near getting an agreement via solicitors - well we had a signed one and then my sbtx cam back to the table.

The latest thing she is demanding is that I pay her maintenance until all four of my daughters are through tertiary education. I point blank refusing to pay her. Any financial support at that point I will agree with my girls - I not having her dictate terms. In fact I find it hugely disrespectful.

Can anyone advise me on my legal position on this? I understood CMS payments to be only up to the age of eighteen??

Thanks for any perspective!

SB

I''m not sure it is disrespectful. It isn''t unreasonable for students to be provided with a base at their home even if they are away at university. Keeping a room, furniture, utilities, food etc involves costs and if your children are anything like mine they will bring their friends and washing home, top up with supplies of food, stationery and toiletries etc to take back to university.

Under CMS rules a child in full time non advanced education qualifies for child maintenance until the age of 20. "Non advanced education" is defined as A level standard or less so if a child goes to a FE college rather than uni there would still be a liability to pay child maintenance to the parent with care.



Anyway how old are the children now? Normally the CMS has jurisdiction for child maintenance and the courts can''t impose an order for child maintenance or a variation unless it is included in a Consent Order by agreement. Exceptions to this include maintenance for over 18s in higher education and when the paying parent''s income exceeds the Child maintenance Service''s capped amount of £3k/week.

Perhaps one way to move things forward would be to offer a compromise so that terms of the order state you pay maintenance to the children directly once they start university.

Thanks Fiona - disrespectful'' is the wrong word. After her adultery, lies and flip-flopping around agreements. I am not prepared to let her dictate terms about my children. It''s actually disgusting.

My girls are 10,11,14 and 15 and because of her actions I only get to see them 9/10 days per month anyway and I will absolutely not have her imply that I would abdicate my responsibilities nor dictate the terms and boundaries of them. I never have, from the day she fell pregnant (after two months) all the way through to now. even whilst her lies were uncovered I have never gone for the financial stranglehold, which I could of, but feel it is beneath me to do that. I have always been honourable and done the right thing. Unlike the classless trout that she is.

And I am sure that you did not mean it as it came out, but I know it all costs money. I know, as I have always paid for everything and paid for myself to be a student too. What would be an earth shattering event, would be if she got her lazy, haughty backside out her newly purchased (by me) mortgage free, five bedroom house and started to earn some money. That way she can contribute too. The fact is that her net income with the money I pay her every month, is, net:net, more than mine and I carry a big mortgage, as I also want to provide a home for my girls with their own bedrooms and accommodate their friends too. Weird for a man eh? I mean why the hell would a man want to be involved in bringing his children up? Why doesn''t he just pay up and shut up?

Sorry for the rant. Ahem. So, if my girls follow the traditional route of GCSE''s and then ''A'' Levels, by the time they are 18, my ''legal'' responsibility according to the CMS is over??

...and please don''t at all think this is about avoiding supporting them. It''s about not giving the money to the sbtx, who is completely irresponsible with it.

I am going to hold firm on it. Nothing regarding CMS will go in the consent order. That would be the final insult as far as I am concerned.

Fiona, its great advice, and thank you, unfortunately, her idea of compromise and mine are millions of miles apart. I am dealing with someone who has no idea how lucky the are.

I don''t think it''s weird for a man to want to be involved with their children or provide a home and accommodate their children''s friends. As it happens my parents didn''t divorce but for other reasons my father was my main carer. Also when we divorced I didn''t have a problem with our daughter living with my ex.

As I said the courts normally have no jurisdiction for child maintenance and can only make an order "by consent" when child maintenance is agreed. Under CMS rules child maintenance would end when the children finish full time education to A level standard. However when the Child Maintenance Service no longer have jurisdiction over 18s in education can apply to court in their own right for maintenance from separated parents under the Children Act 1989.

What you need to bear in mind is if not agreeing to include child maintenance in a consent order means the entire agreement falls apart it could be even more costly going to court. If it does go to court you may find yourself in a position whereby it''s unreasonable not to agree CM so you agree to it as part of the overall settlement anyway. That''s why I''m suggesting trying to agree CM that it is paid directly to the children when they go to university.

What you need be careful about is the terms about the amount of child maintenance. For example if you pay a percentage of income or to pay in line with CMS rules it is a potential nightmare determining what constitutes income, how it is verified and by whom, whether there should be reviews, when etc etc. Anyone would be well advised to seek independent legal adviceabout any terms before agreeing a consent order.

Thanks Fiona, I was not digging out you, just how the whole who is the carer and who pays for what situation feels totally unjust to me. Nothing is balanced though in Divorce, I can see that.

Can I just clarify something. We initially agreed to terms for a consent order including CM. I agreed to pay much more than CM guidelines just to get things done and over. She has reneged on this agreement. So I say, fine lets go the CMS route and let them decide.

However your comment about ''falling apart'' did you mean if the child care agreement falls apart and we go to court?

Also, CMS - my solicitor informs me that I will pay 19% of my gross weekly salary, minus 2/7 as I have the children or will have them more than 104 days per year. I have only been in a position to accommodate them properly for the last 3 months and have averaged about 10 days per month (excluding Summer Holidays) - how do they calculate the amount of days - how is that proven? I do not trust my sbtx at all.

Thank you so much for your help.

SB

Sorry, I meant if the *financial* agreement falls apart because of a dispute over maintaining the children at uni it could cost more going to court than the maintenance in dispute. The living and contact arrangements for children are dealt with separately under different legislation.

When there is a dispute about the number of overnights parents share care the CMS will consider any agreement or the terms of a court order providing for contact or shared residence. If no agreement or order exists evidence of the pattern of care for the previous twelve months is investigated.

If there isn''t enough evidence the CMS can assume the non resident parent provides care one night a week. The assumption is applied until the non resident parent applies for a "supersession" and there is sufficient evidence to determine the actual number of overnights per week. Evidence can include information from the children’s school, GP, dentist, other people who also give childcare, such as child minders, friends or family or bank statements, receipts or contracts which show you both make major spending decisions for the children.

Thanks Fiona - that helps a lot. I just spoke to the CMS and they told me that they will base their initial assessment on my last years tax earnings. The problem is that I changed jobs in Nov 2012 - so my 2012-2013 tax record is significantly higher than what I earn now.

Which figure will they use? Surely they use the earnings from now, not 2012-2013??