Estranged Teenage Son wants to sue for back child support

Plodalong

Hi

I have a query about Child Support. My partner has recently been contacted by his 17 yr old son after 7 years of no contact at all, a decision made by his mother and himself when my partner lost his job and could no longer contribute financially to his upbringing. Before this happened, they met regularly and had a good relationship, my partner paid his mother an agreed amount and also bought him clothes etc. My partner met with his son and has had many conversations and text messages with him and they have all been very hostile, negative and basically rude. His son has now told him that he intends to sue him for back Child Support and wants our address so he can send a solicitors letter.
My partner would very much like to have a relationship with his son again as over the last 7 years he has still sent cards at birthdays xmas etc. and wishes things could have been different.
Can he sue for back dated child support? Any advice

chops018

I imagine that they could apply to the Family Law Court for a Maintenance Order and try get the Judge to back date it.

I could be wrong though.

I also assume the Judge would take the facts into account and go on what's fair, rather than just blankly making an Order for 7 years Child Support.

Sounds like it could get messy quick.

Was there a Maintenance Order in place before and your partner just stopped paying this?

lifeandtimes

depends

id there was an order for maintenance and it was not kept then the this can be backdated, however i doubt the 17 year old will be able to do it, the mother/guardian would have to go to the courts and make an application for it.

If there was not order then its up to the judge, i doubt they would make a blank order for 7 years all at once,the may put an order in place with a backdate charged on top of each payment, then again with no order in place the judge may only back date to the date of application which they can do. all up to the judge and the circumstances involved.

tell your partner to get legal advice for further help

myshirt

The real issue is he is just angry. Focus on that, and yes, trump up as much cash as is possible. It is his son after all, and he did short change him as you said. But there is certainly no need to go legal, that just means less money available for the kid who was let down badly.

4ensic15

myshirt wrote: »

The real issue is he is just angry. Focus on that, and yes, trump up as much cash as is possible. It is his son after all, and he did short change him as you said. But there is certainly no need to go legal, that just means less money available for the kid who was let down badly.

He didn't pay when he couldn't afford it. This whole thing is a try on. Is the son genuinely short of money for his living or educational expenses or does he just see this as buying drugs or drink?

MarkAnthony

Just some high horse pontificating. If you have a kid it eats before you eat. If your partner wasn't in prison or a coma then they should have been contributing on a regular basis (weekly or monthly) even if that meant collecting cans.

Personally I'd seek proper legal advice but morally no leg to stand on I'm afraid.

chops018

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Just some high horse pontificating. If you have a kid it eats before you eat. If your partner wasn't in prison or a coma then they should have been contributing on a regular basis (weekly or monthly) even if that meant collecting cans.

Personally I'd seek proper legal advice but morally no leg to stand on I'm afraid.

While I do agree with your post, I wonder why the OP didn't get a Maintenance Order years ago, and why now all of a sudden they are looking for back payment.

It seems that he was paying voluntary maintenance but when he lost his job he stopped, and then didn't have contact with his son for 7 years yet sent birthday cards etc. again strange.

Anyway I suppose you're right, a parent should always maintain any dependent children.

4ensic15

chops018 wrote: »

While I do agree with your post, I wonder why the OP didn't get a Maintenance Order years ago, and why now all of a sudden they are looking for back payment.

It seems that he was paying voluntary maintenance but when he lost his job he stopped, and then didn't have contact with his son for 7 years yet sent birthday cards etc. again strange.

Anyway I suppose you're right, a parent should always maintain any dependent children.

A parent need not maintain a child, only see that the child is maintained. In the o/p's case the mother showed no understanding when he hit a bad patch and stopped access. The fact that she is not seeking maintenance is also significant. The son is only entitled to be maintained, he has no choice as to who maintains him. Some parents do not want the other parent involved in their lives and don't want payment or to allow access. The son should complain to hius mother not his father.

Peregrinus

4ensic15 wrote: »

A parent need not maintain a child, only see that the child is maintained. In the o/p's case the mother showed no understanding when he hit a bad patch and stopped access . . .

This is not what the OP says. According to the OP, the decision to stop contact was "a decision made by his mother [i.e. the child's mother] and himself [i.e. the child's father".

So far as I know, a child can't apply for maintenance for himself. Either parent can apply, seeking maintenance from the other, but not the child.

In this case, the child's mother can now apply for maintenance. Nothing in the OP suggests that she is minded to do this but, if she does, I don't think she can seek arrears of maintenance for the last seven years, especially as she apparently agreed that no maintenance be paid. But if the father's circumstances now allow him to pay maintenance (and perhaps have allowed this for some time) she can suggest that the level of maintenance fixed for the husband future should take account of the fact that she has born the full costs for several years past. Whether the court would be receptive to that argument, I can't say.

The boy is obviously angry, and that's understandable. I don't say that with a view to blaming the OP's partner for what happened. What happened, happened. But from the boy's point of view a father with whom he had a good relationship suddenly disappeared from his life just when he was entering a time when life was going to become very difficult, and he suffered as a result. He has to work out his feelings about that somehow, and "anger" is certainly going to be one of his feelings. The threat to apply for arrears of maintenance is an expression of that anger. As a legal threat it may be pretty meaningless; as an expression of anger it's very real.

If the OP's partner wants a relationship with his son, accepting and dealing with the boy's anger is part of that relationship. (As any parent of a an adolescent can tell you!)

The OP doesn't actually say what her partner's attitude to paying maintenance would be. At 17, there's still plenty of scope for maintaining the boy, especially if he goes on to third-level education. If the partner wants a relationship with the boy, I think he has to engage with him and, really, if maintenance is something the boy needs or would benefit from, I don't think he should wait for legal proceedings to be issued. Talk to the boy's mother now about where the boy is at, and what can be done to build a positive relationship with him. Accept that financial contributions may be a part of that.

haveringchick

My 2 cents.
3rd party ( in this case the OP) interference in these situations is almost always counterproductive.
OP your partner and this woman made this boy and have made such bad desicions regarding his upbringing that they now have a very angry young adult threatening to take his father to court
If he had wanted to be in his sons life badly enough he could have engaged the Legal Aid Board and pursued it irregardless of what the child's mother said or wanted. I have personal experience of other fathers doing this.
Your partner needs to beg this boys forgiveness and patiently work at regaining his trust.
Your role is to accommodate your partner in these efforts, not seek exit routes

April 73

According to the OP when this boy was 10 his mother & father agreed to no financial contribution or engagement from the father because he lost his job. Before that there was financial support & engagement.

Did anyone ask the 10 year old boy what he wanted? He probably couldn't have cared less about the financial support but could well have wanted his Dad in his life. Seven years later he is expressing his feelings.

There is a lot of work to be done to repair this. It's not just the money - that's the way the son is expressing himself. The mother & father should sit down with the son & try to explain the decisions they made 7 years ago and apologise if the son's wishes were ignored & try to start repairing the damage. If the father has worked within the last 7 years - there is a lot of explaining to do about the lack of financial support & engagement. 10 year old boys need their Dad in their lives regardless of his income.

mattaiuseire

It entirely depends on the circumstances, a judgement cannot be made off understandably vague descriptions.

There are circumstances when a judge might rule it is ok to seek retrospective monies, and others where it is not.

I don't think the OP is looking for advice on family matters.

Your best bet is to contact your solicitor and seek their professional advice.

Joshua5

There is no reason come hell or high water that a father should stop seeing their child or supporting them.

And I'm not just talking about financially, but kids need loving parents. Disappearing on a kid no matter what age would have a tremendous impact on their life.

In saying this, it's not clear if the mum stopped him seeing his boy, which can be the case and if this is the case my heart goes out to this guy.

People often use the phrase the no parent should live to a son or daughter pass away.

What people don't consider is the equal grief a father or mother feels when their access is removed.

It's not as easy as going to court, it's not as easy as saying this is the right thing.

It's soul destroying so before people start to critise the guy they should consider the torment he could quite possibly have faced.

Wabbit Ears

All else morally etc aside the son has no say in this. Maintenance is between the mother and the father. The father pays the mother or vice versa (albeit rarely vice versa in ireland).

So, AFAIK, the son cannot sue for maintenance nor is he entitled to any maintenance from the father.

Again, yes there are moral and parenting issues here, but this isn't personal issues or parenting forum.

Peregrinus

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

Again, yes there are moral and parenting issues here, but this isn't personal issues or parenting forum.

True. But, on the other hand, it's sometimes helpful to point out to people raised a legal query that the underlying problem isn't, basically, a legal one, or one that is susceptible of a legal solution. And the legal problem that they are faced with may recede in importance, or even disappear completely, if they take a step back from it and address the underlying problem instead.