Family court

Kathleenrose

Hi I've a 16year old son he has just moved into his dad's in the last few weeks. I told his father while he is temporarily living with him he doesn't have to pay maintenance. He refused to do this and is now taking me to court for maintenance and the child benefit. Has anyone been in a similar situation??

RocketRaccoon

Surely if the child is living with him then he is at least entitled to the child benefit? Why would you continue to get it when the child isn't with you?

Dravokivich

Sounds like a bizarre turn of events. Has maintenance been court ordered before (his payments to you). He cant demand the child benefit from you. DSP pay it out to who the child resides with, and this would be stated on the custody applications. If you have custody, hed surely need to submit to the courts to get that amended also.

Is it only a temporary thing that the child has moved for? As he'll be chasing an awfull lot of work for a short term arrangement.

mitresize5

why shouldn't the roles be reversed if the child is living with the father.

I assume you were paid maintenance and got the child benefit when he lived with you

whats the difference

Kathleenrose

He is staying with me 2-3 nights a week. My goal is to have him mainly back with me. I told him to keep his maintenance and he just wants to go to court. He only moved in on January 1st. This isn't what I wanted.

RocketRaccoon

Kathleenrose wrote: »

He is staying with me 2-3 nights a week. My goal is to have him mainly back with me. I told him to keep his maintenance and he just wants to go to court. He only moved in on January 1st. This isn't what I wanted.

My daughter lives with me 2 nights a week, every week. I still pay maintenance and my ex gets the child support.

Kathleenrose

I've looked after him for 16years. I didn't want him to move. It's only since January 1st. I'm hoping it's only temporarily. I just didn't think the father needed to involve the courts.

RocketRaccoon

I'm sorry you're not getting the answers you want but there's no guarantee it's only temporary, he is definitely entitled to the child benefit.

Dravokivich

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

I'm sorry you're not getting the answers you want but there's no guarantee it's only temporary, he is definitely entitled to the child benefit.

Only if he has a court order stating he has custody.

RocketRaccoon

Dravokivich wrote: »

Only if he has a court order stating he has custody.

Which is presumably why he wants to go to court. I don't see a point in OP fighting this

Kathleenrose

I'm the main guardian. We never had an issue with days because he could always have access when he wanted. Now it has just got so complicated and nasty.

Kathleenrose

I'm the main guardian. We never had an issue with days because he could always have access when he wanted. Now it has just got so complicated and nasty.

splinter65

Kathleenrose wrote: »

He is staying with me 2-3 nights a week. My goal is to have him mainly back with me. I told him to keep his maintenance and he just wants to go to court. He only moved in on January 1st. This isn't what I wanted.

I’m a bit concerned with “This isn't what I wanted”. It’s about what your son wants and what’s best for him.
Your son has gone to live with his father. You don’t have to sign off from child benefit. Just transfer it to him when you get it next week. If he’s not living with you then you don’t need it. Sort out between you both about maintenance. Are you working? Is he? Don’t go to court it’s too stressful for everyone especially your son.

Enter name here

Sorry it's not complicated at all. It seems that way because you are making it.

Child lives with father now, father wants to go to court to get this ratified.

Court ratifies this by way of court order.

Father should now receive the benefit and any maintenance due.

Quite simply really.

But the interesting thing about your post is not that of the child's welfare, more that of how much money you will lose or now have to pay.

Kathleenrose

I work full time. I don't want money. I would love my son to primarily live with me became he's my son. I've always been his primary carer for 16 years. His father is refusing to agree to anything and has already went through with court procedures. I was only looking to see if people were in a similar situation. Was only looking for advice.

Kathleenrose

I work full time. I don't want money. I would love my son to primarily live with me became he's my son. I've always been his primary carer for 16 years. His father is refusing to agree to anything and has already went through with court procedures. I was only looking to see if people were in a similar situation. Was only looking for advice.

RocketRaccoon

Kathleenrose wrote: »

I'm the main guardian. We never had an issue with days because he could always have access when he wanted. Now it has just got so complicated and nasty.

But you shouldn't be his main guardian now as he is living with his father.

racso1975

Taking a stab in the dark here. Its a 16 yr old boy and you guys are eother going through a rough patch or had and argument and he packed up and moved to Dads. Dad is now trying to exploit the situation involving court as opposed to trying to help tou guys sort it out?

RocketRaccoon

racso1975 wrote: »

Taking a stab in the dark here. Its a 16 yr old boy and you guys are eother going through a rough patch or had and argument and he packed up and moved to Dads. Dad is now trying to exploit the situation involving court as opposed to trying to help tou guys sort it out?

I'm surprised it took so long for someone to slate the father here.

Let me also take a stab in the dark, you're a woman who has been hurt by a partner in the past and now says all men are bastards?

Senature

Even if it is temporary, while your son is spending more time living with his father than with you, his father should be entitled to financial support from you during that time.

Would I be correct in presuming the father is taking you to court because you refused to hand over the child benefit and pay maintenance? I have no idea why you think that is nasty. Unless there is a significant difference in your earnings, you are still covering additional expenses such as activities, medical, school, transport etc, or you went through a period where he wasn't paying maintenance to you, you should be paying him a similar amount to what he was paying you.

FishOnABike

Your son is sixteen and has decided he want's to stay with his father (for the mment at least). At sixteen he is old enough to decide for himself where he will primarily stay and what proportion of his time he will spend with either parent.


Child benefit is usually paid to the mother by default or to parent with whom the child mainly resides if the mother and father are separated.



As your son is now spending two or three nights with you and the majority of the week with his father it would seem that, unless this is a temporay situation, child benefit should be transferred to his father.


Transfer of child benefit payments can be made relatively quickly with the consent of the person currently receiving payment or can take several months without consent as the current recipient has to be notified and given a right to reply to the request to transfer payment.


If your son wants to remain with his father, at sixteen the court is likely to give significant weight to your son's wishes unless there are very good reasons why he should not stay with his father. From your posts there doesn't seem to have been any issues with access so I can't see any reason why the court wouldn't acceed to your son's wishes.


What is most important is your son's relationship with both parents and that both parents treat each other fairly and with respect.



If your son now wants to live with his father you should respect his wishes and if you want to avoid acrimony you can agree to transfer child benefit and whatever maintenance you were receiving to his father. As mitresize5 said above "why shouldn't the roles be reversed if the child is living with the father"



If the arrangements up to now were just between yourselves then you can agree between yourselves to reverse them. If the arrangements were from a court order then the order will need to be changed to reflect the new circumstances. This can still be done with your agreement.


In less than two years your son will be an adult. That time will pass quickly. If your son is still spending two or three nights with you he is still spending a significant amount of time with you. Going against your son's wishes could potentially harm the good relationship you have enjoyed with him up to now.

Cork Trucker

If the child (young adult at 16) wants to be with his father and tells the judge exactly that then you are a sitting duck. If you are not the custodian and the father is can you not both be civil for the sake of the child and just hand over the child benefit? The impression i get is it's all about the money and i am not being nasty in saying that to you, i myself am going through a court case for the last 13 years but don't envisage myself ever ending up with in your shoes. What could happen is your ex could contact the social welfare and tell them the child is now with him and they will investigate, while a court order certainly makes things a hell of a lot easier for them it is not obligatory. Like another poster, i pay my weekly maintenance as i have the child half the week, the mother still gets child benefit on top of that as she is the primary care giver, a position you are now not in. Do you both really want to be seen squabbling by a 16 year old over money, kids are smart these days, a hell of a lot smarter than generations before them. for the sake of your child you should both come to an agreement outside court unless contact has broken down so badly you're not on speaking terms any longer. Just remember the only winners in the court are the solicitors and judges who pit the parents against each other even if it doesn't look that way to some. I wish you well.

Xterminator

Hi OP

I think you did have a point that this didnt have to involve the courts. But for that to happen you would have needed to agree what the arrangements with the father should be for as long as this situation lasts. It may not be too late for that one. He should get children's allowance and a similar to what he may have been paying, (with regards to income difference) amount for the child's maintenance, paid electronically. Is there a reason this cannot be agreed voluntarily? you said 'father is refusing to agree to anything' but perhaps it is at least worth looking in the mirror to make sure that your thinking is not clouded on this issue.

It wouldn't matter how long it lasted, in principle any time he is the primary carer it should be reflected in support arrangements. Is it possible to agree with father or certain demands, and/ or meet halfway?

I think you felt some of the comments were personal attacks on you, but i felt most of them were simply disagreeing with you.

Stateofyou

The point of child benefit and maintenance is to support the child who's living with the primary care giver. Your main concern should be to ensure he's got the support wherever he is mainly living, which is what his father did for the previous 16 years. If your son was mainly with you for the last 16 years, but with him 2 days/week, but he paid that amount of maintenance to you, why wouldn't you now pay it over to him? Why should this only be temporary for your son? Unless he's not safe and happy at his Dad's, he should probably remain there for the sake of stability and finishing out his final years in school. Support him where he's at, you still see him 2 days a week. As hard as it may be for you, I'm assuming that's as hard as it was for his father for the past 16 years.

ldy4mxonucwsq6

Kathleenrose wrote: »

Hi I've a 16year old son he has just moved into his dad's in the last few weeks. I told his father while he is temporarily living with him he doesn't have to pay maintenance. He refused to do this and is now taking me to court for maintenance and the child benefit. Has anyone been in a similar situation??

We ll that's how it works, the person who the child lives with gets the child benefit until they are 18. You need to notify child benefit section that the child is no longer living with you full time especially if his dad is already going the court route.

Maintenence is paid to the parent who has custody of the child, by the other parent. The parent with custody of the child is the parent who lives with the child, who looks after them on a daily basis.

Maintenence is paid until the child is 23 if he is in full time education.

I have been through this, it's a tricky age. It might be temporary or it might turn out not to be.

But at 16 the reality is that you have very little control and say over the matter once he decides to go live with his other parent.

Yes it hurts for your son to do this after raising him to this age.

Try not to take it to heart. It's natural for teenagers to seek out independence and rebel against their parents wishes (just not all of them have the option of another parents house to go to). Just try to be there for him if he needs and don't push the subject.

Regardless, the above are legal obligations so your ex is correct in asking for both maintenence and the child benefit.

AulWan

Kathleenrose wrote: »

I've always been his primary carer for 16 years.

Unfortunately, what happened in the past is irrelevant. What is relevant is your sons's living arrangements, now.

And if as you described, he now lives with his father more then half the week then his father is entitled to have the child benefit payment transferred to him, to seek a variance of maintenance, to reflect the new living arrangements.

AulWan

OP you should get ahead of this and inform Child Benefit Section yourself, before the father does, as it will smooth the process along.

Payment will be suspended while they investigate who the payment should me made too. From the operational guidelines on Child Benefit.

Where Child Not Residing Full-Time With Either Parent

a. Parents residing in separate households

Child Benefit is payable to the parent with whom the child resides the majority of the time. If the child resides 50% of the time with each parent, the mother is paid.

If the father informs them his son is living with him 4/5 nights a week (i.e. more then 50%) they will transfer the payment to him.