nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Maintenance

Strangely

Ex has requested €600 per month child support:

My earnings are €38000 per annum (€2300 per month)
Bonuses etc: none

Marital status: single

Property: rented

Mother: Civil servent (45k+)
Home: owned

I am a willing father with limited access (court date pending)

What are the views on the amount requested please??

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Corinthian

On the face of it, it could be a bit high (26% of your stated net income), however a court could award her this as it still falls within the limit that a district court may award (€150 p.w. or €650 p.m.) - it depends on the judge on the day.

Things you've not mentioned that have a baring on this include:

Her income (salary, LPA, rent allowance).
Her rent.
Both of your liabilities, i.e. mortgages, personal or car loans, etc.
Other overheads, e.g. car, child care.
Your additional child-related costs, e.g. extra payments, transport costs to visit your child, etc. This is important as child maintenance covers all your contributions, so if you're shelling out €25 p.w. for ballet lessons, then that that is part of the final figure.
Your rental income (you state both home ownership and rented property, so it's unclear if you are renting or renting out - or both).
Both of your savings.
Other children/dependents that either of you have.

Unfortunately, Ireland has no 'schedule' of child maintenance levels, as exists in many other countries, and as a result amounts awarded can vary wildly, often based upon the mood/prejudices of the judge or how either parent comes across in court on the day.

Strangely

The Corinthian wrote: »

On the face of it, it could be a bit high (26% of your stated net income), however a court could award her this as it still falls within the limit that a district court may award (€150 p.w. or €650 p.m.) - it depends on the judge on the day.

Things you've not mentioned that have a baring on this include:
Her income (salary, LPA, rent allowance).

Her rent.

Both of your liabilities, i.e. mortgages, personal or car loans, etc.

Other overheads, e.g. car, child care.

Your additional child-related costs, e.g. extra payments, transport costs to visit your child, etc. This is important as child maintenance covers all your contributions, so if you're shelling out €25 p.w. for ballet lessons, then that that is part of the final figure.

Your rental income (you state both home ownership and rented property, so it's unclear if you are renting or renting out - or both).

Both of your savings.

Other children/dependents that either of you have.

Unfortunately, Ireland has no 'schedule' of child maintenance levels, as exists in many other countries, and as a result amounts awarded can vary wildly, often based upon the mood/prejudices of the judge or how either parent comes across in court on the day.

thanks for the reply:

Her income is approx 45k+ entitlements.
Each trip would cost me €12 x 8 trips per month
I am renting accomodation, I have an ambition to own a house although €600 pm maintenance would scupper that idea.
She is a homeowner with a massive mortgage
I currently pay €320 pm for our sons maintenance.
My car is a banger and will need replacing for access reasons not vanity.

Orion

I've moved this to its own thread - no need to bump old ones.

Strangely

I must add...i am not shying away from my duties..I just need to be sure i'm not being screwed over. I feel that somewhere in between what I am paying and what she wants is closer the the correct amount?

The Corinthian

Strangely wrote: »

Her income is approx 45k+ entitlements.
Each trip would cost me €12 x 8 trips per month
I am renting accomodation, I have an ambition to own a house although €600 pm maintenance would scupper that idea.
She is a homeowner with a massive mortgage
I currently pay €320 pm for our sons maintenance.
My car is a banger and will need replacing for access reasons not vanity.

I take it this 45k+ p.a. is social welfare or is it salary? Either way, if you can demonstrate this in court, her position would become far weaker.

Seeing your child costs you €96 p.m. already, just to see, as you are presumably doing so on her terms. A tactic would be to show how this level of payment would in effect make it impossible for you to be able to afford to see your child.

Also include all other payments/expenses you have made for your child - that even includes presents. Remember, child maintenance is supposed to cover all your child related expenses - once you've paid it, in theory you are not obliged to put your hand in your pocket for anything else.

Her mortgage will go in her favour - to an extent. After all, while it is an overhead that cannot be ignored, you're not there to effectively supplement her home ownership either, are you? If she's working she'll have child care costs and you would be expected to contribute to them - again to an extent; after all, child care is not simply for the child, but also so that she may pursue her own career and income.

As to the car, get a car loan now and buy one. The car loan will become an objective liability you're forced to pay and you'll have avoided the largely subjective discussion of whether you need a new car or not.

Prepare a schedule for you income and expenditure, including all of the above. She'll need to do the same (unless she wants the judge to go through her for a shortcut) and may well exaggerate or omit figures - you need to be in a position where you can question these (if the judge lets you), as if you do so successfully, the judge will turn against her.

Ideally, your application for access should be on the same day, before the maintenance hearing, with the same judge. If she's been obstructing access and you can demonstrate this, the judge will look poorly on her from that point on.

You may wish to consult a solicitor on this however.

Strangely wrote: »

I must add...i am not shying away from my duties..I just need to be sure i'm not being screwed over. I feel that somewhere in between what I am paying and what she wants is closer the the correct amount?

Have you tried offering her a compromise figure, explaining why you cannot afford more? Or offered to go to mediation? If not do so by registered post. If she refuses either, inform the court that you pursued these options in good faith.

She may be chancing her arm overall. Or using this as a scare tactic for you to raise maintenance from the current level. Or she may feel that she's genuinely entitled to it.

I certainly would pursue a direct agreement if possible as well as seek professional legal advice.

Strangely

The 45k is her salary. Thanks for the advice, I feel in a better position now than i was this morning!

James Jones

Strangely wrote: »

She is a homeowner with a massive mortgage

You will need to suggest that she reorganizes her mortgage so that she has more money left each week to feed and cloth your child.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Her mortgage will go in her favour - to an extent. After all, while it is an overhead that cannot be ignored, you're not there to effectively supplement her home ownership either, are you? If she's working she'll have child care costs and you would be expected to contribute to them - again to an extent; after all, child care is not simply for the child, but also so that she may pursue her own career and income.

But he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head. Child care is not only that "she may pursue her own career and income" as the income is also for the child.

The Corinthian wrote: »

As to the car, get a car loan now and buy one. The car loan will become an objective liability you're forced to pay and you'll have avoided the largely subjective discussion of whether you need a new car or not.
.

This may be seen as an acceptable expense or might be used to show that you are seeking to increase your own expenses so as not to pay as much maintenance. There's is no way of knowing how this will go so be warned!!

Do you know that you can apply for the One Parent Family Tax Credit? It should be back-dated for 3 (possibly 4?) years. Although it refers to "Custody", and says that you must have custody "for the whole or part of a tax year"", you can get the tax relief once your child has stayed with you for one night of each year.

In relation to a fair amount of maintenance, there is no way of assessing this. However, have a look at page 53 of the report Post-Separation Parenting:

"To summarise the maintenance payments in the 87 cases examined in this study, maintenance is only payable when there are dependent children (defined as under the age of 18) or older children (up to the age of 23 if attending college). Child maintenance payments were made in 54 cases out
of the total of 87 observed. Payments ranged from €140 per month to €3,000 per month. Coulter (2009b, p. 64) noted that where maintenance was specified, the amounts varied from €60-€100 per week per child, along with educational and medical expenses. There is no payment actually stipulated by any statutory agency, but it is related to the willingness of parents to pay it. A typical lower income level payment would be €75 or €80 per child per week. This is expected to contribute to the child’s living costs, housing, clothes, food, education, mobile phone and other sundry expenses. The residential parent will also receive a Child Benefit Allowance. If a husband was unemployed or ill, the amount of maintenance ordered was lower".

The Corinthian

James Jones wrote: »

But he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head. Child care is not only that "she may pursue her own career and income" as the income is also for the child.

I agree, which is why I said her mortgage will go in her favour - to an extent. This is to say that he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head, but there is a limit when he is asked to do so because money is being spent by the other parent in something that is not related to the child. Ultimately, as I said, it depends on the judge.

This may be seen as an acceptable expense or might be used to show that you are seeking to increase your own expenses so as not to pay as much maintenance. There's is no way of knowing how this will go so be warned!!

Which is why I suggested he buys the car now, as it effectively makes the question of whether it is seen as an acceptable expense or not a fait accompli.

A typical lower income level payment would be €75 or €80 per child per week.

What is lower income in Ireland nowadays?

James Jones

The Corinthian wrote: »

James Jones wrote: »

But he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head. Child care is not only that "she may pursue her own career and income" as the income is also for the child.

I agree, which is why I said her mortgage will go in her favour - to an extent. This is to say that he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head, but there is a limit when he is asked to do so because money is being spent by the other parent in something that is not related to the child. Ultimately, as I said, it depends on the judge.

The house IS related to the child. The child lives in it, will live in it and will eventually inherit it. I'm afraid there are no limits as to what a Judge may decide.

James Jones wrote: »

This may be seen as an acceptable expense or might be used to show that you are seeking to increase your own expenses so as not to pay as much maintenance. There's is no way of knowing how this will go so be warned!!

The Corinthian wrote: »

Which is why I suggested he buys the car now, as it effectively makes the question of whether it is seen as an acceptable expense or not a fait accompli.

I take it from the above you have never been in the Family Courts? The purchase of a car by a father shortly before a Court hearing can be made to look like maintenance avoidance.If a Judge doesn't like your attitude, he can order maintenance so high that you can't afford to live and he can restrict your time with your children so much that maintaining a relationship with them is impossible. He can do so with a clear conscience because his order can be appealed and so he can convince himself that he hasn't done any harm, simply passed the buck. If you do not believe this, just look up the records of previous court cases.

Oh, that's right-there aren't any!!!

The Corinthian

James Jones wrote: »

The house IS related to the child. The child lives in it, will live in it and will eventually inherit it. I'm afraid there are no limits as to what a Judge may decide.

Actually there are limits; at a district court a judge may award no more than €150 p.w. (€650 p.m.), for example.

Secondly, I think you are stretching logic somewhat if you think that the judge would see the house as the child's future inheritance as a justification for getting the father to paying twoards the mortgage. Honestly, I've never heard of something as insane as this.

The purchase of a car by a father shortly before a Court hearing can be made to look like maintenance avoidance.

While this can certainly be the case where the father quits his job shortly before the court date, as a means to avoid maintenance (and a judge will come down on him like a ton of bricks), a car loan is not on the same scale, nor so easily identified as avoidance. A car loan is ultimately a liability that will be taken into account, result in a little less maintenance being sought, but hardly allow anyone to avoid maintenance payments.

Oh, that's right-there aren't any!!!

I'd agree that the system in Ireland is a joke, in that there is zero accountability in the judiciary, which allows them to make the most insane rulings literally on a whim - this is something that while the bias tends to be in favour of the mother, it can upon occasion unjustly go against her too.

But this is why I've repeatedly said that it depends on the judge on the day; and this is the same in pretty much all court cases in Ireland (particularly where it comes to rulings/sentencing). You may rub one the wrong way, or invoke positive or negative prejudices (your accent, attire, background, lifestyle, etc can all do this), which is why there is very little consistency in how maintenance is awarded - I've been told (by a friend who's a solicitor) that you can go down to Dolphin's House in Dublin and find one judge awarding €20 p.w. and another down the corridor awarding €60; despite the circumstances of both being virtually identical (mother on LPA, unemployed father, etc).

My own experience with the courts, having sued or been sued on numerous occasions over the years (Ireland is very litigious), is that preparation and getting on with the judge makes all the difference.

James Jones

The Corinthian wrote: »

Actually there are limits; at a district court a judge may award no more than €150 p.w. (€650 p.m.), for example.

I'm afraid you're wrong on the limits. The reference you have quoted is for the District Court. An appeal can be heard in the Circuit Court where there are no limits.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Secondly, I think you are stretching logic somewhat if you think that the judge would see the house as the child's future inheritance as a justification for getting the father to paying twoards the mortgage. Honestly, I've never heard of something as insane as this.

That was in reply to your claim that "This is to say that he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head, but there is a limit when he is asked to do so because money is being spent by the other parent in something that is not related to the child, which is totally unrealistic". The child has to be provided with living accommodation and both parents have to contribute to this. If the accommodation is provided for by mortgage payments, the non-residential parent is not exonerated from this. By the way, if you never heard of anything as insane as this, then you obviously have not ever been in the Family Courts.

The Corinthian wrote: »

While this can certainly be the case where the father quits his job shortly before the court date, as a means to avoid maintenance (and a judge will come down on him like a ton of bricks), a car loan is not on the same scale, nor so easily identified as avoidance. A car loan is ultimately a liability that will be taken into account, result in a little less maintenance being sought, but hardly allow anyone to avoid maintenance payments.

I don't think you should be giving advice with such authority when you have no experience of the Family Courts.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I'd agree that the system in Ireland is a joke, in that there is zero accountability in the judiciary, which allows them to make the most insane rulings literally on a whim

I'm glad you accept the possibility of an insane ruling by a Judge in a Family Court.

The Corinthian wrote: »

But this is why I've repeatedly said that it depends on the judge on the day; and this is the same in pretty much all court cases in Ireland (particularly where it comes to rulings/sentencing).

Not all court cases in Ireland are heard in secret.

The Corinthian wrote: »

My own experience with the courts, having sued or been sued on numerous occasions over the years (Ireland is very litigious), is that preparation and getting on with the judge makes all the difference.

Your own experience does not really count. Family Law is a different ball game altogether because of the cloak of secrecy. Even though I have been in the Family Courts over 30 times before 12 different judges, I would not take on to make generalizations. No matter what your preparation, you have no idea what the relationship between the solicitor and barrister on the other side is. If they're buddies, you're f***ed anyway.

The Corinthian

James Jones wrote: »

I'm afraid you're wrong on the limits. The reference you have quoted is for the District Court. An appeal can be heard in the Circuit Court where there are no limits.

I did specify the district court, if you'd care to read my post again.

Also the circuit court also has a (higher) limit - it is in the high court that there is no longer a limit.

That was in reply to your claim that "This is to say that he does have to assist in the provision of a roof over his child's head, but there is a limit when he is asked to do so because money is being spent by the other parent in something that is not related to the child, which is totally unrealistic". The child has to be provided with living accommodation and both parents have to contribute to this. If the accommodation is provided for by mortgage payments, the non-residential parent is not exonerated from this. By the way, if you never heard of anything as insane as this, then you obviously have not ever been in the Family Courts.

I think there's some confusion here; I am not suggesting that the non-custodial parent does not have an obligation to contribute twoards the cost of the child's accommodation, even if it involves contributing to a mortgage, however he is only obligated to contribute to that accommodation in the framework of reasonable care. Otherwise a custodial parent could choose to rent a six bedroom house and expect up to half of the rent to be contributed, or - in this case - a mortgage that was the choice of the mother to get which far surpasses what would otherwise be required.

Naturally, I would agree with the caveat that it unfortunately largely comes to what the judge 'feels' on the day.

I don't think you should be giving advice with such authority when you have no experience of the Family Courts.

I do actually.

I'm glad you accept the possibility of an insane ruling by a Judge in a Family Court.

I've been underlining this caveat since my first post in this discussion, so it's hardly something I've recently 'accepted'.

What I've put forward is what is expected of the OP in theory. Unfortunately theory and practice then must run the gauntlet of the judiciary who interpret such 'rules' with wild abandon in many cases and I have repeatedly added this caveat in every post.

Worse still is what comes after, which is enforcement, which is all but ignored if it involves enforcement against a mother. But that's another discussion.

Not all court cases in Ireland are heard in secret.

That has nothing to do with what I wrote.

Your own experience does not really count. Family Law is a different ball game altogether because of the cloak of secrecy. Even though I have been in the Family Courts over 30 times before 12 different judges, I would not take on to make generalizations. No matter what your preparation, you have no idea what the relationship between the solicitor and barrister on the other side is. If they're buddies, you're f***ed anyway.

I'm quite aware of this and have repeatedly pointed out, in particular, the inconstancy of the judiciary as a caveat to what the law states in theory.

As for the relationships between barristers and solicitors (although this will not matter for the OP as I suspect we're talking the district court for him), this is naturally another level of complexity, which incidentally you find in all court cases, be they civil or criminal.

As is the competence of either, for either side; my own experience, at district court level, included the other party employing a solicitor on the day, while I represented myself. Her solicitor was completely inept and had to be corrected by me on at least one occasion, which oddly turned the judge in my favour.

January

James Jones and The Corinthian the OP has asked for advice and not another of your debates between each other. Take it to PM and focus on what the OP has asked please.

Gadfly Girl

OP if you can afford the amount then I see no reason not to pay it, ambitions to own a home are great but your childs needs need to come first, if it is stretching you too far (i.e. you cannot afford to live) then sugguest a more suitable amount. It does not sound like an excessive request as regards to contributing to your child.

Good luck with access, I hope the judge decides in your childs best interests.