Giving business to wife

Yes but none of that would ever be a consideration for my Ex. She thinks anyone with money is a "snob" and would rather see her kids at no school as opposed to private. She is pure scum, and I am not joking. You wouldn't spit on her if she were on fire. Also, housing etc is surely something people WORK to pay, not to be subsidised by the money for the upbringing of a child.

G.

Only you can asses the state of your current relationship and its likely permanence. The point I was trying to make is how would you feel if your current relationship breaks down and your wife owns what was your half of the business. If you are sure that won't happen then fine, although the effect of that change on your assessed payments is possibly not that certain.

Not an expert on the CSA although I do consider they are most inefficient and target those they consider they are likely to succeed with rather than all those who should be targeted.

It should be possible to find out their justification for the £2k.

It does seem high to me.

but maybe it's not high given that the OP's net income was £300,000 last year. It depends what basis they use to work it out.

Robert

that raises anohehr question. is there anything that can be done if the money paid for the child is actually spent by the mother on herself?

From what the OP says this is actually what causes the feeling of unfairness. it's not so much that it's a big % of his income, but rather that it's being taken by the ex and not spent on the child.

That does seem wrong.

Robert

In message , RobertL writes

Well assuming that this is a new claim and that the basic rate applies and he only has the one child to support then his income for the purpose of the calculation would be capped at a net weekly income of £2000 pw.

The basic rate works on a standard percentage and for one child is 15% which would be around £1300 per month so £2k per month does seem on the high side. I wonder if arrears are also being collected in that amount.

I suppose it depends on whether the basis is his income or the cost of raising the child. I would feel pretty upset in his situation.

My income is the basis. Gutted is an understatement, hence my original question.

G.

Not true for the old system. New system (csa2), yes, however I believe there to be no cap on the system I am on (csa1).

No arrears. Final assessment not here yet, 2K is a worse case figure I was quoted.

G.

In message , news.btinternet.com writes

Oh dear.... poor you! The new system came into effect for claims after March 2003. Prior to that, as you say, there is no cap, they can assess income over any period they see fit and they use a hellishly complex formula, though the total they take shouldn't exceed 30% of your net income.

Without his co-operation in running the business, his would-be ex-wife's shareholding would almost certainly be worthless, so it probably isn't that much of a problem.

I can't blame you for feeling that 2000 per month is far too high. Some people don't take that much home to keep a family. If it takes 2,000 to keep one child and there are five in the Family, that means they need 10,000 to keep them per week. Unless this family are a high income, high expenditure, 2,000 is far too high. If you have not paid her any money until now, then that is not too high. If you only have one son, who you love dearly why don't you pay for him to private school. This country can't get it right for child maintenance, some fathers pay large amounts, while others pay nothing ay all. I know someone who was divorce with two boys, has not had one penny from her husband, and has give up trying, that is why the CSA has failed. I know someone else who is not working with one child, who only pays about 1.00 per year. this nominal fee keeps the claim open should he start work again. The CSA should have a scale to follow, and that scale should have a maximum. These inflated sums only cause hatred and ill feeling between the two parties, which is not good for the child. Good luck.