DH Resident in UK - his ex wife and children living in RSA ...

[Loosemo]

Since my DH divorced in 2002 & agreed to pay child maintenance for his 2 children, living with their mum in South Africa both his and his ex-wife's circumstances have changed dramatically.

My DH is now a UK resident, married (to me, natch!) and we now have 4 children together.

Ex wife is now working full time, living with another man and has re-married too.

My DH has a voluntary court order, dating back to 2002 stating that he should pay R6000 per month for both the children plus reasonable private school fees, plus yearly increase according to the consumer price index. Ex-wife's right to Spousal Maintenance was waived.

This was okay to begin with but has become increasingly difficult to meet with the arrival of each of our subsequent children. My DH, not wishing to short change his children in South Africa continued to pay, but we now find it increasingly difficult to meet the payments.

Ex-wife is not open to negotiation.

Where does my DH stand legally? Surely we don't have to go back to court in South Africa to resolve this issue? Is this something that we can resolve via a solicitor in the UK? My DH still wants to pay maintenance for his children in South Africa, but needs his new circumstances to be taken into consideration.

Can anyone out there help or at least point us in the right direction?

Thanks in advance,

Loosemo

[wannaBe]

you don't get to pay less towards your existing children just because you have new ones.

So no, the fact he is now married to you and has more children does not make any difference to the amount of maintenance he pays towards his children from previous marriage.

No court would agree to this, so I would just save yourself the fees and suck it up.

[Loosemo]

Really? Is that how it works? Sorry if I sound naiive, but surely the way the money is split between your children should be equal?

[wannaBe]

afraid so.

I'm just headed out the door, but if you have a look for the CSA calculator it will tell you that essentially the starting point for maintenance is 15% of income for the first child and I can't remember how much thereafter.. That doesn't change regardless of future children being born into new relationships..

But you would need to check how that ties in with SA law and what their guidelines are because they may be different to here.

[prh47bridge]

you don't get to pay less towards your existing children just because you have new ones.

Rubbish. If the ex was resident in the UK and your DH was paying through the CSA his payments would be reduced by 25%.

[2ndtimeblues]

I think CSA does reduce payments if there are subsequent children but a court order trumps that. Her circumstances don't change anything. The money is for his children not for her. You should think of the payments to his ex as being like tax. It's gone. It's not his - or your money - any more.

[Santa5l1ttleHelper]

Bit harsh wannabe! My ex reluctantly pays maintenance for my son but if he had more kids I wouldn't want to see them suffer. I'm certainly no fan of his but I'm grown up enough to understand things change. OP is saying the amount they're paying is a massive strain and are looking for something more affordable

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

Thing is, when you have a second or subsequent child, it is inevitable that the first loses out a bit. The pot remains the same size but there are more mouths to feed, whether those subsequent children are born to the mother of the first child or a whole slew of other women.

[cheekychubster]

Hope this helps- unless its you

www.justanswer.com/uk-family-law/5wj8m-currently-live-uk-ex-wife-lives-south-africa.html

[Santa5l1ttleHelper]

Well said oldlady

[MOSagain]

'you don't get to pay less towards your existing children just because you have new ones.

Rubbish. If the ex was resident in the UK and your DH was paying through the CSA his payments would be reduced by 25%.'

Completely agree with prh, wannaBe you are talking nonsense. In addition to what prh has pointed out ref CSA, if the maintenance was being paid under a court order then the father could apply to the Court for a downwards variation of maintenance to take into account the change of circumstances.

[Loosemo]

Thanks everyone, I really appreciate the responses.

As I understand it, the amount of maintenance was mutually agreed between DH and ex-wife, the court in South Africa just 'rubber stamped' it - to make it official, I guess. It was not a court judgement.

Will have to check the original agreement when DH gets home later for the details.

OldLady - that was my way of thinking too.

Cheeky - thanks, we'll look at this in closer detail after the little ones are in bed.

Please don't get me wrong - we want to continue contributing towards the original 2 children from DH's first marriage, we'd just like the way DH's income is split to be, well, fairer I suppose.

[MOSagain]

It does sound like SA's version of our Consent Order whereby the terms are agreed by the parties and then sealed (approved) by the Court. If this is the case, then it should be possible to make an application for a downwards variation of the maintenance to take into account the change in circumstances.

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

Then none of us should ever have more than one child.

[cazboldy]

i don't want to judge, but you knew the circs when he had dc with you. He chose to have 6 dc, he needs to pay for them, like he agreed to.

Think about it from their point of view

[Tooblunt2012]

I don't think she's saying to not have more than 1 child, but rather don't have more than you can afford.

[MOSagain]

Yes SGM but the OP has posted in 'legal', not AIBU

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

But a second child automatically reduces resources available to the first child. There's less money available, and less parental attention. One may be able to "afford" this, and may be able to afford a third, fourth and so on, but what if circumstances change, a job is lost? You can't send back the younger children!

[Northernlurker]

Do you seriously think that the arrival of a new wife and children should mean the old wife and children receive less support? What about if he leaves you and has another child. Will you be willing to negotiate YOUR maintainence for your kids then? I wouldn't think so.

[Dilligaf81]

But when OP DH made the order his circs were completely different and so is his EXwife who has had more children too, Criticising the OP's decision to have 4 children is not helpful is it?
My friends DH has the UK equvalent of voluntary order and he has been back to court to change the order as they had further DC's.
There are uk solicitors specialising in children residing abroad.

[Dilligaf81]

northernlurker but the Exwife has remarried and had more children too - how do you know she didnt end the marriage ?

[cazboldy]

no one is saying that she shouldn't have had the dc, but that she did so in the full knowledge that her dh had obligations to his elder children.

He wouldn't be much of a father imo if he did what the op is suggesting.

[Truckulentagain]

Morally then if a mother has more children with she should increase her earnings so her original children aren't missing out?

Sounds rubbish to me.

[cazboldy]

Dilligaf81 - Why does it matter who ended the marriage - the commitment is to his children, not his ex wife.

Likewise any other children his ex wife has now are irrelevant