[Solved] Unable to pay - Partners savings taken into account?

Hi Kestrel59,

Welcome to the forum.

Thats quite a question - I will pass this on to our legal experts for a response.

Please bear with us as a reply could take a couple of days.

Thank you very much Goonerplum. Even if the response from your legal experts arrives too late to make any difference then I think this is a case and judgement that can and should be highlighted so that others are aware of its implications. I will remain active on the forum and offer my experiences (as opposed to experience) in this matter in the hope that it will help prevent any other cohabiting couples avoid a similar fiasco.

When was the court order made originally, and has there been a new order to 'renew' this or did the court simply not change the original order?

If it's over 12 months, as I understand matters (though I could be wrong on this), then you can ask the CSA to take over this, and as your daughter is over 18, then there is no liability at all. It certainly seems very strange that any court would include your partner's savings or income, unless it's in joint names. I'd certainly be very interested in knowing how you go on with this case.

One more thought - does your daughter know the situation you are in, and does your ex actually support your daughter? On possibility would be for your daughter to move in with you (during holidays) - that way, I would think that there would be no liability at all for you to pay.

When was the court order made originally, and has there been a new order to 'renew' this or did the court simply not change the original order?

If it's over 12 months, as I understand matters (though I could be wrong on this), then you can ask the CSA to take over this, and as your daughter is over 18, then there is no liability at all. It certainly seems very strange that any court would include your partner's savings or income, unless it's in joint names. I'd certainly be very interested in knowing how you go on with this case.

Hi actd,

I don't want to disclose too many personal details in public but the order is in excess of 5 years old and I am currently being summonsed under the original order which remains unchanged. I appear to have got myself into this situation because I did manage to continue making the weekly payments for a lengthy period after I ceased working and the magistrates view is that if I paid it then, I can continue paying now. The clerk of the court also told me that because I was unable to inform the court exactly 'how much' my partner had in savings that they assumed she had sufficient funds available for me to use those resources ("which are available to me" they say) to continue making the payments.

It's ludicrous but apparently there is nothing I can do about it. I have been informed by a barrister that any appeal is likely to fail and of course if my partner doesn't pay then I must pay the consequences which could be bailiffs or worse, even bankruptcy.

As far as I am aware, the fact that the court order was issued before a certain date and that my daughter is now 21 years of age, the CSA simply would not entertain it.

Relations between my ex are non-existant and I have had no contact with my daughter for the past 18 months.

One more important point, should anyone encounter this:

My court order states that I must pay maintenance in respect of my daughter "...until she retains the age of 17 or completes full time secondary or tertiary education, whichever is the later..."

Definition of 'tertiary' education is vague with some people believing it includes university and others not. However, "full time secondary or tertiary education" I took to mean that she had to be attending university full time for me to have to be liable to pay maintenance. Look closely, because the court order doesn't say that. It states "full time secondary" OR "tertiary education" meaning my daughter could in fact attend university one day per month, have a job, and I could be ordered to pay maintenance. It is simply a loose statement that can mean anything and should be addressed immediately if you have the same problem.

Forgot to add - to clarify the latter part of the above post.

My daughter has passed her exams and is now only attending university to catch up with lectures she had previously missed through her prior non-attendance. That's why I considered an appeal based on the fact that she cannot possibly be still in full-time education on that basis but as my solicitor points out, look at the court order and the way it has been worded.

This seems to be one of those occasions where the law seems to be completely at odds with common sense, unless the Court are of the view that you are not working, or that you have transferred assets to your partner in order to avoid paying maintenance. Assuming not, I don't understand how the court justify using your partner's income or savings - she obviously has no legal connection to your daughter.

I'd be very interested in knowing the outcome of this all.

As for the wording,

>full time secondary or tertiary education, whichever is the later

I'd say your barrister has a case for arguing that the 'full time' refers to both secondary and tertiary education, otherwise, it should have been worded (and note the extra comma):

>full time secondary, or tertiary, education, whichever is the later.

Judges have discretion on how they interpret the law, and I'd say that at the very least, the spirit of the original court order was not to potentially bind you to maintenance throughout your daughter's adult life should she wish to continue her studies.

atcd: I have to attend court tomorrow morning but I would just like to thank you for giving me a bit of reassurance that it isn't only me that believes this kind of justice doesn't belong in our society. Members of my family are serving police officers but through my experiences in a courtroom my faith in our justice system is at zero level. I have very little espect for members of the legal profession because I have never been treated with any kind of respect by any one of them in the past.

I have no need or reason to deceive anyone let alone the courts. I have very little income of my own but I do not claim any benefits of any kind. My unemployment isn't planned in any way to avoid paying maintenance - it was planned because this year was the time I had been informed that my daughters university course was supposed to end. The fact that she didn't complete all aspects of the course isn't any of my doing - I was financially supporting her but she was obviously doing other things that kept her from her studies.

I would like to know why when I attend court I am made to feel as if I have committed a crime. But there again, from what I have witnessed on tv those committing crimes can expect a more thoughtful and considerate resolution to their case than can a father who is simply no longer a member of the family home.

By the time you read this, you will have been to court, so hope it went better than you expected.

I'm in court tomorrow - I have found that these things never end. I have different experiences than you in court, so I do have a respect for the legal profession (and an interest in the law, which is why I studied it). Of course, my view may change after tomorrows hearing.

My court appearance went as I thought it would. When you exit the courtroom it's as if something has been taken from you (other than of a financial nature) and I felt small and worthless and a million similar emotions. I was given the ultimatum that the payments were to be made or a distress warrant would be issued. When asked if they expected my partner to make the payments they of course would not state that directly, only that it is 'a resourse available to me'. Given the fact that I earn less than the monthly figure I have been ordered to pay I pointed out that the threat of a distress warrant is nothing short of emotional blackmail as my partner is left with no other option but to make those payments on my behalf or risk losing what is also her home and belongings. I am extremely angry and physically ill. How on earth can we even have a system where a father can be ordered to pay child maintenace for a 21 year old woman? And of course, some cases I have seen go far beyond even that age. Am I really being so unfair in my belief of that?

This action, intended for the education of my daughter, has directly resulted in the complete breakdown of communication between us and a great deal of anger among immediate family relations that I fear may never heal. The involvement of courts is of course often a necessity but it creates tension and bad feeling even among those with the very best of intentions. I would have very much liked to have been given the opportunity to provide for my daughter of my own free will, especialy once she had attained the age of 18 years, but this has been taken from me by my ex-wifes non-stop pursuit of court action. At the moment, and it's probably just my overflowing sense of anger and injustice over the past 10 years, but I really don't want to see them again.

actd: I trust and hope that you will have a far better outcome with your case and I sincerely hope that you do not come away from it feeling the way I do right now. I sense that your's isn't the same sort of problem and that there is a sense of optimism in your post so I hope it goes as expected for you.

This is an appalling outcome - I really cannot see how they can expect your partner to pay for maintenance at all, but especially when there is no legal connection with her.

Hypothetically, what would be the affect if you were to split up and move out, so you had no assets, and the 'resource' of your partners income/assets were no longer available?

As for my case - I had to compromise a lot, otherwise the case would have continued (and at a cost of 3 to 4 thousand pounds for each time I go to court in barrister & solicitor fees, it's not money I want to spend) - I'll just have to see whether my ex 'behaves' herself in both short and long term.

Sorry to hear you have had to compromise a lot but I understand the underlying costs in legal fees of not doing so at times. Hope it works out for you.

We have considered the option of my partner moving out, but theoretically she shouldn't have to do so. She should not be expected to pay my court order for child maintenance (which absurdly is what is now happening). The court cannot enforce this however, so she could in reality stop doing so at any time and I would have to suffer the consequences of her doing so. In my opinion, and as I think I have stated before, what the court have decided amounts to nothing less than emotional blackmail and I've not finished with this yet.

I agree - there is no way that you should have to separate - obviously, you have considered the implications previously.

Nothing additional to add but so that it is on record as to just what sort of 'mickey mouse' case this has been and continues to be, today I received notification from the court of the terms and conditions of payment which are not the same as the orders/instructions I was given at court just two days ago.

so potentially, you are in contempt whatever you do. 😮

Hi Akgoodad

Not sure what's happened to your recent post, dated today. It's not showing up here?

Can you repost?