Maintence

snuckoms

Just need some advice i live with my partner and we have a kid together, he is at the moment currently out of work . i do work full time but my salary would not be the higgest around. He has a child from a previous relationship used have a maintenance order in place but when out of work couldnt afford it. Paid half of it which we thought was fair. What is the standard expected income for someone on a welfare supplement. we live in ireland by the way.

Thanks for the help

littlebitdull

deleted

The Corinthian

There is no standard unfortunately. One judge may order he pays €15 p.w. and another €60 p.w. for the same man. That he is cohabitation with you and you are employed will in fact go against him in this regard, as will savings. Any expenses and/or debts will go in his favour.

Either way he needs to file a variance order. Even if he is unemployed, he is technically in breach of the existing order until then - and if relations between him and the mother are poor she may well make a complaint.

SarahMc

You can't just half the maintenance payable to his child just because you deem it fairer. You have to agree it with the mother or go for a variation of maintenance.

K-9

The Corinthian wrote: »

There is no standard unfortunately. One judge may order he pays €15 p.w. and another €60 p.w. for the same man.

Agreed.

The Corinthian wrote:

That he is cohabitation with you and you are employed will in fact go against him in this regard, as will savings. Any expenses and/or debts will go in his favour.

No, they are not married. She will not come into the equation. She is not financially responsible for the child. Savings will only be counted if in both names, as will debt.

If it goes to court, only HIS income and expenses can be asked for, not the OP's.

the Corinthian wrote:

Either way he needs to file a variance order. Even if he is unemployed, he is technically in breach of the existing order until then - and if relations between him and the mother are poor she may well make a complaint.

Agreed.

The Corinthian

Seanies32 wrote: »

No, they are not married. She will not come into the equation. She is not financially responsible for the child.

If he's cohabiting the judge will make certain assumptions about hist expenses as he will be sharing them with her.

Savings will only be counted if in both names, as will debt.

I don't understand what you mean - certainly his savings will be counted; if he was unemployed but had €100,000 in savings he would be directed to pay more than if he had no money in the bank.

K-9

The Corinthian wrote:

That he is cohabitation with you and you are employed will in fact go against him in this regard, as will savings. Any expenses and/or debts will go in his favour.

The Corinthian wrote: »

If he's cohabiting the judge will make certain assumptions about hist expenses as he will be sharing them with her.

She's still not financially responsible for the child. If he was sharing a house with a stranger and not the OP, expenses would still be shared. The fact that she is his partner is irrelevant!

In your first post you said the fact that she's employed will go against him. No , a judge is not entitled to ask for her income. Legally, they have no relationship.

Basically, she will be treated the same as a lodger who contributes towards the bills, not as a partner!

The Corinthian wrote:

I don't understand what you mean - certainly his savings will be counted; if he was unemployed but had €100,000 in savings he would be directed to pay more than if he had no money in the bank.

But if it's €10,000 joint savings, the judge can only consider €5,000. If they split up tomorrow, she would be entitled to her €5,000.

Again, only his half of any savings can be counted, or if the savings are in her name only, they cannot be considered. Again, the partner and child are legal strangers with no legal entitlement to the savings.

Nevyn

Unfortuantly the socail welfare department will treat a non married cohabiting couple for means testing like a married couple, but they will not treat a non married cohabiting couple as a married couple when it comes to claiming against prsi.

K-9

Thaedydal wrote: »

Unfortuantly the socail welfare department will treat a non married cohabiting couple for means testing like a married couple, but they will not treat a non married cohabiting couple as a married couple when it comes to claiming against prsi.

I always wondered could the SW be legally challenged on that.

The Corinthian

Seanies32 wrote: »

She's still not financially responsible for the child.

I never suggested she was. I think you misunderstood my post.

In your first post you said the fact that she's employed will go against him.

No, I said that he is employed will go against him.

Basically, she will be treated the same as a lodger who contributes towards the bills, not as a partner!

Well, yes; essentially I meant this - sorry if I was not clearer.

But if it's €10,000 joint savings, the judge can only consider €5,000. If they split up tomorrow, she would be entitled to her €5,000.

I was only discussing his savings.

Again, I think you misunderstood my post.

K-9

The Corinthian wrote: »

I never suggested she was. I think you misunderstood my post.

No, I said that he is employed will go against him.

Well, yes; essentially I meant this - sorry if I was not clearer.

I was only discussing his savings.

Again, I think you misunderstood my post.

Actually him being unemployed and paying half the expenses may actually go for him! He's still responsible for half the bills, but with less income.

Eg.Jobseekers Allowance €220
Rent €150 (his share)
Means €70

Even though the OP maybe paying most of the rent, it's irrelevant. Legally, he has a responsibility to pay half.

I think I'm looking at this from her point of view, you're looking at it from his.