• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

P. Diddy has to pay $250k a year in child support! Now is that fair?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is the name of your state? New York
'This is not about money.
This is about me as a father'




By JOANNA MOLLOY
DAILY NEWS COLUMNIST


Sean Combs was ordered to pay son Justin's mother $250,000 annually in child support. :eek:

As he prepared to celebrate Father's Day, music mogul Sean (P. Diddy) Combs lashed out at a court ruling that ordered him to pay more than a quarter of a million dollars a year in child support. The 35-year-old Bad Boy Records founder - and one of the leaders of the hip hop revolution - was left stunned at the court's decision, the highest amount of child support in New York State history.
In an emotional interview, Combs said he was outraged at the decision - and the motives behind the court case - that led to the huge award.

"This is not about the money," Combs said. "This is about me as a father.

"And this is not about my son. My child is being used. There's a scam that's going on."

In April, four judges of the state Appellate Division ordered Combs to pay more than $250,000 a year to fashion stylist Misa Hylton-Brim, mother of his beloved 11-year-old son Justin.

Combs' lawyer Stephen Gassman filed an immediate appeal in the state Court of Appeals. But the music mogul cannot contain his anger.

"To go and have a judge order me to do it as if I've been a bad father is unfair," he said. "A court doesn't have to tell me what to do to support my child. It's disrespectful.

"It's saying I don't take care of my kids. To put me in this position, when I feel I've even been a shining example as a father ... it's ludicrous. It's ridiculous.

"It's so insulting. I know I'm talking very passionately.

"But I take care of all my children. It's endless. It's priceless. Whatever they need," he added.

Combs has another son. But he says that in Justin's case, he has been a doting father.

"If anything, he has too much," he says. "It's whatever he needs and above. He goes to the best private schools. He gets a tutor five days a week.

"He does every extracurricular activity. I bring him to St. Tropez."

Combs says that he has been a good dad to all the children in his life.

"I give to all my sons - and to other children, too," he said.

"If Justin gets Christmas presents, they all get Christmas presents. If he flies with me on a trip, they fly with me.

"But when you have these ambulance-chasing lawyers who have publicists and do photo shoots in magazines saying, 'This is the man who's going to beat Puffy,' for them it's about my money," he said.

Combs was no doubt referring to Brett Kimmel, the Raoul Felder protégé who fought Mick Jagger and Mike Tyson for child support and at whom Combs allegedly lunged across a table. Kimmel was featured in a Details article last summer entitled, "The lawyer who's going to make P Diddy pay."

Kimmel told The News: "Contrary to Puff's paranoid conspiracy theories, I am not the (District Attorney) Tom Sneddon to his Michael Jackson."

"To me, this is about my son. My son has been fully supported," Combs said.

"This money is not going to be spent on Justin. This is about somebody wanting another car or another piece of jewelry, some new coats.

"And I'm going to fight it to the highest court there is."

Combs says that despite the acrimony, he still loves Hylton-Brim.

"I'll always love her," he said. "She was my high school sweetheart.

"But she did this two months after she separated from her husband. She didn't do it when Justin was 7, 8, 9. Why not then?"

Hylton-Brim could not be reached for comment.

Combs has another son, 7- year-old Christian, by model Kim Porter, and he has virtually adopted Porter's son Quincy, 13.

Combs separated from Porter when he became involved with Jennifer Lopez. But Porter and he have since reunited, though he continues to pay monthly child-support payments of $12,000.

"She pays school tuition out of that," Combs says.

The soft-spoken businessman and Hylton-Brim signed a contract when Justin was a toddler that he would pay her upward of $5,000 a month in cash - but he claims he also voluntarily paid her $120,000 a year for all his son's other expenses, including tuition, medical fees, dental bills and more.

He also gave Hylton-Brim a $50,000 down payment to buy a house "because I want the mothers of my children to be taken care of," he explains.

He thinks judges erred when they voided the contract, and it's the basis of his appeal.

Combs lost his own father at age 3 when he was murdered in a drug-related shooting.

He told the Daily News it created "an emptiness" in his childhood, nevertheless filled by his mother, Janice.

He recalls that it was drilled into him that if he ever had his own babies, he would have to be a responsible father.

"She told me if you're going to have children, you have to be there for them. Children need a father figure there for guidance. Mothers will attest to that. It's the biggest responsibility in the world."

But it's also, Combs says, his greatest joy. "It's a bigger blessing than any award, than anything in music, any amount of money. To see my kids get good grades, do well in sports, to have such good manners, to be nice kids, it's made me feel a little older, but at the same time it's given me a true understanding of the meaning of life.

"It's not the money you give. It's the time you spend with them. You gotta spend the time. It's priceless. I spend the weekends and all my trips, I take them on tour. We spend the summers together.

"I coach my son's football team. I go to parent-teacher meetings. I'm so involved in all my sons' lives.

"You know what? I love when they kiss me. I tell them, when they get older they'd better not try to act cool in front of their friends and not kiss me. No matter how old they are, they're still gonna have to kiss me.

"God put me on Earth to be a father. It's a bigger blessing than any award, than anything in music, any amount of money."

Originally published on June 20, 2005
 


brisgirl825

Senior Member
Of course it's fair. Had he stayed with the mom, he would have spent that kind of money on his kid. As if he'd let his kid shop at wal-mart. :rolleyes:

Need to make sure the boy has gold teeth, Gucci linens, every game console and game out there, mink coats, etc. A pimp can't be a pimp w/o the bling, bling. :cool:
 

genivieve

Member
GothicAngel said:
What is the name of your state? New York
'This is not about money.
This is about me as a father'




Im sure there are a lot of people out there willing to bump her off for 250k. LOL. My father had to pay around 90,000 a year not including our tutition to Deerfield. He just got smart and remarried my mother :p
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
I have seen articles on this before. His income is so astronomically high that the 250,000 is truly a "drop in the bucket". I don't remember what the exact level was...but it was really high.
 

nextwife

Senior Member
brisgirl825 said:
Of course it's fair. Had he stayed with the mom, he would have spent that kind of money on his kid.

Actually, that may be a misconception. I do know people with multi-million dollar incomes, and while, their children live very nicely, the parents Do NOT spend a flat 17% or 20% of their income directly on their child. Once certain basic costs are covered (and covered well, mind you) they make significant donations to charity and endowments and create trusts to benefit their children's, and their own, futures. The persons I know who are, at this moment, doing very well, are no so stupid as to live at a level that spends what they make.

They want their children to NOT grow up thinking that they can spend money like water. Intact families that have that kind of income do NOT necessarilly spend so much of what comes in. They certainly live well, but they reserve a significant amount of income that they don't spend.
 

nagol818

Member
nextwife said:
Actually, that may be a misconception. I do know people with multi-million dollar incomes, and while, their children live very nicely, the parents Do NOT spend a flat 17% or 20% of their income directly on their child. Once certain basic costs are covered (and covered well, mind you) they make significant donations to charity and endowments and create trusts to benefit their children's, and their own, futures. The persons I know who are, at this moment, doing very well, are no so stupid as to live at a level that spends what they make.

They want their children to NOT grow up thinking that they can spend money like water. Intact families that have that kind of income do NOT necessarilly spend so much of what comes in. They certainly live well, but they reserve a significant amount of income that they don't spend.


I don't think anyone on the MTV show Cribs falls under this category! Did you ever see that show? Amazing what stupid things some people do with their money.
 

nextwife

Senior Member
nagol818 said:
I don't think anyone on the MTV show Cribs falls under this category! Did you ever see that show? Amazing what stupid things some people do with their money.

Nobody in my home watches MTV, so I wouldn't know.

The people I refer to own businesses or played ball.
 

haiku

Senior Member
I can understand P-Diddy's point, on a much smaller scale! LOL

I know my husband does not need a court order to tell him he must provide for his children either, and it is disconcerting to be lumped in with people who Don't pay and have to have the court order.


it is insulting, in a way, to be under a court order, especially when if what he says is true his child wants for nothing from him. And there i ssomething to be said for being able to use th money YOU earn in a way you choose to have it benefit your child. court ordered support usually takes away that luxury from the NCP.

parents especially ones such as these, shouldn't have to burden the court system.
 
Furthermore, if the courts are going to order a child to receive child support proportionate to a parents salary, then there ought to be some control over how that money is spent, because we ALL know that the CP doesn't use all that money for the kids. In cases like these, child support is more like alimony. :(
 

brisgirl825

Senior Member
stepmom&mom said:
Furthermore, if the courts are going to order a child to receive child support proportionate to a parents salary, then there ought to be some control over how that money is spent, because we ALL know that the CP doesn't use all that money for the kids. In cases like these, child support is more like alimony. :(

It's to keep the standard living up to what the kid is used to, that's why the c/s is so high. That child doesn't live in a trailer at dad's house so he shouldn't at mom's.
 

haiku

Senior Member
brisgirl825 said:
It's to keep the standard living up to what the kid is used to, that's why the c/s is so high. That child doesn't live in a trailer at dad's house so he shouldn't at mom's.

Why not?

and lets face it, the kid in question was NEVER living anywhere near the lifestyle of the average working class person, most of us here are......

after a certain level of support is reached, it really does become 'alimony' and NOT child support.
 

brisgirl825

Senior Member
haiku said:
Why not?

and lets face it, the kid in question was NEVER living anywhere near the lifestyle of the average working class person, most of us here are......

after a certain level of support is reached, it really does become 'alimony' and NOT child support.

If she's paying for that mansion that daddy feels is so important, then it is child support. His kid has to keep up appearances.
Just b/c the cp owns nicer things than a ncp sometimes doesn't mean that cs should be reduced. It's based off of income and like another poster said, it's drop in the bucket. If ppl don't want to pay support they should suck it up and stay married/co-habitating until all the kids are in the age of majority.
 
brisgirl825 said:
If she's paying for that mansion that daddy feels is so important, then it is child support. His kid has to keep up appearances.
Just b/c the cp owns nicer things than a ncp sometimes doesn't mean that cs should be reduced. It's based off of income and like another poster said, it's drop in the bucket. If ppl don't want to pay support they should suck it up and stay married/co-habitating until all the kids are in the age of majority.

What you meant to say is that the NCP should suck it up and stay married, because the CP has nothing to lose, only the NCP.

Whether or not it is a drop in the bucket is a moot point. It's not the NCP's job to provide for the CP. If the CP wants the child to have the exact same standard of living as the NCP, then they should let the kid go live at the NCP's house.

But we know that would never happen, what they really want is a piece of the pie. IF they just really cared about the child's welfare, they'd let the kid go live with the NCP.
 

brisgirl825

Senior Member
stepmom&mom said:
What you meant to say is that the NCP should suck it up and stay married, because the CP has nothing to lose, only the NCP.

Whether or not it is a drop in the bucket is a moot point. It's not the NCP's job to provide for the CP. If the CP wants the child to have the exact same standard of living as the NCP, then they should let the kid go live at the NCP's house.

But we know that would never happen, what they really want is a piece of the pie. IF they just really cared about the child's welfare, they'd let the kid go live with the NCP.

Ouch, how bitter! lol! There is no NCP or CP when two ppl are married. So who knows which will pay and which won't. If you don't want to take the risk of being the payer of support, don't get divorced.
And it's not a moot point. It goes by income. If you have a higher income, you should pay more. Why? Because we all know that P. Diddy has spoiled hood rats that have an image to uphold.
You obviously hate your husband's ex for forcing him to pay c/s right? That is, if he's actually paying. And I bet you really love those kids huh? :rolleyes: You resent them and hate them for taking your man's money. Get a life.
 

haiku

Senior Member
brisgirl825 said:
If she's paying for that mansion that daddy feels is so important, then it is child support. His kid has to keep up appearances.
Just b/c the cp owns nicer things than a ncp sometimes doesn't mean that cs should be reduced. It's based off of income and like another poster said, it's drop in the bucket. If ppl don't want to pay support they should suck it up and stay married/co-habitating until all the kids are in the age of majority.

I think you are missing the point.

WITHOUT a support order, Puffy-diddy whoever the heck, claims he was paying her 5,000 a month plus many other things costing 120,000 a year. not counting stuff he does with the kid on his time.

And something tells me that the mother in this case who makes from what reports say a 6 figure income, is likely more than capable of supporting the "mansion" on her own.

certainly for these people stuff like this is drops in a bucket, us little people cannot even compare, but I can say still I agree with puffy-diddy claims of feeling insulted over it all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
Top