in stopping stepdaughters maintenance payments?

[postmanbob]

namechanged as don't want to be recognised.

DH has a DD(11) from previous relationship and we have 2 DC together, both pre-school age. We have a good relationship with SD and regular contact. My DH has paid maintenance every month without fail since the relationship broke up when SD was still a baby. We met a couple of years after that. Maintenance was agreed between them both and has not been an issue until now.

DH is in the construction industry and we have been hit hard this last year, his job is hanging on a wire and they have been as much as told to take it week by week.

I work very very p/t and my department have had trouble recruiting for a f/t job recently. Anyway, I spoketo my manager, they interviewed me and I have been offered the post. This means my DH will give his notice so he can care for our children. My new job is secure (NHS). The salary will be less than DH and mine but it is secure and we can survive on it.....but we will be unable to make the maintenance payments.

Does this sound dreadful or understandable? We are both very torn on what to do and I have to accept/ decline by Friday. I should add that it will not cause his ex finacial hardship......but I'm sure she will make a big fuss.

but jellybeans, that's the point, they can't manage - hence sd's maintenance has been reclassified as an optional item

fio, surely it's the first family's business if their income is going to drop by £000s per month?

Read the entire thread Bossykate - the op is taking a fulltime job as her husband works in the construction industry and has been told his job is at great risk. It would seem more prudent to me for the op to work in a secure (NHS) job, and have a secure income stream, than for him to lose his job, her not work and then they lose everything, including the ability to pay any maintenance at all.

I didn't see on here that he has no intention of finding another, the roles will be reversed for the short term, and then when things pick up he will presumably work again.

A bird in the hand makes sense to me here, and I would be doing exactly what the op is doing.

Perhaps you'd like her to wait until he is made redundant and then they claim benefits and lose their home? She is being sensible and prudent imo and ensuring that all three children can be supported, just not at the levels they were before.

Good luck with the job postmanbob - I don't think some people posting on this thread have bothered to read it all. Your sd is lucky to have you.

yes fio but those examples are contingencies - this family is choosing to put itself in the position where maintenance will be reduced.

ok i think i've made my point here. i don't want to be drawn into pissing the afternoon away on mumsnet.

i've read the whole thread.

I don't think that the choice is a very optional one. This family is doing what a lot of families will be doing over the next couple of years. Making the best of a very difficult situation. In fact they are lucky that they can do so, very serendipitous for a secure job to come up (even if less well paid). OP I hope the new job goes well, that you don't miss your children too much and that your dh adjusts to (and enjoys) being a SAHD.

No, the man isn't able to work, he won't ever work again with his disability. He returned to England because he had no way of earning $2,000 a month, let alone handing that over to his ex-wife, he never had had. He's going to be arrested for not paying maintenence. At least in England he would get a fair deal that would take his disability into consideration.

bossykate, it is optional if he's not working. You might not like it but you don't write the law. Why shouldn't they adjust the payment? He's overpaid for ten years and now can't afford to keep paying that amount even if he stays on in his job (which OP has said). Why should they carry on overpaying anyway? They're struggling to make ends meet while the ex and her new partner are living a priveledged life.

anniemac it's nice to see some supportive posts on here.

YABU. Very dubious to reduce maintanance based on possible, rather than actual, job loss. You may not like daycare, but needs must, and it may be possible to combine limited child care with more family help and flexi-time etc.

The Canadian system sounds fairer to me.

Rose, read the thread! They've been overpaying by an incredible amount for ten years. If they got the CSA involved they wouldn't ever have to pay another penny.

Hedgewitch, I assume if the OP posts in AIBU she is genuinely looking for a broad range of views to help her reach the right decision in her case. £400 down to £40 based on a risk of a job loss is a big change, and I'm sure the SD would notice it, but maybe the ex will understand and be flexible?