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.

Poppycoc

You're being a bit melodramatic

There's a difference between not being able to plan every financial eventuality and "not having children with the man I love." Few of us can plan EVERY eventuality, if anyone but we all need to plan as responsibly as we can.

Children aren't a right that comes automatically as part of the package of falling in love. If you do fall in love with someone with children already, he has to honour his responsibility towards them and so do you. If your dp can't afford to support two sets of children, then that's just too bad. Things like people's past families do have an inconvenient habit of getting in the way of new relationships.

I think going from £400 per month to £50 per month is rearranging not stopping. If his job is going, then at least she is going to be working and trying to make some sort of payment, but she has her own children to consider as well.

If it was me, I hope I would understand that if someone has lost their job, then the money isn't there. perhaps if the OP had posted about this after her dh had lost his job, rather than trying to be practical and forward plan to achieve a fairish resolution for everyone; then you might be more sympathetic.

they arent just making a decision on who earns and who says at home. they have HAD that decision pretty much taken out fo their hands by being told that her dp is pretty much certain to loose his job. What they are trying to do is keep their household together somehow and juggle the budgets so that they can EAT and pay the BILLS. If they pay the existing maintainance then they bankrupt themselves and fuck up the lives fo the other two kids. But I suppose they dont matter really cos they are just the 2nd family after all.

maintenance isn't a set amount it's based on what you can afford and if the father no longer works it is perfectly reasonable that the payments should be reduced

If you can't afford childcare then how about your DH takes an evening job, ie; bar work, etc so there is more money coming in and he can support his child.

BTW

I think the OP is within reason to try to renegotiate payments on a temporary basis as a result of circs, with agreement as soon as dh has a new job it will go back to before

I just wouldn't like to be in her shoes. Wish you luck, OP.

sorry, i meant surely its NOT unreasonable to reduce or stop the amount unitl finances are sorted.
I would go through CSA, its hassle but they seem to quite fair actually

Every conversation and forum I've been on ends up with the 'second' family being told they are not important Shaun. I'm used to it by now.

Also if he was still living at home the chidren wouldn't get anything if he lost his job so they are actually better off with this arrangement than they would be otherwise.

Losing your job doesn't equate to shirking your responsibilities.. he's not supporting either family.

Poppycoc no one is saying that the second family is not important; but lots of us have been in situations where the first family have come very very low in the list of priorities of the NRP.

Hi I havnt read many of the comments on here so sorry if im repeating what others have said. I think your in a terribly difficult situation but at the end of the day sd is you dh's responsibility and he should contribute to her upkeep. I know this can be diffficult when money is tight but I think you have to think of the sd in all of this and how she might feel if she were to find out that her dad no longer contributes money for her. She may feel a bit pushed out and forgotton.... however it may not bother her at all. I think your best best is to speak to sd's mum and explain the situation. If your income is going to decrease then so will the maintenance expected. Perhaps when your off at the weekend dh could get a job doing something for a few hours and this might boost your income without requiring any childcare. I think this is something that needs to be thought out carefully and putting you cards on the table sooner rather than later so dh's ex knows whats going on might be a good idea. HTH

'You meet a man, you fall in love and because he has child/ren from a previous relationship your expected to sit down and write out a lifetime financial plan before you can have children together. '

Absolutely!

only read the op
that you would consider doing this
his child his responsibilty.

not going to read all the thread, too many vested interests. I don't have stepchildren and my OH has no children to support but mine.

YABU to suggest that your husband should stop making any payment for his child. If he needs to work evenings to do so then he should, he shouldn't just be leaving it to her mother to support her.

YANBU to discuss with ex-wife a temporary change in payments IF he loses his job and cannot immediately get another - but he should be looking hard for one. He chose to have 3 children, he needs to do everything in his power to look after them. Staying at home while you work - and his ex-wife works presumably - should not be an option.

I agree with poppycoc, chocolatemummy, ShauntheSheep and rebelmum - nice to see someone talking some sense on this subject.

About the XP. My stepsons mother is working as is her new partner, both full time. They both live with their parents paying nothing to them and he has his own home he rents out, they don't pay for childcare because her mother does it all. They're looking at buying a car (a new 7 seater) which he is going to stick on the credit card. In the meantime TBD is paying out way over the odds. We can't afford to live together because of how much he's paying to her. Should we really cripple ourselves while they live in luxury? I'm all for fairness but some of the posts on here have made me very .

It's not illegal to pay amounts that you don't like, the CSA are the people who say how much NRP's have to pay (I'm thankful it's not MN) and that can be nil if nothing is coming in, £5 a week if you're on benefits or a similar rate or a % of your income. Unlike some of the people here, the law doesn't think that the new step mother is responsible for her stepchildren!

Since when did it become the responsibility of the FATHER (regardless of whether he is with the mother or not) to be the one to be financially responsible for his child? If the parents were together and the father lost his job then the child would get less as there wouldnt be the money. Why is this different if the father is no longer living with the mother?

When people lose their jobs everyone in the family suffers. Lifes really shit like that. What people here are suggesting is that one child shoudl get extra special treatment nad the others suffer more for it.

If your household income decreases it is perfectly fine to expect the relevant percentage cut in the payments. However I think whatever the CSA say just because you now earn the money rather than your DH should be irrelevant. I know the law does not see it this way.

If my DH lost his job I would pay for everything because it is our money, not mine. If he had debts to pay I would pay them, as we are jointly responsible for our individual spending. I know this seems hard, but the good relationship you all seem to enjoy could be at risk if you just terminate payment. I would give lots of warning and look for a reduction due to your reduced circumstances.

I think that anyone whose children are at school can be either working or studying towards their families future. I think its tough for most people especially at the moment and especially when there are children from previous relationships to support.
I feel strongly about step parents being made responsible for maintenance to step children who do not live with them, espcially if the parent they DO live with does not work!
I think we should all pay for our own children as far and as much as we can! Its not down to one parent or the other its down to both.
If you can only just afford to pay for yourself, and your own children then you cannot be expected to pay for your partners children who live and have a parent somewhere else. If the dad cannot pay for whatever reason (as long as its legitimate) then its up to him and the mother to come to an agreement.

To stop the payments completely is unreasonable, but to reduce them to take into account a change in income isn't unreasonable. He can't help the fact that he could be losing his job, it's not like he's doing it deliberately. If he was still with his x and it happened they'd just have to tighten their belts or make different arrangements like the OP has. They wouldn'texpect to have £400 magically appear from nowhere. I don't see what the difference is.

Its not unreasonable to consider reducing the payments if your circumstances change, you should pay whatever you can reasonably afford.