ExH redundancy

[GlobalPymtWorry]

My friend got divorced just over a year ago with a global payment due for 5 years. This includes child maintenance and spousal maintenance and is 50% of exH monthly wage after tax (3.5k). They have 2 school aged children and friend currently works self employed PT (about 9 hours a week). Friend has the children all the time bar every other weekend. The divorce settlement was 75/25 in her favour.
ExH has just been told he is being made redundant. He hasn’t been told his package but he suspects it to be around £30k. He has just dropped the bombshell he wants to look for a lesser paying job with less hours as he wants to see the children more. He will likely earn around 60-70k in a new role. Are the global payments valid for the 5 years stated in the consent order? He has said not having the children has had an awful impact on his MH. He will apply for a variation order once he has a new role as won’t be able to afford the current payment. Her head is spinning as she thought she had 5 years to get herself on her feet.

So the kids are out of the house for most of the day at school anyway? And she doesn't want them to need to go to any additional childcare? Christ, what is she doing with herself all day?

I didn't see the "school age" in the first post and assumed these were going to be very young or preschoolers

I'd say it none of your business. Keep your nose out.

She's in cuckoo land, if she thinks he would maintain that amount of support long term. Most men would be advised to do what he has done by a female friend, if they had any sense.

Surely your friend can't carried that much by a man that she can't work out that if he gets a job that pays 70k he will only take home about 4K a month and she can't surely be shocked that he won't be able to pay her £3.5k a month then

Your friend is in for a rude awakening. She needs to give her head a wobble and smell the coffee. Sounds like she wants it all but unwilling to give anything herself. I sense a nasty custody battle

I know a couple where the same thing happened as the exDH was in a high paying, high risk environment and got made redundant. The woman concerned blew up as she thought the finance agreement was set in stone for ever more, regardless of job changes, illnesses etc. Sadly she used the kids against him, didn’t let them have access etc. It was horrible all round. He used his redundancy to honour the finance agreement until he found a new job and now pays via CMS.

This is why a clean break is recommended wherever possible.

Her default is CMS and UC, if she doesn’t want to work.

"She is a lovely, personable and intelligent woman that has never had to worry about supporting herself. "
Hmmm I've bolded the only part of that sentence that seems to be true, she sounds the opposite of 'lovely, personable and intelligent!

She sounds terribly entitled, lazy and lacking in self awareness. And you say that she won’t hear of sharing the children with her regardless of what is best for them?

What are her redeeming qualities that make her worthy of your friendship? Because she sounds like a bit of a twat to me!

Make better choices in who you’re friends with. It reflects badly on you, being mates with such searingly entitled, grabby person.

If I've read this right her DH was earning £200k+ a year, giving her half of it and seeing the children EOW.

If he now gets a £70k job he'll be bringing home £4k / month - where on earth does your friend think he's going to get the extra £3.5k a month from for the next 4 years? He can't give her what he doesn't have.

He is also entitled to want to see more of his children and I'm afraid your friend is going to have to face the harsh truth that she needs to get FT work, use childcare and change her lifestyle.

Lots of us would love to have all that money handed to us each month and just work 9 hours - very few can. I sympathise that she's been through a messy divorce but she was really disillusioned if she thought she could just carry on for the next 4-5 years without making any changes herself.

She's done herself a disservice in not securing financial stability for herself and her children. I was a SAHP for 13 years, not out of choice, and as soon as me and my ex split I'd found a full time job within 6 weeks. She needs to lower her expectations of her lifestyle and of her opening job prospects.

This is clearly a consent order, so there is no limit. Payments can be as high as 50% or even higher if the parents agree.

If he takes her to court, I suspect that whether she doesn't want him to have 50:50 won't be anything to do with her.

There doesn't seem to be any reason why he shouldn't* have 50:50.

She is being absolutely ridiculous.

They are at school.

She needs to get a job and start supporting herself.

This is a legal grey area. The ex-husband was extraordinarily generous in the settlement by consent order (perhaps he was expecting payrises or thought it would buy a deferred clean break in 5 years but he was still far more generous than a court would have been) but he nevertheless agreed to that consent order. He may well need to at least prove that he is trying to find better paid employment in order to meet this obligation before he takes a paycut (although 20 deliberately bad applications will probably suffice as evidence of this). Otherwise he might find a judge at least partially gives the ex-wife a lump sum.

However, it's also likely a court will look at her situation and ask why she has done nothing so far to gain financial independence.

Ultimately it will all depend on a judge on the day.

He may well need to at least prove that he is trying to find better paid employment in order to meet this obligation before he takes a paycut
Bloody hell if this is a legal stance rather than making ops lazy arse of a friend work the law is more of an ass than I thought!

Do t know the legal position but if this is genuine the ex husband has been well and truly shafted and your friend is taking the piss
no idea how this settlement would have been agreed by a court

I have to agree with some of the other posters. I have absolutely no respect for women like your friend. It’s her husband I sympathise with.

Well, you need to remember, he entered this agreement by consent. A court did not and almost certainly would not have been as generous. However, it seems likely to me that he agreed to it to get an early clean break within 5 years rather than when youngest turned 18.

Now he has freely entered into it, variation is only going to be seen as reasonable if he cannot get a job paying the same. Not just because he doesn't want to do it anymore.

However, like I said, what he would need to do is convince a court he cannot earn as much anymore to get a variation. Having more time with the children would be one way of doing that; mental health another and trying and failing to get said job would be another.