Redundancy and Child Maintenance

[TazSyd]

DP is currently furloughed and found out last week that he is at risk of redundancy. He has been expecting this and thinks that there is a high chance that he will be made redundant. He’s been there less than 2 years, so will only be paid 1 month notice and accrued holiday pay. As he lives with me he will only be entitled to £75 a week contributions based benefits.

We have a DD together and he also has another daughter who lives with her mum but stays with us 2 nights a week (in normal times). One weeknight and also on a Friday night and Saturday day - we pick her up from school on Friday and drop her back at her mum’s after dinner on a Saturday. As DP has been furloughed, we (well he, as I have been working from home so haven’t done much childcare during the day for either DD or DSD) have been having her more often - more like a 50/50 split. Despite his drop in income and the increase in childcare, he hasn’t reduced the maintenance he pays to his ex.

I’ve spoken to a couple of recruiter friends and they’ve said that the employment market has picked up a bit but realistically they aren’t expecting it to pick up properly until September. So DP could well be unemployed for a few months.

DP will pay £7 per week out of his JSA to his ex but this is a lot less than he currently pays (£300 per month). I know I have no legal responsibility for DSD but should I top up the maintenance to DPs ex?

still don't get why he can't get an evening job 5 nights a week to take the pressure off his wife and kids

If he works all night then he will sleep in the day.

So in your proposed scenario:

DP will work all night, earning a reduced wage. So the maintenance he pays to his ex will be reduced from the current amount.

We would no longer be able to have DSD on the extra day and night we currently have her. So her mother would have to find childcare for this day, or not go to work on this day. Leaving her financially worse off as she will have to find £180 a month childcare (we did the figures a few pages ago, she will probably be able to claim £60 of this back so it will cost her £120 per month), or lose 1/3 of her wage. Or she goes down to 2 days a week work and loses £220 a month income.

On minimum wage, based on us having DSD 2 nights and 2 days per month (because we will no longer be able to have her the extra 3rd day and night we have been having her since lockdown started) the monthly maintenance owed will be £107.14 per month. Leaving DPs ex £12.86 a month out of pocket as she will be paying £120 per month in childcare (that she isn’t currently having to pay).

So your genius suggestion means that DPs ex will actually be worse off. By £12.86 per month if she can actually find childcare and by £220 per month if she can’t.

Evening jobs are not night shift. He could work in a chippy or a delivery driver from 5.30 till 11pm sort of thing you know.
Why can't you just have Dsd with dd on the days she's meant to be there ?

@scotsllb

Evening jobs are not night shift. He could work in a chippy or a delivery driver from 5.30 till 11pm sort of thing you know. Why can't you just have Dsd with dd on the days she's meant to be there ?

Because op is not her parent?

@TazSyd I am completely on your side but you just won’t win on the Step-Parenting page. It’s horribly stacked in favour of the first family, and unless you promise to send your salary and savings to the ex (and get your DP to take out a loan) then you be harshly criticised.

Why can't you just have Dsd with dd on the days she's meant to be there ?

I’ve said we’ll have DSD on the 2 days and 2 nights she’s meant to be here. In your scenario, we would no longer be able to have her on the 3rd night and 3rd day we’ve been having her since lockdown began. The reason being, DP will no longer be furloughed, he will be working. This will create an issue for DPs ex as she will have to either find childcare, or reduce her hours (from 3 days to 2). Leaving her out of pocket.

it's his problem to sort, not his ex's, if it's his day to look after his child. I'd just pay someone to babysit. Socially distanced blah blah blah. Nannies have always been allowed to work in employer's houses. Up to him if he gets a nanny or a cheaper babysitter. Both are legal. Obviously the job he would be doing is imaginary though

So, he can get a minimum wage job in a shop and somehow pay maintenance PLUS nanny wages out of that?

There are some truly bizarre maths going on on this thread.

Evening jobs are not night shift. He could work in a chippy or a delivery driver from 5.30 till 11pm sort of thing you know.

Have you not noticed that a lot of chefs, waiting staff and bar staff are out of work? A lot of the jobs you mention have been taken by them. You may have noticed we've recently had an unprecedented lockdown due to a pandemic. You may have heard the words Covid-19 or Coronavirus on the news. This means that a lot of restaurants, cafes and bars closed and when they open next month they will be working on less covers (due to social distancing measures - you may also have heard of these in passing) which means less staff. The part time jobs that people used to get to boost their income are in short supply at the moment.

My friend is HR Director for a large delivery company. They have never had so many applicants for driver roles. They are also stopping their recruitment drive as they think deliveries will drop as shops reopen.

Coffeepot I already agreed with her but that wasn't enough to stop her being sanctimonious and patronising.
No one is prioritising the first family no one.

@scotsllb

Coffeepot I already agreed with her but that wasn't enough to stop her being sanctimonious and patronising. No one is prioritising the first family no one.

Except you suggested he pay ALL his income to the first family. You also suggested op pay maintenance for her savings as well ask asking why op couldn't look after dsd so ops husband could work.

But no. Nobody is prioritising the first family.

No one is prioritising the first family no one.

OP explained that she couldn't afford to pay the maintenance they have previously paid due to her OP losing his job. You then came up with increasingly roundabout ways of OP subsidising her DP, so that he could pay the maintenance. Then you suggested that OP should pay it outright.

Not once have you suggested that this child's mother should shoulder the costs of her own child.

Based on the information you have given us about your own situation, I think you are projecting your own self entitlement on to the OP. You are jealous because she trained and worked and got herself into a sensible financial situation prior to having children. Just like OP's DP's ex, you didn't plan ahead and now you think that other people should pay for you for the decisions you made. OP's DP's ex reminds you of yourself.

@TazSyd I am completely on your side but you just won’t win on the Step-Parenting page. It’s horribly stacked in favour of the first family, and unless you promise to send your salary and savings to the ex (and get your DP to take out a loan) then you be harshly criticised.

Don’t forget signing over my house to DP’s ex too.

Oh please you know nothing of my financial situation. Or my situation when I had my children.
Knowing the state of play I have always worked very hard to maintain a nice living for my children.
I self fund my degree. I work as well and I have a nice house etc and happy children.
I don't get maintenance from children dad but I am not bitter about it. I choose not to claim it as it would be a drawn out battle and I will not force anyone to pay for my kids.
I think it's disgusting however but I am not projecting. As I said before I was also a stepmom and we pooled our money and I paid out my own pocket for the step kids despite much drama and nastiness from their mother on so many issues.
Her and maintenance for the children were two separate issues and that was non negotiable it needs paid as a priority.
The whole situation was not for me however and I left hence why I said I had sympathy for the OP a few pages back.

There are some truly bizarre maths going on on this thread.

Absolutely.

As I said before I was also a stepmom and we pooled our money and I paid out my own pocket for the step kids despite much drama and nastiness from their mother on so many issues.

I'm surprised you missed the OP stating that, up until her DP is made redundant she is paying 60% of her stepdaughter's costs, when the girl stays with them. This was 2 nights and days per month until April and has been 3 days and nights since April. The OP has also previously paid 60% of the costs of taking her stepdaughter on holiday.

When the OP's DP is made redundant, the OP will be paying for 100% of her stepdaughter's costs, on the 3 days and nights the girl is with them. Yes that's right, the OP will be paying almost 50% of the costs for a child who isn't even hers.

But no, the OP does not support her step daughter in any way already. As someone else said, truly bizarre maths.

I didn't miss it.
A child who isn't even hers? She's her step daughter a member of her family a child.
Dsds mum already pulls her weight doesn't she.
Op chose to enter the situation

@scotsllb

I didn't miss it. A child who isn't even hers? She's her step daughter a member of her family a child. Dsds mum already pulls her weight doesn't she. Op chose to enter the situation

Op presumably didn't choose to have to pay single handedly for her dsd though?

@TazSyd I can't believe that this thread is still going. I caught up with it a few days ago and thought then that you were being very measured in your responses. I've gathered that second families are frowned upon and I've never been involved in one directly so can't comment. I confess to a certain sense of Schadenfreude though, for which I apologise. I spent DD's first six years overseas with no maintenance and no benefits to claim as none existed. Correction, I had six weeks maternity leave paid by my company but then you have to work the next year or pay it back pro rata.

Reading all this, I think I've had it really easy. I haven't lived with anyone since then apart from DD22 and, although ex is married with children, he is overseas and hasn't ever had any involvement or paid anything. I cannot imagine expecting his wife (of whom I have zero knowledge) to care about or contribute towards us, even if the circumstances were different. You sound extremely considerate to me, although I'm sure that your detractors would say that my bar was low.

OP's step daughter isn't the OP's child. OP has no legal responsibility to fund this child. With good reason - this child already has two parents.

I used to think the CMS was in place to enforce payment of child maintenance. After reading this thread, I've decided it's in place to stop the over entitled claiming money that isn't theirs.

Child maintenance orders the payment of the absolute minimum the law requires a nrp to pay.
Money that isn't there's? The ops DH is only to pay £7 !
As do countless other men the uk wide and those who lie and dodge it as much as possible.

Child maintenance orders the payment of the absolute minimum the law requires a nrp to pay

It's funny because they don't refer to it as a minimum. A minimum suggests you should pay more must the CMS don't suggest that.

A child who isn't even hers? She's her step daughter a member of the family a child.

There are many different familial roles, but the only ones responsible fincially for anyone else are the mother and father. Step children are family, but step parents fall into the category of all other family members who aren't responsible for them financially.

I used to think the CMS was in place to enforce payment of child maintenance. After reading this thread, I've decided it's in place to stop the over entitled claiming money that isn't theirs.

Years ago I think they actually did include the partner’s income in the calculation so the nrp’s figure would be higher as it was worked out using total household income. So effectively the nrp’s partner was subsidising the higher payment therefore paying for children that weren’t theirs. Thankfully that bonkers idea was scrapped, but I know some people on this thread would welcome it back.
They also used to deduct child tax credits paid to the second children and give them to the shiny first children who were already getting their own child tax credits if the rp was claiming them. I don’t think that’s in place now either. Another bonkers idea that felt totally unjustified.

I think the current system where it is based solely on the nrp’s income is 100% fair. Partners and second children shouldn’t have to fund the nrp’s past choices.

It's the minimum. And they are even considering this

A child who isn't even hers? She's her step daughter a member of the family a child.

A member of the family yes, but no legal or moral financial responsibility towards them. You can do both you know. A stepchild can be part of your family but you can still choose not to pay maintenance for them.