CSA and being self-employed

fountainpen · 10 August 2006 at 5:51PM

Unfortunatley with CSA you get dads that WONT pay or CANT pay.

Ivangoldfish has not put all his circumstances on this forum as its public.
The CSA whether is passed to the Inland Revenue or not is B*llocks and thats a fact.
Their assessment criteria is totally unfair.Making fathers who work pay large amounts of money so they are no better of than on benefits .(Im a woman by the way ! ) .
If these fathers go on to have seciond families then tough ,their kids suffer and are put in poverty to feed the qualifying child.
In the assessment criteria partners wages are not took into account.
Nine times out of ten the NRP ( non resident parent) is a man .Men usually do work full time so the PWC ( parent with care ) which is usually a woman looks after the kids and usualy doesnt work.
Therefore when they do the assessment the NRP has wages the PWC has none so the NRP pays more.
If the PWC has a new husband or partner living with them their wages are NOT taken into account , so say they earn more than the NRP - tough!
But in todays age it's the man thats the earner so in other words the NRP is left with a high assessment.
Yes NRP should pay the CSA but what many bitter ex girlfriends and wifes must realise is agree amicably the real cost of a child and not the cost of your lifestyle.Children are not the means to an income!
What the CSA need to realise is be more realistic , come up with a better formulae no wonder NRP's leave their jobs - they cant afford to bloody pay CSA.
Yes we pay CSA £400 a month , yes i clothe my kids in cast offs and second hand clothes so we can pay my partners ex girlfriend and her new husband the money.Bear in mind her new husband owns 3 Buisinesses !!
I agree we should pay not that we see his child .But his ex doesnt work so her income is £0.00 in the assessment .Her husband do not come into it.

To me this is all wrong !! Stop penalising NRP all the time.You will always get fathers who dodge paying but so many times it's the same story
we cant afford to pay it..
parenmting is a 50/50 thing and the NRP is not the cheque at the end of the month to pay the entire amount with no rights to see their child.
If we pay £400 per month does my partners ex contribute this too ??? making the assessment £800 a month to bring up 1 child ?? dont forget to add the childbenefit to that.
Good little earner for some pycho exes me thinks !:T

:rolleyes:

fountainpen · 10 August 2006 at 5:59PM

Scarlett1 wrote:

was just going to say this but you beat me to it

It also saddens me when fathers try to find a way to pay as less maintenance as they can possibly get away with :mad:

Have you realised how much the CSA demand them to pay then realise how little they have to live on ???

Scarlett1 · 10 August 2006 at 10:44PM

fountainpen wrote:

Have you realised how much the CSA demand them to pay then realise how little they have to live on ???

yes I do, my ex pays £52, not exactly breaking the bank is it

oh hang on, its £5 now because he has just jacked his job in :rolleyes:

I can see how you are bitter, but you're partners ex contributes just as much, it takes more than money to raise a child :rolleyes:

Scarlett1 · 10 August 2006 at 10:52PM

fountainpen wrote:

Unfortunatley with CSA you get dads that WONT pay or CANT pay.

Ivangoldfish has not put all his circumstances on this forum as its public.
The CSA whether is passed to the Inland Revenue or not is B*llocks and thats a fact.
Their assessment criteria is totally unfair.Making fathers who work pay large amounts of money so they are no better of than on benefits .(Im a woman by the way ! ) .
If these fathers go on to have seciond families then tough ,their kids suffer and are put in poverty to feed the qualifying child.
In the assessment criteria partners wages are not took into account.
Nine times out of ten the NRP ( non resident parent) is a man .Men usually do work full time so the PWC ( parent with care ) which is usually a woman looks after the kids and usualy doesnt work.
Therefore when they do the assessment the NRP has wages the PWC has none so the NRP pays more.
If the PWC has a new husband or partner living with them their wages are NOT taken into account , so say they earn more than the NRP - tough!
But in todays age it's the man thats the earner so in other words the NRP is left with a high assessment.
Yes NRP should pay the CSA but what many bitter ex girlfriends and wifes must realise is agree amicably the real cost of a child and not the cost of your lifestyle.Children are not the means to an income!
What the CSA need to realise is be more realistic , come up with a better formulae no wonder NRP's leave their jobs - they cant afford to bloody pay CSA.
Yes we pay CSA £400 a month , yes i clothe my kids in cast offs and second hand clothes so we can pay my partners ex girlfriend and her new husband the money.Bear in mind her new husband owns 3 Buisinesses !!
I agree we should pay not that we see his child .But his ex doesnt work so her income is £0.00 in the assessment .Her husband do not come into it.

To me this is all wrong !! Stop penalising NRP all the time.You will always get fathers who dodge paying but so many times it's the same story
we cant afford to pay it..
parenmting is a 50/50 thing and the NRP is not the cheque at the end of the month to pay the entire amount with no rights to see their child.
If we pay £400 per month does my partners ex contribute this too ??? making the assessment £800 a month to bring up 1 child ?? dont forget to add the childbenefit to that.
Good little earner for some pycho exes me thinks !:T

:rolleyes:

sorry got to say this but this just makes you look bitter and twisted, and how does you're partner paying maintenance mean that you're children have to dress in cast offs ?????

You knew you're partner had children when you met him, these children have to be provided for, not forgotten about when the guy moves on to the next woman and has children with her :rolleyes:

For goodness sake children come first :mad:

Sensemaya · 11 August 2006 at 5:54PM

fountainpen

Sorry to be harsh. You knew what you were getting into when you married your partner who has kids from a previous marriage. I've heard this all before on other forums. The OP's question is a old "get out" of avoiding paying a reasonable amount of child support.

As I'm on CS2 and work...not I haven't remarried and it's hard...I've resisted posting on the other SP thread...what my ex is assessed to pay ( he has remarried and has kids ) is reasonable.

Flame me if you must...past caring.

System · 11 August 2006 at 9:00PM

Fountainpen to take issue with 4 of your statements.

1. "If the PWC has a new husband or partner living with them their wages are not taken into account"

That's just right too. Their not their kids why do you expect them to subsidise the childrens non resident parent. Perhaps they are also paying maintenance for their children.

BTW that why the new CS2 system was brought in because so many new partners rightly objected to the CSA demanding to know their income when assessing the amount of maintenance their other half had to pay for their children.

2. "if these fathers go on to have second families then tough, their kids suffer and are put in poverty to feed the qualifying child"

That's rubbish too. The non resident parent gets a discount for any children in his household ( even if they are not his own!!) so the amount paid to his ex is reduced.

3. "Yes we pay £400 per month"

You haven't mentioned how many kids you have but lets say you don't have any then £400 per month if your partner is paying for 3 kids equates to approx £1600 per month net pay (£1600 @ 25% = £400). If there are less children than that then his net income is obviously higher. That's not taking into consideration the amount of discount he gets for the kids in your household.

Your partner knew he had responsibilities and should have taken that into consideration before bringing more children into the world.

4. "But his ex doesn't work so her income is £0.00 in the assessment"

At no point in the processing of a child maintenance claim does the income of the parent with care get assessed. The CSA applies a simple formula to the net income of the non resident parent who most right thinking people would expect to want to contribute towards their childrens upbringing.

fountainpen · 16 August 2006 at 11:30PM

Scarlett1 wrote:

sorry got to say this but this just makes you look bitter and twisted, and how does you're partner paying maintenance mean that you're children have to dress in cast offs ?????

You knew you're partner had children when you met him, these children have to be provided for, not forgotten about when the guy moves on to the next woman and has children with her :rolleyes:

For goodness sake children come first :mad:

Yes children come first - I HAVE KIDS!Work it out if we pay £400 per month for 1 child and have bills and mortgage to pay what does that leave us to live on ?
And dont use the "You know he had a child before you married him" or the "Why did you have another child"[/I.
Everyone is entitled to meet someone else and be happy.Yes his child must be provided for we are not the baddies here nor am i bitter nor twisted .
The point seems to have gone over many of your heads.

I could quiet easily say to you why did you have your child in the first place if you knew you were going to split up , it was irresponsible ? You cant judge me your the single parent not i .

I have the interest of children ALL children not just the Qualifying one.

ANNIEHAHA · 18 August 2007 at 11:56AM

just been reading this thread I met and married my hubby 1 child from previous,we now have 2 and were entitled to have them.We have sat back paying £250 a month whilst watching her go to spain 3 years running with bf and 3 kids while we could not afford one.Also she lived with bf claiming and working and him working built up a nice nest egg,had a new car and bf house done up all whilst on the fiddle

ANNIEHAHA · 18 August 2007 at 12:04PM

We sold our house to move 2 hours away as we could not afford mortgage and csa and its cheaper to pay the petrol as we now are on less money then her!!! my 2 kids get second hand clothing we do our best but how annoying when her and son have top clothes and she sends him up her with holes in shoes and clothes too small and her hair and nails done weekly.my consilation is we are happy while she is single bored and twisted trying to get at us all the time through their son NOT ALL EXS ARE NICE OR DESERVING and I appreciate the TRUE MUMS INTITLED TO CSA AND BENEFIT

kelloggs36 · 18 August 2007 at 12:08PM

missk_ensington wrote: »

ivagoldfish/kelloggs- are you stupid? The CSA money is to pay for a roof, gas, electric, food. How can the mother NOT use the money on this?!!!! Are you seriosly suggesting that any mother doesn't bath their kids or feed them, or put the central heating on, or use petrol to drive them to school, or buy clothes or school uniforms, or decorate their rooms?? Or is this all free and the CSA money is used on themselves?

The money is for the upkeep of the kids, the basic things kids need to survive, not for toys and treats! It is for the mother to pay her rent/mortgage and bills, not to be spent directly on the kids

No I am not stupid actually. What I am saying is that it is not possible for an NRP to demand that every penny they give over is spent on the children. Of course maintenance is for the things you mentioned, but in some cases the maintenance is more than is actually needed for such things and in other cases the maintenance is much less than is actually needed. As it is based on a fixed rate, not linked to the PWC household then as I said, you can't MAKE them spend the money on such things. And yes actually maintenance is to be used for the children directly too, such as clothes, outings, toys, treats etc if they can be afforded.

CSA and being self-employed

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free