Child maintenance adjustment for cost of access?

floyd2007

My (soon to be ex) wife and I split up in 2002. We have two children who are now 6 and 8 years old whose care we share (allbeit unequally). Two years ago she relocated with our children 50 miles from our original home and since then I have had them every other weekend for three nights and driven down to pick them up from school and spend four hours with them once a week - all pretty standard stuff. Since the split I have bought a house with my new partner who has two children of her own and we have recently had a baby.

I am currently paying maintenance which we have mutually agreed based on the online CSA calculator. I have a pretty good job, so this amounts to a substantial amount of money. However, my fixed costs (mortgage, travel expenses etc) are high - even without luxuries we struggle to afford things like an annual family holiday.

We have looked at every aspect of our outgoings and I have recently noticed in the CSA documentation that there can be an adjustment based on costs of access when one parent has moved the children away. I estimate that these costs amount to at least £160 per month - this mostly accounts for petrol with a small provision for keeping them entertained for the 4 hours when we are stuck away from home.

So my question is this - according to the CSA, what (if any) adjustment would be made to account for this?

I have to say that I am loathed to ask them directly as their reputation for dealing pragmatically with people who fundamentally just want to be treated fairly seems very poor. I should also add that evidence (new car, four international holidays a year etc etc) suggests that my ex-wife has slack in her finances, otherwise I would not be pursuing this.

I'd greatly appreciate any advice.

3onitsway

Might be better off posting on the CSA section for more answers, but..........

In the CSA calculations, you can either claim for shared care or contact costs. Not both.

When you agreed the amount you pay - did you included the shared care reduction. 3 nights every other weekend would be 78 per year so that would be 1/7th off the basic maintenance amount.

Do they stay any more in the school holidays? If its over 104 nights over the year it would be 2/7th's off.

It normally works out better for the NRP to have the shared care - as the way they work out the contact costs usually make a miniscule amount.

Paparika

https://secureonline.dwp.gov.uk/csa/v2/en/calculate-maintenance.asp

try this, hopefully this can help

marksoton

As already advised you can only get one reduction or the other. The shared care element is the way to go generally as the travel costs etc are pitiful.

You are right to be wary of the CSA, there have been cases of people asking just for information and ending up on their books with demands for payment !

You would get reduction for the nights you have the 2 children who visit and also for the three children who reside in your household.

The only thing the CSA would not care about under CSA2 is your ex's finances or lifestyle. They will just make the assessment on 20 % of your net income after the above allowances .

Savvy_Sue

MOVING THREADS FOR BETTER RESPONSES

Hi, Martin’s asked me to post this in these circumstances: I’ve asked Board Guides to move threads if they’ll receive a better response elsewhere (please see this rule) so this post/thread has been moved to the Child Support board, where it should get more replies. If you have any questions about this policy please email [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL].

floyd2007

Thanks for the responses. AFAICS the CSA does not publish information about the consideration of costs of access (?) - with holidays I do have the kids for more than 104 nights, so there is a worthwhile discount going that route.

What on earth is the rationale for allowing one OR the other and not one AND the other. In the extreme case where travelling back to the secondary carers property even at the weekend is impractical are they not incurring even more expense putting themselves up and feeding the children in hotels or B&Bs???

Also, allowing cost of access to be more effectively subtracted from child maintenance would be a very useful instrument to discourage the primary carer from making it difficult for the secondary carer by moving the children a long way away.

kelloggs36

They include collecting and dropping off children as part and parcel of the costs of the time that you are responsible for them and give you a discount for this in the formula.

I do agree partially to your second point, however that may mean that the secondary parent gets to spend a whole weekend or more with their children rather than just the visiting times which is less quality time so it could be good for the children.

floyd2007

kelloggs36 wrote: »

They include collecting and dropping off children as part and parcel of the costs of the time that you are responsible for them and give you a discount for this in the formula.

IMO the CSA is oversimplifying here. Believe me, when you can't be at home, it costs money to keep kids entertained and give them a main meal. Compounded with the costs of getting there in the first place, secondary parents are very disadvantaged and consequently the CSA are penalising/disincentivising this type of contact.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I do agree partially to your second point, however that may mean that the secondary parent gets to spend a whole weekend or more with their children rather than just the visiting times which is less quality time so it could be good for the children.

I agree that the dynamics are complicated here, and everyone has unique circumstances. However, even the most well intentioned parent (and possibly in particular the most well intentioned parent) cannot allow themselves to run up ever increasing debts. In a financial sense, I guess in some ways this is self limiting - if it gets too expensive/time consuming to travel to see the children it becomes impossible/impractical. How does this help the kids though?

Better that the parents choose to remain in each others locality, and as I have said, the CSA could encourage this type of behaviour.

kelloggs36

Let's face it - the CSA does not take personal cases into account - it has to be blanket for it to work at all - making it more complicated is only a path to failure - as was seen when it was first set up - it tried to take account of too many things. It isn't fair, but then the whole welfare and tax system isn't fair!

floyd2007

Whoa!! There's a topic to get your teeth into...

Just reviewing this thread (which has been very helpful thanks), it would seem that the most pragmatic thing to do (which does not add complexity, merely changes the logic) is to allow reductions in maintenance for the extent to which childcare is shared AND (not OR) the costs involved in gaining the agreed level of access.

Anyhow, I think I am done now. Cheers all.