CSA - Ex Making A Claim Against Me Now

Deepest_Blue_2

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Chall that is not the best advice because in some cases it is NOT enough just to state on a bank statement that the money is child maintenance. The PWC still has to agree that that was the case and if she doesn't then they won't allow it. they will ask questons, but many a PWC has claimed that the NRP owed them money and that is what the payments were for. The PWC has no bearing on what the NRP puts on a standing order and so it is not enough for the NRP just to claim that the money paid is for child maintenance. To safeguard oneself you need receipts from the PWC agreeing that the money paid was for maintenance and for the period covered - this is more protection for the NRP.
.

This really really does concern me because I was told that setting up a standing order was one of the best ways of proving that I have been paying. What this now does is wanting to stop my payments from immediate affect incase I get into deeper problems, I am really really confused and worried. There is absolutely no way I can justify paying double when I have bank statements to prove I have given her money for the last 4 years, that's just criminal. It's not my problem what she does with the money, as far as I am concerned SHE has had the money given to her and allocated for the children as child support so what SHE does with it is up to her, it's like saying you were not paid by your employer because you decided to spend it all at once on the wrong things? I just don't understand how she can get away with saying it wasn't for child care when it clearly says on my bank statement that it was sent to her for that reason and proof of her bank account number so that the CSA could see it was going in there, she had the money.

kelloggs36

All your bank statements say is that she has had the money - that cannot be in dispute. What is was for is a key factor and is in the PWC's hands. If a PWC has had child support and been on income support but not declared it, then there is a huge risk that she will deny that money was for child support and say it was for something else - it is your word against hers, and hers is nearly always the deciding factor. You may appeal but that takes months!

Take this one step at a time - establish whether there is a CSA case against you first, then sort out what you need to do. There is no point in speculating what may or may not be the case - deal with facts rather than worries.

Deepest_Blue_2

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Take this one step at a time - establish whether there is a CSA case against you first, then sort out what you need to do. There is no point in speculating what may or may not be the case - deal with facts rather than worries.

Thank you very much and I shall do just that.

Have to think logically.

So really, if what you're saying is correct, then I should in theory stop payments as soon as the CSA actually get hold of me properly? That would be the only fact I'd know to date, that they have got hold of me so therefore I can work on the notion that anything from this time is "recorded".

I'd feel more comfortable in doing that because then that's when I guess any backdated payments "would" start. I am not saying that's what I will do, but it seems logic to me after reading a lot of other similar threads.

First point of call now is to go through every single email i've ever received from her to ascertain any information regarding what she's actually doing with the money, I know that somewhere along the line she has talked about what she's done with it, eg, advised some kind of benefit agency, so I will get back to you with what I find and then you can give me an opinion on it. After I have done that, I shall more than likely contact them and ask the questions you advised me to ask, brief and to the point without over elaborating on anything.

Deepest_Blue_2

Well, I've just spent the last few hours painfully trawling through every single email i've ever got from me ex with regards to this situation in the hope of finding evidence that would help me at least prove that she has been using money for maintenance as intended.


I have placed in quotes what she has said to me in the various emails I've received from her over the last few months.

"Good morning, ok i just got in contact with the CSA, firsty they are going to take into consideration whether you still intend to pay the £nnn a month that you do at the moment. This is because they will get back pay off you, for the end of starting this month, also along with whatever else your be paying"

This tells me that she has told the CSA that she had been getting money off me for maintenance. And as a hunch, I would say maybe the reason why it’s taking them so long to get hold of me, because she has been getting money off me. So as far as I can see, she’s declared it.

"...really dont care whether you stop paying anything, as it will all get given back in a nice big lump some if you dont, so it is up to you"

I don’t know what she was advised by the CSA, but I haven’t stopped paying her since she made the claim back in June, so I would suspect that the CSA will certainly take what I have paid her as back payments.

“So anyway just let me know yes your still going to pay the money at the moment or not. Otherwise i will just have to guess your not, either way it will get paid back.”

This translates to me that if I stopped paying her the money out of spite (because she’s gone to the CSA), then she would have to declare that to the CSA & benefits that she was no longer getting it from me and that she would have to start to claim other monies. Otherwise why ask if she didn’t’ need to? That’s because she’s declared it.

"i actually dont lose, shall i tell you why, it is called housing benefit which because of the money i get from you at the moment, i just miss out on, You so think i'm doing it to better off, think again, i will be about the same"

Looks as though she couldn’t claim housing benefit because of the money I was paying her, again, more evidence that she’s declared it.

“the CSa saying nothing about what the money get's spent on, because it is meant to feed them clothes and house them, which again i dont get housing benefit for so yes some would be but not all go onto the rent. Please dont pay a penny, i will get housing benefit and it all paid back."

I found this statement very strange, it’s almost like she’s really wanting me to stop me giving her the money because she thinks she would be able to claim more and then get it all back anyway!??

“they kno all about our agreement again they are dealing with it now, you will just have to wait and see what happens.”

Her statement here is self explanatory and yet more evidence of her declaring it.

“Oh and one more thing i had a visit from the CSa, a man turned up to do a check of everything a review or something and ask so many question's. Now i said i was happy with the money arrangement's you can even ask the kids that. As they were here. But they have to check out your paying what the goverment believes you should pay. as child tax that i get paid comes out people's tax. So anyway they are going to look into your earning from the tax man or something like that etc. They are having to do this because of new goverment things coming into place as the csa have been so crap in the past. One thing they maybe putting in your favour is not charging fathers so much who have there kids over night on a regular basis. I state i had nothing to do with this i am happy with these arrangement. And it is not as if i will get anymore money just less child tax credit if it get's worked out that you should pay more or even less, you never know you maybe paying too much.”

I have no idea what she was trying to say here, but again, more evidence that she was a) initially happy with our arrangement, and b) that I have the children on a regular basis, c) she's claiming purely out of greed

“I had a phone call from the CSA, they said that if i was happy with the
arrangement with you then it would be ok. I have sorted that amount out with all the benefit's..”

More evidence that she has declared what I have been giving her and advised the benefits of this money she was getting from me.

“Now with the maintenance i need to get you to understand something. They TAKE THE MAINTENANCE OUT OF MY BENEFITS. So this mean's that anything you won't pay me i will then have to make up the rent. Your child support money will not be making any difference, once the tax credits get sorted out. Because your money will be deducted from the beneifits. Everyone said it was a bad idea for me to agree maintenance payment's with you.”

And now she’s becoming frightened that I would stop the money even though she wanted me to earlier?? Makes no sense, as again, even stronger evidence of her actually relying on my money now rather than actually getting it as an extra.

“I have your maintenance money taken out of the housing benefit and Child tax credit. I cant fill out new forms everytime I think that your money could change.”

More evidence that she’s declared it, this goes back a few years now.


“So this is then shown as proof to housing benefit, and child tax credit's they are also on my case to prove everything. So advice is not to give the maintenance at the end of this month, but if i was you keep it saved because they will back date it from the date of my claim. And it can take a few weeks, for The CSA to look into everything. They will get in touch with you.”

Seems like she’s never hidden that fact then.

Hopefully I should have nothing to fear if the CSA get old of me, I am just wondering now if the CSA are overly bothered about this claim because I’ve continued to pay her an amount that she’s been “happy” with, maybe the CSA are not falling over their feet to try and help her unless I fell into the trap of cutting it altogether as this then would force her to claim the benefits she was talking about which in turn would start that domino effect and through the process of trying to get monies back off me because she’s started to claim more.

My next move now is to contact them myself and see if they have created a case.

Thanks for reading.

LilacPixie

I know it may be irrelevent but since 2003 maintanence has not been considered income for child tax credit purposes. Might be an incling that she is not being truthful with you tho.

Deepest_Blue_2

LilacPixie wrote: »

Might be an incling that she is not being truthful with you tho.

Hi,

I thought that, however, each single quote I have made here comes from different emails spanning over 4 years so she has been consistent in all she's said in regard to what she's been able to claim and what she has been getting. Her initial quote that I started the thread with being the most recently made (back in June 2008), and probably the most striking evidence that she has told the CSA that she has been getting money from me because she says:

"they are going to take into consideration whether you still intend to pay the £nnn a month that you do at the moment".

This was the last thing she said to me and we've not spoken since, so therefore I have to go with the fact that she's notified everybody of the money I have been paying her already for the last few years.

I now really believe and feel absoultely content that I've been doing the right thing and paying her that money instead of falling into the trap of threatening to cut it off because of her being spiteful to me, I think this has probably inadvertantly worked against her.

So hopefully, my bank statements and her admission/declaration to all the benefit agencies/CSA that I have been paying her child support should cover me.

LizzieS_2

It does sound like your ex is claiming some other form of benefit, housing benefit looks a definate, and Income Support a possibility.

The fact that she told you in advance that she was off to the csa suggests the motive had more to do with her other benefit claims (or possibly just confusion over what she had to declare) rather than a conflict with you.

Tax credits do not include child maintenance as income, however as the arrangement is private she could have been told that she had to declare income in excess of what the csa would have collected - would explain why csa had to check the figures.

Wanting to know if payments will be regular, suggests a worry over another benefit - Income Support is the obvious one there.

Housing Benefits is based on household income, however from October 2008 child maintenance is not counted as income. For pre October it could be that the council were being funny over the amount (as in TC above).

The easiest way to resolve all this, is to pick up the phone and ask her to explain why she is worried and why the arrangement is unsuitable.

chall1964

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Chall that is not the best advice because in some cases it is NOT enough just to state on a bank statement that the money is child maintenance. The PWC still has to agree that that was the case and if she doesn't then they won't allow it. they will ask questons, but many a PWC has claimed that the NRP owed them money and that is what the payments were for. The PWC has no bearing on what the NRP puts on a standing order and so it is not enough for the NRP just to claim that the money paid is for child maintenance. To safeguard oneself you need receipts from the PWC agreeing that the money paid was for maintenance and for the period covered - this is more protection for the NRP.

Lets not get confused here Kelloggs, the majority of cases you refer to are payments by way of cheque of cash!

In the case of a SO where it is marked 'child maintenance', the PWC has accepted funds for that purpose.
A PWC may not be able to control what a SO states, but can authorise her bank not to accept the payments from such, if in disagreement.
Its doubtful many NRP's would make regular payments to a PWC stipulating CM for any other reason. x

tamsin1982

i think she may have gone to csa to keep her money situation safer.
if you pay csa and she is on income support then theyd pay her what she was allowed to keep and the rest held back, But if you pay her direct an the money is taken off her benefits she'd be screwed if you missed a payment.

its all changed now but this is how it wouldve been at the time of her original claim

kelloggs36

chall1964 wrote: »

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Chall that is not the best advice because in some cases it is NOT enough just to state on a bank statement that the money is child maintenance. The PWC still has to agree that that was the case and if she doesn't then they won't allow it. they will ask questons, but many a PWC has claimed that the NRP owed them money and that is what the payments were for. The PWC has no bearing on what the NRP puts on a standing order and so it is not enough for the NRP just to claim that the money paid is for child maintenance. To safeguard oneself you need receipts from the PWC agreeing that the money paid was for maintenance and for the period covered - this is more protection for the NRP.

Lets not get confused here Kelloggs, the majority of cases you refer to are payments by way of cheque of cash!

In the case of a SO where it is marked 'child maintenance', the PWC has accepted funds for that purpose.
A PWC may not be able to control what a SO states, but can authorise her bank not to accept the payments from such, if in disagreement.
Its doubtful many NRP's would make regular payments to a PWC stipulating CM for any other reason. x

No that is not true because the PWC has no say in how the NRP sets up their standing order do they? Anybody could put that as a reference whether it be true or not. What I am saying is that if a PWC denies that the money was for maintenance, then there could be a dispute which needs an appeal to sort out - which could take months, meanwhile the PWC's word is accepted as fact and the NRP is being chased for 'arrears'. I do not want the NRP in this case to get stung in this way - he has to cover all bases.