Is CSA1 an exact science? (if so where can I get a copy of the formula) -merged-

Monkeyharris_2

You can find a copy of the CSA1 formula here. Beware, it is complex and unweildly in the extreme!! <a href="http://www.csa.gov.uk/en/PDF/leaflets/old/CSA2008.pdfWith" target="_blank">http://www.csa.gov.uk/en/PDF/leaflets/old/CSA2008.pdf With regards to your question as to whether your new partner's income is taken into account, I hope this explains it a little:Basically the CSA do three different calculations under CSA1 and they always use the lowest figure they come up with. The first one they do is just based on YOUR income and (very basic) outgoings. The second one is just 30% of your net income as they're not allowed to take more than that under normal circumstances where details have been provided. The final one they do is a calculation based on whether your household as a whole can afford it. Lets say for example you take home £300 per week and after looking at your basic outgoings the maintenance payment should be £60 per week. Obviously 30% would be £90 per week so that'd be straight out. The final calculation works out that your household as a whole can only afford £30 per week.Therefore you'd pay £30 per week as it's the lowest.Most uproar is caused when a formerly single non-resident parent gets a new partner and is re-assessed. Chances are that the new partner brings with them more income and so will push the maintenance payment up to the level of one of the first two calculations. The thing to remember here is that the new partner is not obliged to provide their income details etc and all that will mean is that the CSA can't do the last calculation therefore just stick with the first two.Hope that's a little clearer?

kelloggs36

Unfortunately Monkey, that isn't the intention of the OP. He is arguing against CSA regulations regarding why they have refused to backdate his assessment and why they haven't allowed his housing costs as a non dependant.

Monkeyharris_2

Apologies, I'm new to this and hadn't read the previous pages before posting. Seems his original question is now defunct then hehe.

mothballed

Monkeyharris, You did in fact answer the question and I thank you for it.

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

He is arguing against CSA regulations regarding why they have refused to backdate his assessment and why they haven't allowed his housing costs as a non dependant.

That is incorrect. But interesting you, a real life child support officer will go as far as passing an unlawful assessment to be lawful just because the circumstanes go against your moral standards.

There IS no child support legislation that enables a CS officer to class me a non dependent - and deprive me of housing costs even while evidence to the contrary exists.

The CSA create excuses saying I must to appeal within 30 days of their decision - while the CSA is trying to exclude itself from ANY time limits when an NRP gets it wrong.

Not very fair is it?

kelloggs36

the limits for appeal are written in legislation fair or not but then much of life isn't fair!!!

You are arguing exactly against their decision not to backdate your assessment - to say that you are not is blatantly untrue! You are also arguing against the decision not to award your housing costs - to say otherwise is untrue. Many are trying to help you, but if you just want to slap us all down, then we won't bother in future.

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

but if you just want to slap us all down, then we won't bother in future.

I am sorry if you see it that way. Its not intended.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

the limits for appeal are written in legislation fair or not but then much of life isn't fair!!!

This is legislation created by none other than the CSA itself. I dont see why the CSA is trying to restrict an NRP's right to an appeal when there is an Act of Parliament that removes any time limit to make an appeal.

The CSA is vexatious because it forces an NRP to pay money for lawyers to have his case moved up to the next stage of the appeal process - a tribunal. The CSA is only creating this legislation to make an unlawful assessment lawful.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

You are arguing exactly against their decision not to backdate your assessment - to say that you are not is blatantly untrue!

The CSA can enforcing and backdating assessments when it suits them. Now the CSA is trying to change its laws retrospectively. But the CSA makes excuses for not making a backdated correction when the NRP stands to benefit. Instead it creates new regulations - time limits - even to the extent of contradicting an Act of Parliament that already legislates otherwise.

In my case, I learn there is no such legislation that enabled the CSA to class me a non dependant. It is just an opinion of a CSA officer.

If the CSA put thing right 18 months ago, I would not be on JSA today and hiring lawyers. The CSA did not act in the interests of my children, me, or the taxpayer. It acted solely for its own interests - obtaining money using an unlawful assessment.

kelloggs36, I am not having a go at you personally (or anyone else on this board), its just I really feel cheated of my job, my children, and the right to a normal family life at the hands of the CSA. All they achieved is putting us all on benefits. A stark contrast considering I have never claimed any benefits until the CSA came along. We had a prosperous family life, own luxury house and my own farm business.

mothballed

Hi Jacklink, I havnt always been driving busses, its was only a stopgap. Driving them is the easy bit, dont need a brain, its the drunks, dealers and allsorts that hide upstairs. Switch on the upstairs rear cam haha.

kelloggs36

A tribunal is free.

As far as backdating is concerned, it is clearly laid out when it can and cannot be done if you bother to seek out all the relevant information and facts rather than just arguing against the points just because you don't agree with them.

As with much DWP law, the basis on which some decisions are made are on the balance of probability. You always have the right of appeal but if you don't appeal in the timescales, why is it the CSA's fault that you didn't? Ignorance is no defence in law so you can't claim that you didn't know - that is irrelevant as you could have made enquiries at the time and ensured that you did appeal.

The CSA do not make or pass legislation - ministers and law lords do that I believe but certainly not CSA staff!!!

I would be interested in the Act of Parliament which states that there are no time limits on appeals as the time limits and conditions for which are clearly laid down.

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I would be interested in the Act of Parliament which states that there are no time limits on appeals as the time limits and conditions for which are clearly laid down.

Its Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

I know the CSA doesnt like it, but its still an Act of Parliament nevertheless and no CSA secondary legislation can rebuke any Act of Parliamant unless it has been repealed by that legislation.

This means time limits only applies to appeals for which the outcome is decided within the CSA itself. There are no time limits for an NRP to move a case up to tribunal.