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

mothballed

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Whilst it is no illegal to tape a conversation that you are involved in, it is illegal to play it to a 3rd party without the other person's consent. Which you have done.

Its good you are trying to be an internet lawyer but it helps if you have your facts right. The tape was played to an officer of the court - a solicitor.

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Being called the wrong name a couple of times (when the officer did call you your correct name) is verging on a little petty.

My point exactly, the CSA can screw up but the NRP cannot.

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Kelloggs has been on this site alot longer than you and is certainly liked a hell of a lot more than you and people respect her.

I am not here to collect brownie points and climb the popularity stakes on this forum. That is for losers who have nothing more constructive in their lives.

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

You have no admitted you have not paid rent for a year (apparantly) and your Uncle landlord has taken no steps to recover these arrears.

I sometime wonder if you are really on this planet. Read my post and you will see I am about to bankrupt.

kelloggs36

The CSA can screw up and when either an NRP or a PWC appeal following the correct process, it can be sorted out. There is also ICE and the Parliamentary Ombudsman to name a few bodies that ensure that corrections are made on cases.

I find it difficult to believe that you are blaming the CSA for you not paying your rent - if you were left with nothing I could see where you are coming from, but you still had some income left over even if you had paid your rent. As a single person, your foodbill could be very small and I suspect that your girlfriend will have fed you over the time you have been together, thus lowering your bills still further. If you were so desperate, why did you not ask for a reassessment and then appeal?

kelloggs36

Ah, but you did say that you had asked for a reassessment but when asked for the figures, it still included overtime, hence you couldn't get a reduction.

kelloggs36

mothballed wrote: »

This aspect has already been addressed satisfactorly by you and worked the airthmetic surrounding the case. Not really as the figures don't add up - I'm trying to help, but you are hindering me by not providing what is required to give sound advice. Rather you would choose to argue and avoid certain questions put to you - that doesn't help but rather fuels the ideas that you are not quite telling the whole story.

I think you are construing my non payment of rent to be grounds of the CSA not taking it into account. Its the other way round, i have rent arrears because the CSA didnt take it into account.

...........................................................

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

You also said that your assessment was based on one Summer's worth of 75 per week work then went on to say that you have done this for a lot longer and that was the reason you claimed JSA! Your figures don't add up as you have also been told that you have to be left with your protected income, but claim that you are not being left with that - can you clarify that your protected income level is only £60.50 per week? This would be equal to the exempt income for CS1 where a DEO is concerned.

The assessment was 30% of income including overtime. The CSA were not forthcoming in correcting it and i sought legal advice. The assessment was a runaway train which I had no control. We had no choice but derail it with JSA and bring it to a controlled stop. I can now look at clearing up the mess which we are making excellent progress. That advice would never have come this forum because consensus is payup regardless. Legal advice did prove to be the correct advice because I now learn my children were seeing almost nothing of the money I was paying to the CSA and the CSA cannot charge me anything while I am on prescribed benefits.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

As you have failed to adhere to the appeal procedures

I might not be savvy in money matters , but I am meticulous in record keeping and there is no document remotely resembling the appeal form you sent me yesterday. How can I adhere to a procedure that has been deliberetely concealed by the CSA?

kelloggs36 wrote: »

you have had the opportunity but failed to act - that is nobody's fault but your own. As I said earlier, and the appeals form also confirms this - not knowing is not an acceptable reason - you could have found out if you had asked. You did nothing. I wish you luck on your judicial review - have you asked Stephen Lawson about the possibility and whether it is a viable case for such a review?

Not SL but another lawfirm recommended by my business insurer. Their position is I must exhaust all CSA internal procedures according to their secondary legislation but if that fails to give a positive outcome then I can proceed with resolving it using primary legislation. The primary legislation outcome is already known but lawyers cannot execute it until secondary legislation completes its course. Its irrelevant that it might costs thousands, its less than what the CSA have been screwing me over for. I would prefer a primary legislation route because it opens the door for damages whereas the CSA internal compenation plan is tokenary in nature.

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

The CSA can screw up and when either an NRP or a PWC appeal following the correct process, it can be sorted out. There is also ICE and the Parliamentary Ombudsman to name a few bodies that ensure that corrections are made on cases.

Its been an interesting read, formal advice is recommending the fastest route through the secondary legislation procedures and proceed to high court with primary legislation.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that you are blaming the CSA for you not paying your rent - if you were left with nothing I could see where you are coming from, but you still had some income left over even if you had paid your rent.

If I paid my rent I would have been left with a lot less then what I get now and that doesnt include council tax. The CSA assumes an NRP has no council tax liability.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

As a single person, your foodbill could be very small and I suspect that your girlfriend will have fed you over the time you have been together, thus lowering your bills still further.

I think this is precisely what the CSA has been doing. Making an assuption on my circumstances and treating it as fact when making an assessment.

kelloggs36 wrote: »

If you were so desperate, why did you not ask for a reassessment and then appeal?

I asked for a reassessment and I understood that was the final position. When I got desparate I called lawyers and they stopped the problem in a minutes with a JSA claim. That has been the best advice to date.

mothballed

kelloggs36 wrote: »

but you are hindering me by not providing what is required to give sound advice. Rather you would choose to argue and avoid certain questions put to you - that doesn't help but rather fuels the ideas that you are not quite telling the whole story.

The figures have already been quoted in this forum and its a case of users of this forum not wanting to believe what they see and find comfort in wishful thinking.

I dont think its a good idea to debate the arithmetic any further when a Jobcentre plus adviser (not on written record) and a specialist CAB adviser (who is on official record) have already deterimed and corroborated each other in their findings within a few pounds that while I was emloyed, the CSA forced me to live on an employed income that is well below the governments poverty threshold.

kelloggs36

I see, deliberately putting yourself onto JSA could lead to a deprivaton of income issue and a reinstatement of the CSA liability. Be careful - this route is legally open to them.

ANyway, you choose to ignore my offer of help and I'm not going to bother from now on. I wish you luck in your endeavours, but I feel you are being given false hope here.

kelloggs36

mothballed wrote: »

The assessment was 30% of income including overtime. The CSA were not forthcoming in correcting it and i sought legal advice. You could have appealed, but didn't. The assessment was a runaway train which I had no control. If you do overtime, then it has to be taken into account unless it is a one off. You have posted your figures somewhere (miles back) and even with your reduced income, it didn't looko much different BECAUSE YOU CONTINUED TO WORK OVERTIME. If you got 2 consecutive payslips which showed no overtime, then it would have been done, but it wasn't because you still did overtime. We had no choice but derail it with JSA and bring it to a controlled stop. Deprivation of income - deliberately went onto JSA to stop CSA. I can now look at clearing up the mess which we are making excellent progress. That advice would never have come this forum because consensus is payup regardless. Legal advice did prove to be the correct advice because I now learn my children were seeing almost nothing of the money I was paying to the CSA and the CSA cannot charge me anything while I am on prescribed benefits. Wrong, it is a flat rate of £7 per week from your £60.50 benefits, so you are being left with below the amount you are legally entitled to live on, but this is allowed in law under such circumstance.



I might not be savvy in money matters , but I am meticulous in record keeping and there is no document remotely resembling the appeal form you sent me yesterday. How can I adhere to a procedure that has been deliberetely concealed by the CSA? In which case you didn't appeal!!!!! It is now too late as you have been told. YOu can try and ask for a tribunal to look at it, but it is doubtful unless you have extreme circumstances.



Not SL but another lawfirm recommended by my business insurer. SL is an expert in CSA matters, I feel that your lawyers aren't - there are VERY few who are and SL is the only one I know of. You could have gone to NACSA who are an EXCELLENT organisation who could help you for no more than £40. Feel free to throw your girlfriend's money away!! Their position is I must exhaust all CSA internal procedures according to their secondary legislation but if that fails to give a positive outcome then I can proceed with resolving it using primary legislation. How? If the tribunal refuses to look at your case, you are looking at a JR - so the primary legislation outcome is NOT already known. The primary legislation outcome is already known but lawyers cannot execute it until secondary legislation completes its course. Its irrelevant that it might costs thousands, its less than what the CSA have been screwing me over for I doubt that - seriously. I would prefer a primary legislation route because it opens the door for damages whereas the CSA internal compenation plan is tokenary in nature.

And if you lose? What do you stand to gain then? You will have 2 huge bills to pay. Why not go to NACSA before getting huge bills sent to you - honestly it will be your best bet in the first instance.

mothballed

I don't understand why you think I will get two huge bills.

I am publicly funded so it won't cost me a bean. If I manage to get funding for a Judicial Review then that will cost nothing. Even if I lose and ordered to pay costs then I can add them to Form 6.28 and it still costs nothing. If I win, I stand to receive a big refund from the CSA, plus if it reaches Judicial Review then the door is opened for claiming damages.

The CSA has already been caught lying when one of its officers made this it's the law comment when dictating I am a non dependant. There is no such law. A second officer covered for her colleague by saying the comment was never made in the first place contradicting the official position I am a non dependant. It was all caught on a telephone answering machine. I now understand that making false statements to obtain a money transfer is a criminal offence under S2 of the Fraud Act 2006, and officer #2 commits an offence under S4 & 5 of the Criminal Law Act 1967 by covering for officer #1. I learn that civil servants do not have immunity from criminal liability and I can ask for a criminal investigation at any time. I am a reasonable chap and won't make issues of this unless the CSA does, but I do think the CSA has been over-zealous.

Since I hold all the aces so I cannot see how I can end up with two huge bills.

One step forward, two steps backwards, I've downloaded the appeal forms and I am open for sensible comment.

On page 44:

Box 1: (decision I am appealing against)

That I am a non dependant

Box 2: (why is the appeal late)

The CSA did not provide an opportunity to make an appeal

Box 3: (why do I think the decision is wrong)

The relative for which the CSA says I am living with and classes me a non dependant lives in Switzerland and I attach a copy of the tenancy agreement.

2nd appeal form –

Box 1 (decision I am appealing against)

The assessment exceeds the maximum prescribed limit of 30% of net income and forced me to live on an income that is below the governments poverty threshold

Box 2 (why is the appeal late)

The CSA did not provide an opportunity to make an appeal

Box 3 (why do I think the decision is wrong)

The assessment is based on "last two payslips" which contained the maximum overtime worked and the CSA has assumes that overtime is worked 52 weeks a year. I attach payslips covering two years income including the specimen income period the CSA used to make the assessment.

I am only doing this for completeness and its why I am succinct in my answers. We already know both appeals will be rejected out of time because CSA secondary legislation only gives 30 days. We already know the tribunal will be rejected because CSA secondary legislation only gives 12 months. This provides a fasttrack to Judicial Review for a ruling on primary legislation opening the door for legal to start work on litigation for damages. As the primary legislation is already written, the outcome is already known.

Any comments before sending?