Child Maintenance (CSA) questions (merged)

Zara33

scottydee wrote:

I produced wage slips last year (april) but they lost them, and amongst other delays, have now just asked my wages dept for year to date figures!

Their service is horrendous. It's having quite an affect on my relationship too.

scottydee what other options are available to you?

I mean can you and the PWC make a private arrangement via the court? is the PWC on benefits?

Zara33

thesaint you sound like a loving, caring father!

Well done!

kelloggs36

You can ask for a review at any time, so if your assessment is not a reflection of your true income now you can have yet another assessment. They will take overtime into account if it is a regular event, but if you do overtime rarely, then they should not be taking it into account. Are you under the old rules or the new ones? If you are self-employed then the amount assessed is based on a previous year's accounts, but other than that they should be based on your current income details and are updated from the time they either do a review or you ask for one. So, if you asked for a review today, they would ask for the last 2 months' wage details to work out your average earnings and base your assessment on that. If you asked for a review in December, then they would ask for the 2 months prior to that.

If you want any more help, just PM me and I shall see what I can do. Have your housing costs changed (provided you are on the old system)? Have any other circumstances changed?

kelloggs36

loftus wrote:

Sorry Kelloggs - I know you know far more about the CSA than I do but I thought the reductions in CM for new children were 15%, 20% and 25% for 1,2,3 or more new or step-children. How does this equate to them getting more than existing children leaving as it does 85%-75% of CM being paid?

Anyway its an imperfect system and whatever replaces it will also be imperfect.

Yes, an example, an NRP who is single will pay for the EXISTING child 15%, 20% or 25% of net income. However, NRP meets gf who has 3 children already who are NOT his. He gets a REDUCTION in maintenance which equates to more than he has to pay. So for example his net income is 300 pounds per week. With out gf he pays 20% for 2 children = 60 pounds per week for the children who are his. However, meets gf who has 3 children and his liability towards his own children reduces to 45 pounds per week as his income is first reduced by 25% which is an allowance for the children who aren't his responsiblity, thus his own children lose out by 15 pounds per week.

loftus

And therein lies part of the ridculousness of the system.
The NRP is recognised by the CSA as having some financial responsibility for his/her new partners children with a reduction in the CM they pay their own children but if the PWC begins to cohabit or remarry there is no recognition of the contribution of the new partner to the household and therefore no effect on the CM payable.
I am not saying that the NRP should pay less if there is a new partner just pointing out the anomoly.

scottydee

I'm on the new system for one child, and the other is phasing in from the old.

My main gripes (amongst many!) are that I provided them with the relevent info last april, they've since lost it, and as I said I can't even do overtime to cover my payments. I'd need to do overtime every week, just to take up the short fall which the maintenance takes. Catch 22!!!

kelloggs36

In this case the anomoly is entirely to the benefit of the NRP who may also be getting extra maintenance in from his partner's ex to pay for the children for whom he has an allowance for - this is totally to the detriment of the existing children who never asked their parents to split up! There should be no allowances either way - a flat rate regardless. In my experience it is all skewed towards the benefit of the NRP but many others would say otherwise! It depends on your experience! My ex has refused to pay even though he has a liability to of nearly 77 pounds per week. If the CSA had done what they were supposed to do, and Senior management (including Baroness Hollis and the Chief Executive) stopped worrying about the effect enforcement would have on the non-payer, instead of doing what they were set up to do, and ensure that payments were made for the children then the CSA wouldn't be in the mess it is in now. Too much time and energy was spent trying to avoid bad publicity to the detriment of thousands of children which only benefitted those who chose not to pay as nothing happened to make them face up to their responsibilities. They should have used some of these dead beat PARENTS (not just dads) as an example of what would happen if they ignored them. Instead, word got out that the CSA were a soft touch (as they were) so they became totally ineffective. Too late for many children who have been left languishing in poverty whilst those who refuse to pay get off scott free.

kelloggs36

This doesn't make sense. Either you did the overtime and so your assessment would reflect this after you did it, but then you ask for a further assessment as you ceased doing the overtime so it would reduce your payments.

It is very, very frustrating when they lose info that you send to them. Have you made a formal complaint about this specific issue (you are clearly no stranger to complaining) and have you asked for consideration of a compensatory payment for the inconvenience this has caused you, let alone the financial difficulties. Was the ICE report any use in terms of getting compensation?

scottydee

It is quite a tricky situation. When I was last assessed I was on a slightly lower wage. I then sent them slips showing what my wage was, as and when they asked. Since then, I've had a bonus, and I've worked overtime. They are now working on my year to date figure which they have gone straight to my works for.

I'm having to get in extra money, as my partner is getting nowhere in getting money via the CSA - so we're getting hit from both directions - Me being stung cos I'm trying to make up shortfalls, and my partner because they are failing to get anywhere with her case.

My current wage is likely to be even lower, because I'm trying to make some pension contributions. I'm sick and tired of the whole thing.

As for the tax credit, it's absolutely discusting that they can take this into account as MY income, when it's mainly for my partners kids.

kelloggs36

Yes I agree that you are in a tough situation - especially as they made assumptions when they passed the law that ALL NRPs would be happy to comply with them! If this had been the case, then the situation would be a lot easier to bear!

I take it that you are the higher wage earner in your household? If not, then they should NOT be taking the Tax Credits into account although I do agree that it is wrong to include them when they are not for your children!

As your current wage is lower, your assessment should reduce - ensure that they have taken 100% of your pension contributions into account when calculating your net income.

Have they made the reduction for the children you have in your household?

What exactly is the situation with your partner's ex? You say that they are getting nowhere - what HAS happened? Is he untraceable? Is he self-employed? Have they failed to take enforcement action? My ex is a nightmare but I have been on their case and although he hasn't paid, he has a warrant out for his arrest and the process is going through to sell his house from under his nose as they have 4 charging orders on it.

Do you have your children to stay over at all? If it averages at least 1 night per week, please make sure that they give you the relevant reductions.

I know it's like preaching to you and you are probably doing all this, but it is so common that errors are made and if the public are ignorant of any little thing, then it could make a big difference.