Child Maintenance (CSA) questions (merged)

jezbo

sammyy wrote:

As I understand it the OP's CSA payments have gone up since he stopped having the children to stay so much.


[QUOTE=jezbo]I think it WAS (for the old payment of 112) because I had them for more than 104 nights a year, but now it's only 70ish so I lose that reduction. It's only the NEW scheme I think where you get a reduction for more than 52 too, but in the old scheme I don't think you do.

So I think its perfectly reasonable to expecting to be paying more now they are spending MOST of the time with the mother.They haven't gone up for no reason.[/QUOTE]

Just to clarify : I still have them around 70-80 nights a year, it's just not possible or practical to have them for much more than every 2nd weekend. And the main difference between my last assessment and this one is that I have a new baby now, but it seems my allowance for him is only £10 a week, which clearly is wrong.

Savvy_Sue

jezbo wrote:

Nursery is only two mornings a week, not full time, it's good for him to mix with other children no? But no, it doesn't come into the equation. My wife being Czech and wanting to see her family occasionally doesn't either - but I think it should - they are BOTH additional dependents, and travel to see her family is an essential expense - I'd have a divorce on my hands, and another single parent - if that basic right was denied.

There are cheaper ways of mixing with other children than at nursery. The problem with your special circumstances being taken into account is that every absent parent could argue something similar.

ginger_nuts

if you dont want to pay the £750 every month then take your children more often .
Are you telling me that a 9 & 11 year old cant help / play with a 1 year old .
If you have more access you pay less money .
Look on it as money saving if you like .

Spendless

jezbo wrote:

Well, I'm going to try this anyway. I did get through to the CSA and they said since we settle the payments privately then paying into separate accounts for my ex, and the children, would not matter to them. So I'll pay my ex the basic maintenance of £128 per WEEK, and pay the rest into accounts for the kids directly. IF she complains to the CSA they make take no action since they should see I have the kid's (rather than their mum's) interests at heart, which SHOULD be their main concern.

I would be very careful about doing this and get what the CSA say in writing. My friends hubby paid into his 2 kids accounts instead of his ex wifes (for the usual reasons-he said she wouldn't spent it on the kids), cos of a similar conversation with CSA.Later on the CSA refused to accept these payments as maintainance and said he was now in arrears.

pandas66

jezbo wrote:

Don't give me ideas ! I don't want my girls to miss out and I'm quite willing to pay what's reasonable, I just don't think this is ! My new wife and baby have to skimp on the things that I'm paying for my other kids to do, and babies cost much more!

Utter rubbish, I've seent he babies through to teens and kids are expensive whatever their age but don't tell me your new wife and baby are skimping. I told you before my ex was on £35,00 and after he paid his maintenance he had a good lifestyle, you admit to earning, good for you and all your children but don't expect me to believe your skimping on anything. My gross now is £12500 and I have 2 holidays a year.

jezbo

Believe what you like. You can't make me believe this is fair either. Good luck to you if you can afford 2 holidays a year.

jezbo

If I'm ever asked to pay arrears, I can prove that I've paid many more thousands into my ex's account than was required by the CSA since this all started, because I had my kid's best interests at heart, I'd say it's comfortably into 5 figures. No one can accuse me of trying to skimp on them. I just want a fair balance now I have my other child (and wife) to consider, that's all.

Spendless

jezbo wrote:

If I'm ever asked to pay arrears, I can prove that I've paid many more thousands into my ex's account than was required by the CSA since this all started, because I had my kid's best interests at heart, I'd say it's comfortably into 5 figures. No one can accuse me of trying to skimp on them. I just want a fair balance now I have my other child (and wife) to consider, that's all.

The thing is if they say from Dec 1st 2005 you have to pay x and you don't it might make no difference whether previously the ex has had a million pounds off you. If you're going to do it this way-go ahead but make sure you have it in writing to cover your own back.

jezbo

Could any PWC here please tell why as much as £173 a week coud possibly be needed to bring up 2 children ? I just can't see it, but it may help to understand if someone can explain why. Food maybe £50pw, clothes £15 (on average), travel costs to school £10, a half share of putting a roof over their head maybe £30. After that I'm struggling. And why should I pay all food/clothes/travel costs when the PWC is expected to contribute none?

nearlyrich

jezbo wrote:

What ??

I pay directly to my ex. Why should the government get their hands on most of it ?

Why should the taxpayer support your dependants it's your responsilbility?