Child Maintenance (CSA) questions (merged)

THE_LONE_RANGER_4

ben500 wrote:

Don't tell me you never saw your father as a child and all you can remember is him beating you round the head with a clog twice a day once for breakfast and once for supper.

Is there a monty python sketch living in your head or something?

no sorry came from a non broken home saw my dad every day and mum and still do

ben500

THE_LONE_RANGER wrote:

no sorry came from a non broken home saw my dad every day and mum and still do

Ah I see just the monty python sketch resident in your head then, thanks for clearing that up for me.

THE_LONE_RANGER_4

calleyw wrote:

Of course the mothers are little angels that are allowed to stay in the family home and get benefits if they don't work and get extra help with tax credits and get CSA money and then moans that the father of their children never has them to stay let alone the fact that can hardly afford to rent any where. So can hardly afford to keep his heads above water but that is not important. (Note: mostly tongue in cheek)

Aren't you lucky lone ranger that you managed to stay married for X amount of years. Better be careful it is long way to fall from your pedestal. And must be so hard being so perfect.

Prehaps you ought to live in the real world. Like some us have to. Which means dealing with b!tchy ex-wives who seem to think that my income should be hers. And everything we do, even though we go without a lot to afford what we have gets looked at when it is none of her damn business.

You also seem to have some fantasy idea that it is all down to the men that the relationships/marriages have broken down. How about coping with your wife sleeping with other men behind your back. I am sure that you would stay when they also make life impossible for you by hurling abuse and threatening you by throwing saucepans at your head. And yes this was my husband and the verbal abuse and throwing saucepans came from his now ex wife.

My husband did not want to leave his children but their mother made it impossble for him to live in the same house. And he could not take the children as he had no where to take them. But we will gloss over the fact that she is always pleading poverty but has 4 children by 3 different fathers:rolleyes:

You also seem to neglect to take in the fact that two people made a child not just one so they are both finanically reposnsible for the child. So if the CSA say it costs £120 a week to keep a child that is £120 between the two of you. Not just £120 from the absent parent.

So please get your facts straight before you choose to tar all men with the same brush. As my husband pays and always had done. To the point of where it has nearly financially ruined us. But why should that matter he is only an absent parent who is a waste of space. And because of that he is not entitled to have a life ever.

Hey ho I smell trolls;)


Yours


Calley

HOLD on a minute, FIRSTLY i have not put any blame on any one i stated when you get divorced the court decide who to put the children with and in general they are better off with the mother the absent parent pays maintenence as decided by csa or the court not by the one bringing up the child,the one bringing up the child doesnt need to pay anything as they are in fact bringing that child up careing for them etc they pay the electric rent etc i think that would compensate for not paying the same as the absent father its common sence ,when he pays what is due every month that is it the gripes of the ex is of no concern etc as in there lack of cash etc,i would also say from what i see in my job single mums are helped back in to work also tax credits only apply if the person is working the absent parent may i add is paying what the powers that be decide is a correct amount,any absent parent must take this in to account when starting another family you should not over commit ,yes it is not all absent parents to blame for break ups of course not, but it is up to absent parents to pay what they are told to i if i were to divorce would not even consider another family until my first one has been paid for and i would assume that i would be hard up for cash for the time being , my brother divorced but paid what he was told and has also remained in daily contact with his children he found it hard for a while 4/5 years but trained and worked hard and upped his salary but he has not had any more kids and the woman he is with was made aware of this from the start,i dont consider myself on the high ground at all we all have tough breaks i was plunged in to 18k worth of debt due to losing 2 well paid jobs my life was made hell by the creditors but i got on with it worked every hour and got back on track,the csa from what i see have made huge bloody mistakes that is true but the courts were a soft touch too awarding far to low monthly payments examplw 150quid for 4 kids a month that is not enough that pushed many single mothers on to the bread line as absent parents carried on regardless we all have to pay the piper ,and the people who choose to take up with a divorced person takes on that baggage

missprice

For the original poster some actual facts that may help

(you can see from some of my much earlier posts that i know what i am talking about)

First yes her money will be taken into account if you give CSA the information. they ask and most people give the info, however they are not in fact entitled to that info. it is covered under the data protection act.

very sorry about that, but you can change it by insisting on a tribunal. there are precedents where the new partners money has to be discounted. a quick point though - it rarely makes a difference to the amount you end up paying.

a tribunal can be a long process, but you can defend yourself.

for help there are 3 sources online for free. i no longer visit because i have given up trying to get money from my ex (it has now been 11 years since i saw a penny and there is only so long you can fight)

anyways
nacsa think its .co.uk, but if that dont work try .com
a csa newsgroup, i can no longer find them, but i know its still out there
and https://www.barrypearson.co.uk he has a couple of sites but only one for the csa. so again try .com if that dont work.

assuming you find the sites could you please post links on here for others.

thanks
sx

calleyw

THE_LONE_RANGER wrote:

HOLD on a minute, FIRSTLY i have not put any blame on any one i stated when you get divorced the court decide who to put the children with and in general they are better off with the mother the absent parent pays maintenence as decided by csa or the court not by the one bringing up the child,the one bringing up the child doesnt need to pay anything as they are in fact bringing that child up careing for them etc they pay the electric rent etc i think that would compensate for not paying the same as the absent father its common sence ,when he pays what is due every month that is it the gripes of the ex is of no concern etc as in there lack of cash etc,i would also say from what i see in my job single mums are helped back in to work also tax credits only apply if the person is working the absent parent may i add is paying what the powers that be decide is a correct amount,any absent parent must take this in to account when starting another family you should not over commit ,yes it is not all absent parents to blame for break ups of course not, but it is up to absent parents to pay what they are told to i if i were to divorce would not even consider another family until my first one has been paid for and i would assume that i would be hard up for cash for the time being , my brother divorced but paid what he was told and has also remained in daily contact with his children he found it hard for a while 4/5 years but trained and worked hard and upped his salary but he has not had any more kids and the woman he is with was made aware of this from the start,i dont consider myself on the high ground at all we all have tough breaks i was plunged in to 18k worth of debt due to losing 2 well paid jobs my life was made hell by the creditors but i got on with it worked every hour and got back on track,the csa from what i see have made huge bloody mistakes that is true but the courts were a soft touch too awarding far to low monthly payments examplw 150quid for 4 kids a month that is not enough that pushed many single mothers on to the bread line as absent parents carried on regardless we all have to pay the piper ,and the people who choose to take up with a divorced person takes on that baggage

If I had the time and could be bothered to wade my way through your reply which seem to lack any sort of structure like pargraphs. I might do a proper reply.

But I suppose you are the type of person that thinks even if an absent parent had the children living with them half the time and paid for all their clothes, trips etc. That they should still pay maintance.

Men are always going to be cast as the villain of the piece not matter how much they pay.

Sorry but if the mother is allowed to have a life then so is the father. I mean why not go the whole hog and get the absent father to pay the all the mothers bills and let him live under a bridge as he can't afford to live anywhere else. As that is all he deserves nothing better.


Yours


Calley

pink_phantom

THE_LONE_RANGER wrote:

i would also say from what i see in my job single mums are helped back in to work

it is not all absent parents to blame for break ups of course not, but it is up to absent parents to pay what they are told to i if i were to divorce would not even consider another family until my first one has been paid for and i would assume that i would be hard up for cash for the time being , that pushed many single mothers on to the bread line as absent parents carried on regardless we all have to pay the piper ,and the people who choose to take up with a divorced person takes on that baggage

1. where is the help for people who are already in work?
2. Up until what point exactly is a family "paid for" ? Families are for life, not just for conception.
3. I would not call children from a previous relationship "baggage". I certainly would not be very happy if my son was referred to in this term and I know that my partner does not see him as baggage, he sees him as an extension to me and loves him for himself.

THE_LONE_RANGER_4

pink_phantom wrote:

1. where is the help for people who are already in work?
2. Up until what point exactly is a family "paid for" ? Families are for life, not just for conception.
3. I would not call children from a previous relationship "baggage". I certainly would not be very happy if my son was referred to in this term and I know that my partner does not see him as baggage, he sees him as an extension to me and loves him for himself.

A family is paid for , what i mean by that they the children a supported until they are of an age to take up work be it at 18 or after university,people in work help for low wage earners is through tax credits etc,if they are not low wage earners then what help do they need they cant expect help to pay for there children .the word baggage is not an insult to the children as you well know it is a term for all the things that comes with people after a relationship children are exactly that children

pink_phantom

THE_LONE_RANGER wrote:

A family is paid for , what i mean by that they the children a supported until they are of an age to take up work be it at 18 or after university,people in work help for low wage earners is through tax credits etc,if they are not low wage earners then what help do they need they cant expect help to pay for there children .the word baggage is not an insult to the children as you well know it is a term for all the things that comes with people after a relationship children are exactly that children

Yes people get help from the tax credits but they do not help enough to keep up with the cost of living and inflation these days, especially rent, housing and fuel costs which are very much inflated compared to just 3 years ago. Tax credits haven't gone up anywhere near that much. For example, my heating bill is almost double what it was last year. Tax credits are substantially less because of my partners slight pay rise.

I think that baggage is fairly derogatory wheather it referes to children or not. Someone with "baggage" is viewed in a very negative way. Instead someone with "baggage" should be respected for the extra experience that they have gained and admired for coping with it.

THE_LONE_RANGER_4

calleyw wrote:

If I had the time and could be bothered to wade my way through your reply which seem to lack any sort of structure like pargraphs. I might do a proper reply.

But I suppose you are the type of person that thinks even if an absent parent had the children living with them half the time and paid for all their clothes, trips etc. That they should still pay maintance.

Men are always going to be cast as the villain of the piece not matter how much they pay.

Sorry but if the mother is allowed to have a life then so is the father. I mean why not go the whole hog and get the absent father to pay the all the mothers bills and let him live under a bridge as he can't afford to live anywhere else. As that is all he deserves nothing better.


Yours


Calley

ok i cant be bothered to do paragraghs full stops etc etc im in a chat forum tapping a computor im not getting paid for it so im not realy bothered to be honest .absent parents men or women should pay maintenence ,why are they having the children for half the time ? it must be there choice so why give a reduction ? the law states what they pay theres no excuses not to pay it reflects what they earn if they choose to start another family then thats there choice what do they want people to pay for there kids

THE_LONE_RANGER_4

pink_phantom wrote:

Yes people get help from the tax credits but they do not help enough to keep up with the cost of living and inflation these days, especially rent, housing and fuel costs which are very much inflated compared to just 3 years ago. Tax credits haven't gone up anywhere near that much. For example, my heating bill is almost double what it was last year. Tax credits are substantially less because of my partners slight pay rise.

I think that baggage is fairly derogatory wheather it referes to children or not. Someone with "baggage" is viewed in a very negative way. Instead someone with "baggage" should be respected for the extra experience that they have gained and admired for coping with it.

im sorry but are you winding me up where does it exactly stop ?tax credits arnt enough ? enough never seems to be enough you do have to help yourself at some time and no im not being nasty before i retrained and got a better paid job i use to earn 13k a year and get around 5k in tax credits for 2 kids and working tax credits plus family allowance that gave me take home of 1,350 pm and to be honest it was plenty to live off we went on holliday every year 2 cars nice house never wanted for anything granted living in a rural area in shropshire etc but im sorry tax credits are a god send to many baggage point taken but experiance for copeing with extended familys of your own doing divorce must start to be frowned upon again this is why many divorce at the drop of a hat please note divorce rates have dropped now that agencys like csa get involved why is that the case /? becouse people are made to makepayments for past relationships etc