more questions!

jacklink

ha ha ha ha

markeymark

jacklink wrote: »

advice is usually very shortcoming toward an nrp or nrpp due to the fact that its usually the nrp and nrpp that money is gained from.

sorry to jump on post but i feel i need too. I am a NRP and have had really usefull advice whenever i have posted here

jacklink

thats all very nice but im a female NRPP and all i get is abuse,

i am a female that the nrp left the pwc for

bitter ex syndrome thrives

jacklink

to quote marksoton, '' The fact this is a CSA1 question'' what fact ? has it been stated that this is a particular csa 1 case? = no. so therefore there is no FACT

Loopy_Girl

please_help wrote: »

Hi

I was wondering whether somebody could give me somemore advise...
i am the parnter of the nrp and they are now currently asking for my wageslips.. they have my patners and all our household details ( we are on the old csa system by the way).

Anyway the wageslips they asked for were from last year (jan 08). i have sent them jan 08 and dec 07 (as they needed to be consecutive) the 2 slips from the dec and jan were quite high due to an abesnt colleague xmas bonus so i also sent them a letter explaining that i do not get this kind of overtime now.. infact i think im lucky i havent been redundant.. and also oct 08 and nove 08 wageslips......

they have now asked for either oct 07 & nov 07 or feb 08 and march 08...which still have quite a bit of overtime....

i am concerned that i am now not gettin this kind of overtime and that they will work the assesment on these old (year olds) payslips.

Can somebody tell me whether they can keep asking for wageslips (when im just the partner) and also whether (as i earn slightly more than my parnter) whether they will only half the living costs of whether they will work it out as a percentage!!

Basically i dont want to send the 5th and 6th payslips and i think that they are takin the mick the only thing they dont have is my inside leg measurment..... I HATE BEEN A WORRIER!! ARRRRRHHHH

Sorry if this does not read well....

Right there jacklink

Zara33

jacklink wrote: »

thats all very nice but im a female NRPP and all i get is abuse,

i am a female that the nrp left the pwc for

bitter ex syndrome thrives

Do you think it might infact have something to do with the drivel that comes out of your mouth and has nothing whatsoever to do with you being a NRPP...just a thought

kelloggs36

I would like to think that I help anybody who has a query whether they be an NRP, an NRPP or a PWC. I feel I give fair advice - whether you agree is up to you, but at least accept it for what it is - honest, fair advice which will help you progress your case. There is hardly any bias on here - except I feel from NRPPs themselves who cannot get past the fact that their partner has an ex and therefore a permenant link to them via the children - perhaps a bit of insecurity in some cases! Not all of course, but I never seem to read about how the children may be faring - only themselves and how they are suffering. To be honest, if you feel that bitter about paying for your partner's children (which you don't anyway, but you may feel you are as your partner was paying BELOW what they were supposed to be paying before they moved in with you and now you are in fact contributing to their househodl costs if you work, so more of their money is now freed up, theirs, not yours) then you have a choice. Accept that partner has to pay for children via the CSA formula or don't. If you don't then it is your choice. IF the CSA assessment is wrong in law (not the same as what you deem as being fair) then of course, you have a valid point and all attempts to correct the assessment must be made and should be supported. HOwever, if it is an argument about the fairness, then it is a pointless argument as the law is what is, and should be followed. I am all for helping those to get a correct assessment but there is no point in complaining about what you feel is unfair - you can choose whether you are a part of it, the children 'can't and should not suffer (that is the children that were in most cases in existence before you came along - they shouldn't have to go without because you chose to have more children - so your children cannot be a priority over the others).

LizzieS_2

Kellogs, your advice is always relevant to the party asking the question and I haven't spotted any bias from you ever.

pd001

Zara33 wrote: »

Do you think it might infact have something to do with the drivel that comes out of your mouth and has nothing whatsoever to do with you being a NRPP...just a thought

Bit harsh here methnks.......

Mr_Green_Genes

jacklink wrote: »

thats all very nice but im a female NRPP and all i get is abuse,

i am a female that the nrp left the pwc for

bitter ex syndrome thrives

I think most of us sometimes have the feeling that the particular situation we are in (PWC, NRP etc) gets the s**t end of the stick, particularly on boards like this where there is a lot of raw emotion. It's just human nature I suppose. Overall, I don't believe there is any generalised bias, certainly not from people like Sensemaya who, as she says, has been an NRPP herself, as well as being a PWC.

You have a perfect right to post from the position of being an NRPP but will get stick if you make ad hominem attacks, or even if it looks as though that's what you're doing.

I personally admit to a huge area of bias. I firmly believe that the gestapo is always wrong. In the unlikely event that that turns out not to be the case, I always ascribe that to pure chance. Apart from them, I love everybody. Well, nearly everybody .