full assessment backdated to default assess date

chickalittle

Hopefully someone will be able to clarify

I had a default assessment put in place as the NRP refused to provide any information. I have now received a letter this week that states an assessment has now been made and backdates it to the date that the default assessment was first put in place. The full assessment is lower than the default ( NRP S/E and declaring minimal income)

Is this correct? - looking at CSA website info it states that when the NRP provides the information the full assessment will be from the date the information was provided. But in my case they have backdated the "full assessment" back to the original default date.

Is this what has happened with others in a similar situation? Just wanting to know if this is correct procedure. Thanks

Mr_Green_Genes

Think about it the other way round.

PWC applies, NRP doesn't respond, default put in place. Then, proper assessment done, which doubles the default. Would you be content if that doubling only took effect from the date the NRP finally provided the information?

Put like that, you must see that it's the only way for it to be done. Mind you, they've probably got the assessment wrong anyway (but those on here who know my posts would expect me to have a dig at the gestapo any time I can :beer: )

chickalittle

Thanks - I see what your saying but the info from the CSA website does state that if the full assessment is more than the default assessment than the higher amount is back dated to when then the default was put in place. Conversely it states that if the full assessment is lower than the default amount than it only applies from the date the NRP provided the info.

I was wondering what people's experience was around this and whether it's worth querying why the CSA haven't followed their own policy.

kelloggs36

Have you queried this with them?

chickalittle

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Have you queried this with them?

I have written asking for clarification but not had a response yet. The assessment letter came from my regular case worker who is the one who has told me all along the way that my ex hasn't responded to any requested for info.

I thought someone on here may have had a similar situation and be able to advise whether this worth me pursuing or not. The difference between the two figures backdated to when the original default was put in place is worth several hundred pounds and would be a big help ( assuming the CSA take steps to collect it of course)

LizzieS_2

chickalittle wrote: »

Thanks - I see what your saying but the info from the CSA website does state that if the full assessment is more than the default assessment than the higher amount is back dated to when then the default was put in place. Conversely it states that if the full assessment is lower than the default amount than it only applies from the date the NRP provided the info.

I was wondering what people's experience was around this and whether it's worth querying why the CSA haven't followed their own policy.

Not had any such experience, however, I do agree that the above is documented in at least csa2 literature.

It seems at odds doing opposite things in different circumstances, however, I would guess that it is deliberately set to get those who would have to overpay to respond quickly.

NACSA_CHAIR

Yes you are correct - if the full assessment is more than DMD, the effective date is that of the DMD. If the full assessment is lower than the DMD, the effective date is when that information was given (subject to a slight movement in dates as they have to work it a specific date within the maintenance period - I tried putting that in a way that wouldnt confuse but not so sure it worked!!)

However if there was a valid reason why no info was given at the time - they would make the effective date the same as the DMD no matter whether it increased or decreased.

kelloggs36

So the OP needs to establish if there was a valid reason for the delay in the NRP supplying the info.

chickalittle

Thanks for all the replies. My ex has been at the same address with the same contact details all along so unless him saying he never received any requests for information is a valid reason and one accepted by the CSA I can't think of anything else.......
Guess I will have to wait and see what they come back with.

kelloggs36

And don't just accept what they say - question it if you feel it is wrong.

pd001

kelloggs36 wrote: »

And don't just accept what they say - question it if you feel it is wrong.

That applies to just about every piece of correspondence anyone receives from the csa