They are not my kids so why do I have to pay?

Soubrette

skibadee wrote: »

Well my OH's on CSA 1 and is still assessed on CSA1,

Yes, unless his child maintenance payments are due to end within the next few years or so then I believe he will stay on CSA1 - the changeover between the two seems to be slow and laborous. Even worse, the changeover to CSA3 should be happening in 2011, where gross income is used instead of net income :rolleyes:

I think I should have made it clear also that my partners income being assessed with any benefit claims I make means that he is assumed (and correctly so imo) to be contributing to the household therefore directly reducing any benefits that I personally would be getting, basically because he is subsidising me and my children.

Sou

skibadee

His payments are due to finish in september 2011.
At the end of the day.....maintenance has to be paid, the system is not always fair though on either side, I have been a PWC and a NRPP......I think when the Government say they want to end child poverty they should look at this from both sides when doing assessments.

You are obviously a very honest person Soubrette...I wish the same could be said for my OH's ex!!

pinkpig08

Sorry to jump in but just a quick question - does anyone know whether the change from CSA2 to CSA 3 will be phased in, or will you suddenly change from 2 to 3? Or will it be just for new cases and old ones remain the same?

Soubrette

skibadee wrote: »

His payments are due to finish in september 2011.
At the end of the day.....maintenance has to be paid, the system is not always fair though on either side, I have been a PWC and a NRPP......I think when the Government say they want to end child poverty they should look at this from both sides when doing assessments.

You are obviously a very honest person Soubrette...I wish the same could be said for my OH's ex!!

That is a lovely thing to say - it didn't seem right just to click the thanks button for such a kind compliment

Good luck with the ex though

pinkpig08, I have no actual knowledge of the changeover to CSA2 to 3 but I do know that they are bringing their new powers (which were given the royal ascent last year) in gradually. I would guess that it will be a similar situation to CSA1 to 2. If that is the case (big if there) then as the PWC with a lying NRP I shall certainly be asking for a transfer to CSA3 as then the ex will have his tax return looked at and I'm hoping that if our tribunal fails then he will be caught at this stage with a big arrears bill for withholding a material fact. This will be just in time to help my eldest through university.

Sou

pinkpig08

Thanks for that Soubrette. DH pays on time every month without fail, but I know how efficient *cough* the CSA are with their management of assessments! We're already having a long (a year!) drawn out battle regarding shared care which DH should be getting, and could really do without the hassle of yet more changes!

LizzieS_2

There was some published guidelines over when people would transfer to csa3 - if it's anything like the csa1 to csa2 proposals that never happened then 3 systems for years will apply.

I did understand that csa3 by choice could only be done if both parties agreed, but it is a long time since I read that and things may have changed.

Kungfukitty

Soubrette wrote: »

I absolutely do not agree with this, both are criminally selfish and both should be punished severely.

Both access and financial support is detrimental to children when withheld - denying access can have obvious effects but can you imagine what it is like for a child to know that one of your parents is prepared to pay as little as possible for you whilst still spending lavishly on their own lifestyle? in general, most PWCs make many sacrifices for their children including time and emotional energy (and shame on those that don't), so it is not good enough to say that if they are financially sound then they should fork out for most of the costs of keeping the children too.

It's funny how few PWCP we have on here complaining about how they have to support their partners children isn't it?

Sou

Gosh I hope you are not suggesting that we be punished severely for wanting to do the best by ALL our children! Things aren't that black and white. My kids don't give a monkey's that their father never gave any funds to their upkeep, they are however mortified that he could have left, not to see them for 10 years, without even any effort to get to see them. That damaged them, particularly my daughter who may never trust a man ever again. Him not paying doesn't even come into her thinking.

And who are you to say that we are spending lavishly on our lifestyle? We live on the breadline while the parent with care has three cars!! and a house full of hi-tech goodies. We have none of that, we don't earn much as we have THREE other kids between us we need to get through uni. There needs are greater at the moment thant the little ones, who live with their mother and have everything they need. We pay what we can but asking for money that goes to our older children is unforgivable. Thank heaven CSA saw the error and changed the rules

Kitty

kelloggs36

This is where we differ on our ideas of what is important - as has been said before, you 'children' are in fact adults and are much more self-sufficient than the PWC's children and it is not fair to suggest that the PWC pays all of the costs just because she can - the responsibility lies with both parents, so the NRP must pay his/her fair share towards their own children, not let them go without because he/she has aquired step children who are nothing to do with them legally in terms of finances. As it is, they already get a reduction in their liability. It is irrelevant if the children know or not about the financial side of things - the point is that you can't suggest that your adult children have more of a need than young children belonging to your partner. Your adult children actually have the means to aquire money if needed by getting a part time job or by approaching the Access to Learning Fund at their university if you are unable to help them. IT doesn't matter if the PWC has 10 cars, her children are not solely her responsibility, they are half your partner's and he must pay his share.

Loopy_Girl

I'd be shame faced if I was an adult (and that's what they are, they are over the age of 18 which in all ways - and not just numerically - is an adult) and took £30.00 a month 'keep' from my parents when I knew they were on the breadline.:o

As Kelloggs says, if they need money then they should get up and earn it. Uni is a lifestyle choice and they should have made sure they could have afforded to go to it before signing up.

Plenty students out there that get their way through Uni with a part time job and a whole lot of debt shackled to their neck - their choice though.

THEY need to get themselves through Uni - not you.

But at least it all worked out though so that your kids didn't suffer eh? I wonder how much of a fight in your belly you will have when your hubby's kids by his ex come to him when at Uni and ask for 'keep'. Do remember what you said here about the 'need to support them through Uni'.
Ah mind you, their might be grandchildren on the scene from your children though I suppose...no doubt they will take precedence.:rolleyes:

mumps

I can't believe a parent would think £6 per week was an appropriate contribution to make to his children's care. I have friends who give this sort of amount, £3 per child, for grandchildrens pocket money! I never thought my ex was very generous but he always paid more than that, and that was before CSA was even thought of.