Committal Hearing - Can I attend?

Sunsh1ne

The key her is the type of court not the potential penalty that that court can apply. CSA committal hearings are heard in magistrates courts. The courts treat them as similar to family proceedings. CSA proceedings are not held in open court and the CSA will not need, or want a PWC to attend. Certain individuals may attend at the courts discretion but a PWC is unlikely to be allowed in. A PWC's presence could inflame an already higly charged situation.

It is possible that you could work out the court where the hearing will take place. It is likely to be the most local one to where your ex lives. Even so I'd advise against going along.

I have heard that the move to CMEC may see some of its hearings held heard in open court but this is just a rumour at the moment. It depends if CMEC (and the courts) want these type of hearings to be open to the press.

Its also worth noting that an NRP sent to prison at a CSA committal hearing does not get a criminal record. Enforcement of child maintenance in court is a civil matter, not a criminal one.

kelloggs36

I asked the CSA and they said no, and to write to the court, who also said no as it was a closed court.

pd001

Sunsh1ne wrote: »

Its also worth noting that an NRP sent to prison at a CSA committal hearing does not get a criminal record. .

Is that really true?

kelloggs36

Yes they do! They have been sent to prison!

pd001

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Yes they do! They have been sent to prison!

No no I think you misunderstood my question.

The person sent to prison does not get a criminal record?? Is this correct?

Rorkes_Drift

Hi, new here, first post but I just happen to be privvy to the info being debated here.

Kellog, they dont get a criminal record for being committed to prison, its not a criminal offence to willfully refuse to pay. A person can be convicted for passing false information to the CSA and would attract a crim record but not necessarily a custodial sentence.

Sensemaya: Kellog is right, civil proceedings are usually closed hearings and crim proceedings are usually public hearings. The public cannot attend a civil proceeding unless they are a McKenzie or invited by the defendant.

Persons held as a civil prisoners (previously called debtors prison) have different privs to crim prisoners, but similar to remand prisoners, own clothes, TV, can phone friends etc, and can pay the money for their release.

The public cannot sit on a committal to prison hearing, its a civil case and the defendant can ask the magistrate to strike out the debt if he can show the assessment is unlawful or in breach of an AofP. He can claim damages if a tribunal later revokes the liability or the assessment.

Many CSA civil prisoners become incarcerated intentionally, an ulterior motive, getting free housing, prisoners accelerate the social housing points list count when they are released from prison. They want to become a media martyr making a public statement against the government or CSA. They know a tribunal will revoke liability and he wants the damages money. Defending a committal proceeding is v.easy! just tell the magistrate you are completely skint and the case is dismissed in a flash.

pd001

Rorkes_Drift wrote: »

Defending a committal proceeding is v.easy! just tell the magistrate you are completely skint and the case is dismissed in a flash.

Really? Is that correct?
Is it that easy?

Sensemaya

Sensemaya: Kellog is right, civil proceedings are usually closed hearings and crim proceedings are usually public hearings. The public cannot attend a civil proceeding unless they are a McKenzie or invited by the defendant.

So why was I allowed in not just on the one occasion, but three?

Rorkes_Drift

The law says the court must be of the opinion that there has been wilful refusal or culpable neglect to pay his liability. The burden rests with the CSA to prove.

If you say you are skint then the CSA will need to produce evidence you have the means to pay. Having a credit card with a £50K limit is not enough. Have a read S40 of the CS Act 1991.

If all other enforcement has failed then a committal is likely to fail unless the defentant wants access to a prison (e.g. to make new connections with drug dealers or users) so he'll make his assets safe but visible to the CSA and use S40 of CSA'91 to access the prison service.

kelloggs36

pd001 wrote: »

Really? Is that correct?
Is it that easy?

I doubt it. I'm sure my ex would have said that, but at the end of the day, the debt exists and there is no part of legislation that will allow it to be wiped out. If the debtor hasn't paid, the courts can impose a minimal amount for them to pay.