NRP - csa1 to csa2

kelloggs36

jpmummy wrote: »

Well defies me how my Hubby has to pay so much for ONE 18 year old yet yours is paying less than half for TWO. That can't be right on that income. Just to add, "PWC" and Maintainee (hope that is a real word!) in our case use the cash for nights out and hmmmm substances!?!?! Not for actually day to day essentials. - Yet my child misses out on hols outings etc cos we are being bled dry! I am waiting for them to try and claim through the courts come September for us to finance his "higher education" however the higher I think may not come from a college or uni!

Can you prove that the money given gets used for that? Are the children living on the streets? Are the children not wearing any clothes? ARe the children not being fed? Do the PWC bills get paid? If you can't prove that the above are true, then you have nothing to complain about. If you think that the children are at risk of abuse or neglect then you should report it. The FACT is that these children are those of your partner and as such he has a legal responsibility to pay for them - like it or not and that DOES mean an impact on your own family but you should have known that when you got together, you really should not complain about the fact that his children need paying for. As for the amount, have you checked that yours is correct? If the two cases are on different systems then they won't be the same amount even if the income is the same - you can't compare them at all.

catenorfolk

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Can you prove that the money given gets used for that? Are the children living on the streets? Are the children not wearing any clothes? ARe the children not being fed? Do the PWC bills get paid? If you can't prove that the above are true, then you have nothing to complain about. If you think that the children are at risk of abuse or neglect then you should report it. The FACT is that these children are those of your partner and as such he has a legal responsibility to pay for them - like it or not and that DOES mean an impact on your own family but you should have known that when you got together, you really should not complain about the fact that his children need paying for. As for the amount, have you checked that yours is correct? If the two cases are on different systems then they won't be the same amount even if the income is the same - you can't compare them at all.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!!!!!! well done kellogs:T

jpmummy

whilst i could write back with reasons to prove my previous post, it would detract from what I was saying, the person we are paying for is not a CHILD he is an ADULT, for the love of God his mother has been supplying both alcohol and other substances for years and DESPITE reporting it to relevant authorities NOTHING was done, and am I right that now that he is EIGHTEEN no-one can do anything??( I think in the eyes of the law he is now an ADULT).... this is not always about kids of young ages with a fluffy teddy under their arm and a mother wondering how she will keep a roof on their heads. Maintainence is to be paid to the mother until they are 19 years old if the circumstances are right or ASSUMED right by the powers that be. I know exactly what we are paying for thank you and in todays troubled society we probably aren't the only ones who are not paying for day to day basics, whilst I sympathise with people whos circumstances mean that they NEED their maintenance AND should have it, in some situations such as ours it is a really not appropriate in my oppinion to keep paying particulary when it is causing us strain yet "enhancing" their lifestyle remember this person is EIGHTEEN, also interesting to note that mother can be given details of our incomes etc, YET we don't get a breakdown of hers. So regardless of the backlash I will probably get on this forum, I think in many cases there is some blatent milking of the cash cow done by some. I was fully aware 15 years ago of my hubby fathering a child with someone 3 1/2 years previous, however, I have been more than supportive of him having to "maintain" his child, however, we can scarcley move since said child turned 16 for the want of a review and given the amount we are paying, it is hardly worth said "child" looking for a job til at least the cash cow has run out and will play FE card until then.

kelloggs36

Once the child is 19 CSA will stop altogether regardless of whether they are at school or not - as I said, unless you can prove neglect then you really have no argument at all - if your assessment is correct that is it.

jpmummy

I do have an argument!! in the eyes of the law he is NOT A CHILD, so therefore, can he be neglected??? Think not, old enough to drive, vote, marry, drink, do drugs leave the country, young enough to be financed by us and the tax payer too! I have argued with the halfwits at Dudley for nigh on 18 months and as they say the assesment is correct... ROLL ON 19th Birthday and then maybe WE will be allowed to live and breathe and the PWC may well review her parenting then!

kelloggs36

IN the eyes of Child Support law, the person in question IS a child.

jpmummy

That is as maybe, in my view its a joke, would social services or the police take me seriously if I told them that the mother supplies drink and drugs?? nah didn't think so

catenorfolk

, however, I have been more than supportive of him having to "maintain" his child,


jpmummy - Surely being ' more than supportive' goes without saying. . This is his child. What kind of person wouldn't expect their partner to support children from prev relationships? But kids just dont go away when they are 18. I am way way older than that (yeuk) and my parents still help me out now and then when i am having troubles (bless them).

marksoton

catenorfolk wrote: »

But kids just dont go away when they are 18. I am way way older than that (yeuk) and my parents still help me out now and then when i am having troubles (bless them).

True however CSA payments are enforced ones by a government agency. Where does it stop ?

If i remember rightly the CMEC legislation makes provision for the possibility payments may still have to be made until 20.

Their has to be a cut off and age 18 would be the logical one. Maybe thats why its not. :rolleyes:

jpmummy

[QUOTE

But kids just dont go away when they are 18. I am way way older than that (yeuk) and my parents still help me out now and then when i am having troubles (bless them).[/QUOTE]

well thats lovely that you find that your parents still help you out and great that they can afford to do so, however, the amount we are paying are ridiculous having been moved over to CSA 2 at her request to make sure that she was having her last slice of the pie! In my opinion child support should cease when child is 18 regardless. I am fully aware that kids don't go away, however it would mean that the CSA and the smirking PWC would!