CS1: NRP switching roles with NRPP - CSA repercussions?

Wasteland_Drifter

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Maybe, but letting her live rent free was not the only option - surely you could have asked for something?

As part of the original occupation order I wasn't even allowed to speak to her so asking for rent wasnt possible, she just got onto the CSA who contacted me indirectly - technically in breach of the civil proceedings order - no direct or indirect contact.

I knew I would have to take a £80,000 price knockdown on selling it tenanted, but prices on larger homes are favourable and having cash enables me to offer a vendor a quick sale. The investment company has agreed in principle not to start eviction proceedings (if an agreement is refused) until I have a new house in place.

Wasteland_Drifter

silvercar wrote: »

So an idiot of an investor is prepared to have his money tied up for years, get no rent and wait til your ex decides to give up her rent free house! Takes all sorts, his plan will come undone if your ex stays put and lives to 100.

I said the same, but I understand it doesn't work like that. I originally listed it with a reserve of £130,000 below valuation and the hammer came down at £80,000 below so they got a very good deal.

Once alternative provision for my children in place, my ex gets 28 days to agree to a tenancy or she vacates the property. Investment companies dont like an empty property so they will most likely go in there and tell her she can live rent free on DSS if she signs a tenancy agreement and allows the landlord to claim the housing benefit. If its refused then the unsigned agreement is put before a judge for eviction.

Soubrette

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

This rings alarm bells with me, and its precisely what we are trying to avoid. Does anyone know the CSA legislation that defines inconsistent lifestyle? does it have to be a fact or is it an opinion of a civil servant? I need to get some idea on how a subsequent tribunal would see it.

I am an ex-MFI lorry driver and my gf is a Fund Manager earning £160,000 a year. Our lifestyle is consistent with earnings and there is no criminal element involved, but our concern the CSA may infer something from it - and drum up some rule that could indirectly make my gf pay CSA. She is already taxed to the hilt and faces a further blow in the latest budget.

My ex wont know the house has been sold until a signatureless tenancy contract from her new landlord lands on the doormat. The letter will tell her to contact housing benefit and the proverbial fecal matter will hit the fan, and we need to be ready.

As far as I know from my own experience - if you can show that your girlfriend is the one providing the lifestyle then there is nothing they can do about it (and rightly so - Mum and Dad are responsible for their children - anything else is an extra from a giving person)

In fact my ex takes salary and dividends and only declared minimum wage salary to the CSA and just the fact he says his girlfriend supports him is enough for the CSA at this stage.

Be aware though that your ex will probably do the same as me which is to go through the system asking you to actually prove it's not your income that supports your second family. Whether I will be successful or not is another thing - all I want is a fair proportion of my ex's income to better the life of the children - if he is truly now on minimum wage then what he pays is fair. If he is hiding income then it is not.

I would have thought you'd just have to show your tax returns after one year to prove your zero income?

Read btd1's posts on how a determined (or obsessed) PWC can make your life a misery though and by extension your childrens.

Sou

LizzieS_2

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

My ex doesn't know it yet but the house she lives in was sold at auction to an investor with ex as sitting tenant, but the investor is contractually bound to allow my children to freely live there until the youngest leaves full time education or ex vacates it voluntarily. I need the capital to buy a larger house with gf and a newborn is expensive. I have to guarantee a roof over my children if ex fails to pay the rent to the investor or refuses to sign a tenancy agreement.

Can you explain this post further as your later posts suggest your children can be evicted? It reads to me that you are guarantor for the rent if she doesn't sign a tenancy agreement. It also suggests you are financially struggling with your new partner to buy a house, but later go on to mention your partner earns £160K.

I take it you were not married? (even though the right to remain in a property for married couples is above whatever child support is payable). Your ex couldn't sign a tenancy agreement with you as she was not able to obtain HB due the children being yours - likewise if she offered to vacate, rehousing and entitlement to benefit would go against her as she had voluntarily left a property capable of possession until children older (one of those catch 22 situations for both of you). Not sure your plan will work - if she is determined enough (and could be forced via the council anyway), you will probably end up using the capital gained to pay rent for a number of years (on top of any csa). That solicitor seems to have given you a little too much hope and not enough facts of the pitfalls (eg the sale is underhand and she can easily prove she wasn't involved - meaning the council will expect her to take you to court for housing).

Wasteland_Drifter

LizzieS wrote: »

Can you explain this post further as your later posts suggest your children can be evicted? It reads to me that you are guarantor for the rent

There's no rent guarantee clause, it is a provision in the title deeds that rerquests (but not rerquiring) the buyer to avoid an eviction for a fixed period or until I can guarantee an alternative accommodation for my children whichever comes first.

LizzieS wrote: »

if she doesn't sign a tenancy agreement. It also suggests you are financially struggling with your new partner to buy a house, but later go on to mention your partner earns £160K.

Its unfair for gf to pay the lionshare of a new house while I have a house with an ex that refuses to pay rent on it.

LizzieS wrote: »

I take it you were not married? (even though the right to remain in a property for married couples is above whatever child support is payable). Your ex couldn't sign a tenancy agreement with you

She wouldn't sign a tenancy agreement nor pay any rent. She got the CSA to punish me for overturning a transfer order, a costs order and being aquitted of sexual assault on the grounds of vexatious prosecution. She figured she can make me pay twice in the form of CSA and a rentfree house.

LizzieS wrote: »

as she was not able to obtain HB due the children being yours

The council's position doesnt agree with that. In the council employee's own words - its a shame you cant get a tenancy agreement, we would have paid your rent.

LizzieS wrote: »

- likewise if she offered to vacate, rehousing and entitlement to benefit would go against her as she had voluntarily left a property capable of possession until children older (one of those catch 22 situations for both of you).

I dont think she has looked that far, she has never hinted at wanting to be rehoused by the council.

LizzieS wrote: »

That solicitor seems to have given you a little too much hope and not enough facts of the pitfalls

What facts do you think the solicitor has missed?

LizzieS wrote: »

(eg the sale is underhand and she can easily prove she wasn't involved.

Why do you think the sale is underhand? I understood an owner can lawfully dispose of a property at auction provided the transaction is compliant with conveyancing law. There was no legal obligation for me to tell ex the house has been auctioned because she has no tenancy agreement.

LizzieS wrote: »

- meaning the council will expect her to take you to court for housing).

I dont understand why the council will take me to court for housing. The CSA has already said housing does not qualify as maintenance and I am under no legal duty to provide housing, only 30% of income as legislated by the Child Support Act 1991.

LizzieS wrote: »

Not sure your plan will work - if she is determined enough (and could be forced via the council anyway), you will probably end up using the capital gained to pay rent for a number of years (on top of any csa).

The plan has already worked. The money is only retained by the solicitor otherwise it upsets JSA and thus the CSA. I needed shot of a house, provide a guaranteed roof for my children, be in a position to offer a vendor a quick cash sale and a step up the property ladder. I think the solicitor has done a stirling job!

This is an interesting perspective you have voiced on this situation.

LizzieS_2

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

There's no rent guarantee clause, it is a provision in the title deeds that rerquests (but not rerquiring) the buyer to avoid an eviction for a fixed period or until I can guarantee an alternative accommodation for my children whichever comes first.


Either way, you are inadvertingly guaranteeing a rent for childhood for your children/ex.

Its unfair for gf to pay the lionshare of a new house while I have a house with an ex that refuses to pay rent on it.

Appreciate that. Personally I think the courts should be invovled in all separations involving children and put figures for things like lost rent/mortage which the csa are then capable of taking off assessments. Not being funny here, but your gf is always going to pay the lionshare anyway as your jobs seem miles apart on income.

She wouldn't sign a tenancy agreement nor pay any rent. She got the CSA to punish me for overturning a transfer order, a costs order and being aquitted of sexual assault on the grounds of vexatious prosecution. She figured she can make me pay twice in the form of CSA and a rentfree house.

Maybe thats truely her intentions (it does sound like it). Sorry, but I post on facts ratrher than emotions - hence why I mentioned the catch 22 over her not being 'allowed' to sign a tenancy agreement (well she could, but only under a court order).

The council's position doesnt agree with that. In the council employee's own words - its a shame you cant get a tenancy agreement, we would have paid your rent.

I wouldn't take that as gospel - post the question over whether you can charge an ex (with your children) on the benefits board and you will probably see it isn't possible.

I dont think she has looked that far, she has never hinted at wanting to be rehoused by the council.

Depends what advice she has taken and how open a person she is - very easy to hide emotions from discussions if you are strong enough

What facts do you think the solicitor has missed?

The rehousing element and associated costs. She will have to explain how she came to be homeless and my research shows she had the opportunity to force a stay.

Why do you think the sale is underhand? I understood an owner can lawfully dispose of a property at auction provided the transaction is compliant with conveyancing law. There was no legal obligation for me to tell ex the house has been auctioned because she has no tenancy agreement.

Half agree (wholly agree to principle from your point of view). In law, tenancy or not, it's the childrens home and I suspect you have a duty to give prior warning of your intentions due purely to the children. In basic terms your children have a beneficial right to remain in their home.

I dont understand why the council will take me to court for housing. The CSA has already said housing does not qualify as maintenance and I am under no legal duty to provide housing, only 30% of income as legislated by the Child Support Act 1991.

The council wouldn't - they could refuse your ex housing on the basis that she can take you to court to 'retain' what she had. The csa is for ongoing maintenance, housing is a court issue (hence why I disagree with nrp's paying for housing and the court not being allowed to push the csa into using it to offset some element of support).

The plan has already worked. The money is only retained by the solicitor otherwise it upsets JSA and thus the CSA. I needed shot of a house, provide a guaranteed roof for my children, be in a position to offer a vendor a quick cash sale and a step up the property ladder. I think the solicitor has done a stirling job!

It hasn't worked at all - from JSA prospective you have the money now (benefits board will tell you that). Though I guess you are actually currently unaffected as the JSA is not income related.

This is an interesting perspective you have voiced on this situation

Don't mean to be negative - just looking at the potential downfalls.