father has come forward after a year

Loopy_Girl

No, from April 2010 the full amount can be kept with no reduction in IS

http://www.csa.gov.uk/en/case/child-maintenance-changing-faq.asp#q11

marksoton

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

No, from April 2010 the full amount can be kept with no reduction in IS

http://www.csa.gov.uk/en/case/child-maintenance-changing-faq.asp#q11

Thanks. Good to know the goal posts have moved yet again. :rolleyes:

kelloggs36

Great, I'd best kick out my hubby in April next year as I will be so much better off with all the money he will have to pay PLUS the benefits I would get.

That is not a pop at the OP but the whole system.

LizzieS_2

marksoton wrote: »

Thanks. Good to know the goal posts have moved yet again. :rolleyes:

Must admit I thought it was £40pw too - maybe the finance act has been updated since I read this in previous budget announcements.

marksoton

LizzieS wrote: »

Must admit I thought it was £40pw too - maybe the finance act has been updated since I read this in previous budget announcements.

The full disregard never had a date on it. Obviously it has been brought forward.

Makes you wonder what other measures will suddenly appear overnight.

I have noticed the increasing number of people on the board saying they have been told their assessment will only be reviewed once a year. Whilst complete bull it seems even agency staff are incoherent as to what is being enacted and when.

Loopy_Girl

I don't agree with it either. It's the most stupidest idea that I can think of (again not a pop at the OP).

Where's the incentive to get back to work if you are receiving maintenance plus all your IS and also your HB etc etc? And lets not forget that if there are children with different father's in the house then the PWC will be sitting pretty.

Hardly a shining example of getting lone parents back to work like the Government has been bleating on about since John Major days.

You are always told as a lone parent that you will always be better off back in work getting your WTC etc. I can see cases of this not being the case when this new ruling comes in.

btw I remember reading about the £40 as well...I may be dreaming this but I am certain I read that the date was Oct 2009. This was a long time ago though and as Lizzie says, they may have pushed the full disregard forward.

LizzieS_2

marksoton wrote: »

I have noticed the increasing number of people on the board saying they have been told their assessment will only be reviewed once a year. Whilst complete bull it seems even agency staff are incoherent as to what is being enacted and when.

I'm not surprised, I heard no end of bull from numerous people there. In the end I did get some-one who knew what they were doing, and I wasn't told anything wrong and more importantly I got more explanations/reasons etc (pity the rest aren't the same).

marksoton

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

I don't agree with it either. It's the most stupidest idea that I can think of (again not a pop at the OP).

Where's the incentive to get back to work if you are receiving maintenance plus all your IS and also your HB etc etc? And lets not forget that if there are children with different father's in the house then the PWC will be sitting pretty.

Hardly a shining example of getting lone parents back to work like the Government has been bleating on about since John Major days.

You are always told as a lone parent that you will always be better off back in work getting your WTC etc. I can see cases of this not being the case when this new ruling comes in.

btw I remember reading about the £40 as well...I may be dreaming this but I am certain I read that the date was Oct 2009. This was a long time ago though and as Lizzie says, they may have pushed the full disregard forward.

The theory ( and it's BS IMO ) is that they tie it in with the policy that out of work parents will not be allowed to sit around when their children reach a certain age. Funny how it's all gone quiet on that front ! :rolleyes:

As you say, imagine what you can get with multiple NRP's.

I joke you not i earn a damn good salary but when you do the sums some PWC's will be getting pretty near it when all is taken into consideration. And for doing nothing.

I think it is one policy we can all agree is quite wrong ! :T

marksoton

LizzieS wrote: »

I'm not surprised, I heard no end of bull from numerous people there. In the end I did get some-one who knew what they were doing, and I wasn't told anything wrong and more importantly I got more explanations/reasons etc (pity the rest aren't the same).

I suspect we all have.

But honestly, to deny someone a fair assessment by falsifying is really disgraceful, and trying to claim it is current legislation just tops the bill !

LizzieS_2

marksoton wrote: »

As you say, imagine what you can get with multiple NRP's.

I joke you not i earn a damn good salary but when you do the sums some PWC's will be getting pretty near it when all is taken into consideration. And for doing nothing.

I could see the anger at money going to offset benefits, but this u-turn by the Government is simply going to encourage more (predominently) women to have numerous children by different fathers and live it up on benefits for most of their otherwise working lives.