can a pwc appeal against the arrears?

bestmummy

my ex dont pay anything since November...after contacting csa a million times, I contacted my MP and finally they are sorting this mess out, but my ex is going to pay only £20 of arrears per week when I was told that they were going to take 40% off his wages...dont get me wrong here, I may sound a bit bitter, but my ex always told me that he was making the payments and that csa was keeping the payments,but he was not telling the truth, he was refusing to pay and this hurt me, especially when he told me recently that he is only gonna pay if someone makes him pay...
I dont think £ 20 of arrears is enough when he dont pay anything for so long, I mean I use to get a lot more of arrears before all this happen...
my caseworker says that they cant take more than 40% because they have in consideration other kids in the household, which he dont have but fair enough, but this £20 are a joke....
can I appeal against this amount or ask csa to have a look at this again?

blimey40

If thats what he is earning, then you cannot do anything about it> I knwo you are bitter, but those are the rules. Unless of course, you would like to see him penniless? Do you?

Soubrette

blimey40 wrote: »

If thats what he is earning, then you cannot do anything about it> I knwo you are bitter, but those are the rules. Unless of course, you would like to see him penniless? Do you?

To be fair - her ex did not seem to care when he accrued the arrears, no?

Sou

dizzydusty

When an agreement has been made with the NRP regarding how much they repay against arrears. I know this as my ex refused to pay me maintenance for the 7 months it took the CSA to assess him, and they have now agreed that he can pay this back at £45 a month - they stated extenuating circumstances as the reason but due to DPA couldn't tell me what they were. This decision was made on a telephone conversation as the decision and letters were issued on the same day. I did question what evidence they could possibly have had from the NRP in order to base their decision on, but as it was the guy who did the decision that wrote back to me, he just stated that his decision was correct ....think I might have !!!!!! him off a bit lol.

I was livid. Its going to take 18 months for thim to pay me the £750 he owes because he deliberately refused to pay maintenance while they assessed him - his request by the way as the girlfriend and son had moved in with him.

I asked for an appeal form and it stated on that (and I am sure the CSA website too) that arrears repayment cant be appealed against.

I was also told the 40% thing is only guidance - which they have chosen to ignore.

Send in a letter of complaint - I would if you wern't happy with their decision.

DUTR

Dizzydusty wrote: »

I was also told the 40% thing is only guidance - which they have chosen to ignore.

Send in a letter of complaint - I would if you wern't happy with their decision.

I'm not defending the NRP, my maths suggest if the arrears are £20 per week after 7 months then the assesment is around £60 per week plus the £20 =£80 therefore about £400 net, so the nrp has £320 per week less travel to work costs £25 say, lunch £25, energy costs £25 , council tax and water £40 mortgage £150, grocery £40 leaves about £25 and that doesn't include stuff like TV licence, car insurance existing debts, clothes, horse riding lessons for the child etc etc you can see though it does not leave much and a slightly higher % of wages and it starts to get into the ground of , is it worth going to work?

pd001

Dizzydusty wrote: »

I was also told the 40% thing is only guidance - which they have chosen to ignore.

Send in a letter of complaint - I would if you wern't happy with their decision.

Its not guidance, it is a fact if on a DEO, have a read of the following,

Paying more than 40% via a DEO? Read on!
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what level of income is protected with regard to the recovery of Child Support Agency arrears via a deduction from earnings order; and what other limits restrict the extent to which such arrears may be recovered. [210923]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 23 June 2008:

• In reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.

• You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what level of income is protected with regard to the recovery of Child Support Agency arrears via a deduction from earnings order; and what other limits restrict the extent to which such arrears may be recovered. [210923]

• In new scheme cases the non-resident parent should be left with a minimum of 60% of net earnings after making child maintenance payments. This is set out in the Child Support (Collection and Enforcement) Regulations 1992, Regulation 11(2).

23 Jun 2008 : Column 6W

• The protected earnings rate on the old scheme may also enable deductions up to 40% of net earnings, though this may vary from case to case as the figure takes personal circumstances into account.

• The Agency has set a ceiling for each deduction from earnings order which ensures that the maximum deduction does not exceed 40% of net earnings, leaving 60% of earnings protected.

• The Agency will consider imposing the maximum deduction through a deduction from earnings order where child maintenance arrears are outstanding and the non-resident parent does not agree an acceptable repayment schedule. The Agency is committed to collect more money for more children and get tougher on non-resident parents who avoid their financial responsibilities.

So the upshot is that the csa should not take more than 40% of someones net take home pay under a DEO

dizzydusty

when I was referring to the 40% deduction was that 40% is what they will try and take off, however in my case they have chosen not to take 40%, but accepted a much lower amount from the NRP as they have accepted extenuating circumstances as the reason.

The reason I mention that it is only guidance, is that I have a letter stating such from the CSA. I was arguing that they could have taken more from the NRP to clear the arrears quicker - as many on this board have posted complaining about the fact that they are taking 40% or more. I also mentioned it in an attempt to explain to the original poster why they may not be taking a higher amount from their NRP.

There is a belief - as the CSA do quote that they can take 40% - that this is law, it's not. Its, as they themselves have said 'guidance'.

Cant comment on protected earnings as I have had no experience of that myself.

dizzy x

kelloggs36

Dizzydusty, I'm afraid that is is written into legislation that they can take 40% of a person's net income. The guidance is to recover all arrears within a 2 year period. I think you are confused.

Soubrette

I think Dizzydusty is trying to say that 40% is guidance in that the CSA can choose to take less than this if they so wish.

In pd001's quote it quite clearly says 'up to 40%' implying that less can be taken.

However, as has been stated by several posters, the CSA cannot take more than 40%.

Sou

kelloggs36

I was just pointing out that what Dizzy said about it not being law is incorrect.

marksoton

Soubrette wrote: »

I think Dizzydusty is trying to say that 40% is guidance in that the CSA can choose to take less than this if they so wish.

In pd001's quote it quite clearly says 'up to 40%' implying that less can be taken.

However, as has been stated by several posters, the CSA cannot take more than 40%.

Sou

Which in a lot of cases does not happen. The CSA go for parallel action and get an LO granted too.