Why does'nt PWC pay towards there child?

Blob

PlayingHardball, I wish that your figures were correct, I am assesed to pay £110 a week and if I was left with £520 I would have no problems paying my bills and getting on with my life. The CSA think in their wisdom that I sould be able to run the rest of my life on £175 a week give or take. They wounder just why I am fightingf them!

Blob

Kelloggs, do you know where they transfered the poeople that did not a lot? Was it the CSA perchance?

The DSS fraud people regularly checked my ex, what they found who knows. I got the blame for them getting involved though, now wish it was me all the time! As a though if you work in a restraunt in the town where you claim benefit I suppose that there is a chance that the people that work in the Benefit office might just see you there!

kelloggs36

lol! He came from another dept to us, and then moved on again, but no, it wasn't to the CSA in his case. My wager is that there are a few in every dept.

Gorgeous_George

The guide for one child is 15% of your pay.

If you think this is too much then maybe you should see a solicitor and try to get custody of your child. The CSA will make reductions if you have your child for part of the year (once per week/holidays perhaps).

The money is a fine for picking the wrong person to mother (or father) your children. She (or he) may choose to spend the money on her/his new partner or on fast cars, high priced holidays. It is not for the childeen.

Some absent parents did not choose to be absent parents. They need a home too in order that their children can visit. The only costs that are truly contributable to the child (and would be fair) are 50% (or thereabouts) of the extra costs of having the child at home.

In the end, just pay the fine and be successful. Your happiness will be your revenge - if that is what you seek. You can always look forward to making the last payment.

God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

GG

PlayingHardball

Blob wrote: »

PlayingHardball, I wish that your figures were correct, I am assesed to pay £110 a week and if I was left with £520 I would have no problems paying my bills and getting on with my life. The CSA think in their wisdom that I sould be able to run the rest of my life on £175 a week give or take. They wounder just why I am fightingf them!

I was referring to the OP who would have £630 per week AFTER he paid child support. I used the CSA maintenance calculator based on 15% of net earnings to arrive at this.

How did they arrive at your assessment? What percentage is taken from you? You earn £285 net per week, and they take £110? How has that been worked out?

frugallass

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Can you see them there then Blob?

I think this question was aimed at me......

Obviously I couldn't see them :rolleyes: but when two people ring up to speak to the same person and one gets through and the other one gets fobbed off it's a bit obvious that one has been lied to !

i_hate_the_csa

PlayingHardball wrote: »

I was referring to the OP who would have £630 per week AFTER he paid child support. I used the CSA maintenance calculator based on 15% of net earnings to arrive at this.

If i was on CSA2 playinghardball then that might be correct.But i'm not.So your way off the mark.By the sounds of it my position is like what Blob is in.

mitchaa

If a child costs £100pw to keep, it is not fair in my opinion making each parent jointly liable for £50 each. The £100 should have £20 deducted for CB and then whatever rate the PWC receives in CTC off that figure also. For 1 child on max rate, this will be around another £53pw so liability should be £27 split both ways which equals £13.50 each.

Surely this would be the fairer way? Why should the PWC benefit from child benefits but not the NRP?

Opens a new can of worms

Poostix

I totally understand this, but from what I can gather it only costs a single person 64+change a week to live, thats what the DWP give them on the dole, this takes into account all food and bills (I'm assuming as I've never claimed) so how can a child cost 110 a week when the PWC would have to pay for all the other bills anyway?

Its a random system that penalises the NRP due to factors out of their control. Total household income and expenses should be takin into account rather than just the parents and it should be cumulative (i.e. one person with 3 kids from different parents should not recieve 15% of each father rather a sliding scale due to kids based on a % of what it actually costs to run a child)

I know it sounds cold and clinical saying "run" a child but thats exactly what you are doing.

and by the way on CSA1 they can take a maximum of 60% of your take home pay.... I know its happening to me!!!!!

Supposedly disposable income?????? !!!!!!

jpmummy

When we had our CSA 1 assessment it said that the "PWC" did not have any income despite working, claiming other maintenance and obtaining various tax credits etc. So the full maintenance "required" for 18 year old was £67.07,(bearing in mind, 18 year olds get £30 for going to school/education of the government) allowing us an allowance of £47 for our 4 year old who was in nursery at 35 per day!. They should look at all circumstances rather than picking a figure out of someones earnings.