CMEC Gross Pay Child Maintenance

shell_542

This system that is due to come into affect from 2011 ...

Having just had a read up about it does anyone know if NRP's will still be given deductions for nights they have their children staying with them. Reading the information I have found from a few different sources, there has been no mention of this in how they will work out the calculation.

CMAC_2

shell_542 wrote: »

This system that is due to come into affect from 2011 ...

Having just had a read up about it does anyone know if NRP's will still be given deductions for nights they have their children staying with them. Reading the information I have found from a few different sources, there has been no mention of this in how they will work out the calculation.

Also on my husband's income, it would mean an increase of £40 a month in child support on the new system to CSA2 ... sooooo more NRP's not being able to afford what is being demanded? :rolleyes:

The shared care will only apply on actual joint shared care ie 182 nights per year only. From the preamble to the new legislation there appears to be no plans to include any thing else.

shell_542

There was me thinking this new system would be fairer.

Dancing_Shoes

there seems to be a lot of confusion around this new system....

I have read that they are still going to include pension contributions in the assessment but as they are trying to make sure that nrp's don't divert a large income to their pensions how will they come up with a figure that is fair??

enemes

I reckon that C-Mess will be nothing but a huge bullying tool. It will have such unreasonable powers in an attempt to scare NRP's into coughing up and giving the impression that there will be no hiding place. Great in theory, but I suspect fear will be its greatest weapon, perhaps only, and it too will slide into the same cess-pit as CSA1 and CSA2.

Basically, there will always be those who will want not to pay, and will find away around it.

shell_542

I'm not sure Dancing Shoes, I've not read how they will enforce that ... but I have read that the child maintenance amount will be fixed for a year unless the NRP's income varies by more than 25%.

All I seem to be seeing is "how can we get money which we see fit out of a NRP's bank account, from their property?" and no actual recognition of the fact that the NRP's might not actually be able to afford these amounts. I still do not understand the point of trying to take money off of someone that they do not have.

Even if you went to court for something and had a fine to pay, they only expect payments back that you can afford. They examine your outgoings and incomings. They do not try and demand amounts you do not physically have.

And as for leaving it to all PWC's on benefits to declare any maintenance they receive ... I thought the government were dead set on stopping benefit fraud, not facilitating it (and before I'm jumped on, I'm not suggesting all PWC on benefits are frauds, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was done by some.)

Dancing_Shoes

Hmmm, I doubt our pwc declares our payments to the benefits office!

Yes I agree seems like another stick to beat the co-operative nrp's with:rolleyes:

Those that don't want to pay still will find some way around it all and those that do will be even more penilised:rolleyes:

Donedoingdebt

I thought it was going to be loosely based on the current CS2 system except based on gross pay rather than net.

Therefore, there will be no taking into account of any pension payments.

However, I have not heard that the overnight stays have to be a minimum of 182 nights per year before. That seems to be going back to the old CS1 system.

As far as I'm aware, the system is going to allow the same one seventh allowance based on the number of overnight stays up to a maximum of three sevenths for 3 overnight stays (156 nights per year).

Dancing_Shoes

When I looked at their information (via another website) it does say that they will still be taking pension contributions into account but won't be allowing nrp's to divert large amounts away although how this will be managed i don't know.
At the end of the day the only people that will be punished are the nrp's who are willing to pay:rolleyes:
I am glad that the whole cm will be over for us in a couple of years and then we never have to deal with courts/csa/the witch again!

If people aren't able to pay into pension schemes then this country is going to end up in an even worse situation with lots of old people in poverty.:rolleyes:

marksoton

I direct you thus :

http://www.nacsa.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=84&Itemid=110

Originally pensions were not going to be allowable expenses. Now they are ( and damn right too ! ).

The allowance is also still given for children resident with the NRP, in line with the adjusted %age figures.

shell_542

marksoton wrote: »

I direct you thus :

http://www.nacsa.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=84&Itemid=110

Originally pensions were not going to be allowable expenses. Now they are ( and damn right too ! ).

The allowance is also still given for children resident with the NRP, in line with the adjusted %age figures.

That's one of the sites I read.

I'm not sure if the last sentence was aimed at me and if I was a bit confusing with what I wrote, but I didn't mean the reduction for children resident with the NRP ... I was referring to the reduction for when the child living with the PWC stays with the NRP overnight - 0-54 days, 54 - 104 etc etc etc (not sure if the numbers are exact)