maintenance

scoobydo_2

Hi i have 2 children aged 17 and 15 , my ex has always paid me £320 a month for the past 8 years , this wasn't set my csa it was what he told me I was getting (assured me it was more than he would have paid via them )
My concern is that my oldest will be 18 in march and leaves college in 2010 I understand he stops paying then , but what about my 15 and how do payments work is the money just halfed ???
I know his wages are a lot higher now as he's management about £30,000 to £35,000 I think .
His G/f has her own daughter who's 14 and lives with them .Can anyone help me as to what will happen and what he should give me also is the csa a last resort ???

kelloggs36

If you use CSA guidelines to help you, he should pay you 15% of his net income but first he will deduct 15% of his net income(!) so you get 15% of 85% of his net income. If he earns 30k then this will mean approx £239 to you per month provided he does not pay into a pension scheme (this is deducted from his net so his net is lower). If he earns £35k then it would be £277 per month. Oh, the cut off age is 19, not 18 if your child is still in college (not university) and you still get child benefit for him.

chriszzz

Hi
I think £160 a month is a decent amount!!

You can go down the csa road but i wouldnt give them the time of day and plus I do know that you dont stand to get every penny that your ex will have to pay because the csa is not a charity based organisation, it takes there cut!!

I have a 17 yr old son and I dont get any maintanance, his dad is unemployed, so i would be more than happy to have an extra £160 to help towards his college costs.

The csa cause so much grief to families and if you can make private arrangements with your ex then i think that would be your best route to take. It depends on how greedy a PWC is and what i have found is that greed causes contempt, if your not greedy and can come to an amicable arrangement I would advise that you take that road.

kelloggs36

NO Chris, it does NOT take their cut!!!!! If the PWC is not on benefits, then the CSA give out ALL that it gets in. ONly those on benefits have the money reduced to offset benefits already received by the government.

ankspon

The CSA take 15% for one child,20% for two and 25% for three and more and give it to you.I've had such bad experiences with them i wouldn't wish them on my worst enemy.
If you come to an arrangement it's a lot better

chriszzz

kelloggs36 wrote: »

NO Chris, it does NOT take their cut!!!!! If the PWC is not on benefits, then the CSA give out ALL that it gets in. ONly those on benefits have the money reduced to offset benefits already received by the government.

So I take it that its government funded then???

kelloggs36

Yes it is - how did you get the impression that the CSA take a cut?

chriszzz

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Yes it is - how did you get the impression that the CSA take a cut?

A friend of mine, sister in law works for the csa and I am sure she said that they take £10 off each claimant for administration fees.

I only know this because I had a query with the csa and my friend spoke to her sister in law but that was about 4yrs ago. I supose I could ask my friend to check that out ?

kelloggs36

No, that was many, many years ago (over 10!) and they scrapped the fees bit.

What I think you are confused with is that when somebody used to be on income support, they could keep the first £10 of the maintenance and the rest would be knocked off their benefits, or the CSA paid the money direct to the secretary of state. Now it is £20 per week, soon to rise to £40 per week and then eventually benefit claimants can keep all benefits plus child maintenance. There has not been any admin fee, not since it was scrapped in the mid 1990s. They are talking about charging the NRP under the new/new scheme when it kicks in.

shell_542

Charging the NRP? :rolleyes: Then the NRP should be given the option of not using the CSA if they will agree to a private agreement and can demonstrate they can keep to it.

I know a friend of mine had a lot of trouble with the CSA chasing her ex for maintenance and apparently she did not receive the first lot he paid as it went to them for fees, nothing to do with income support ... her daughter was born in 2005, so not 10 years ago. Good to hear they've changed it though.

chriszzz

shell_542 wrote: »

Charging the NRP? :rolleyes: Then the NRP should be given the option of not using the CSA if they will agree to a private agreement and can demonstrate they can keep to it.

I was thinking the same and agree that they should have a choice and demonstrate keeping up with child support!!! I think genuine dads really do have a tough time and they are all made to look like criminals even the ones that want contact and pay their maintenance.