Order of Sale enforcement

Steve40_2

nadine273 wrote: »

That is shocking!!!
Could it be the PWC was in receipt of benefits hence the money being paid to the Secretary of State.
My ex has arrears but some are due to the Secretary because I did receive X amount of unemployement benefit.

The NRP is meant to financially contribute to his/her child's upbringing but certainly not to contribute towards the Secretary's (large) wealth.

That is so disgusting!

Can you copy and paste the documents?

there was some debt to be repayed to the s of s it totalled around £6000 but there is no explanation as to why he took another £11000.

between 2002 and 2006 i payed a appx £14000 to the mothers of my 2 children only to be told by the CSA that i had to repay everything i had payed for my second child back to the first mother. It also took us 12 months and the involvement of the independant case examiner to secure provision for my second child from the money they were taking from my wages. due to the fact that when they made a DEO (as i am apparently a non compliant father) they payed it all to the 1st childs mother and left nothing for the second . Following another !!!! up i am now about to lose my home because once again the csa have attacked my wages for 30% with regard to arrears i alegedly owe my first wife and yet again no oney is being forwarded to my second child so i am having to pay for her manually the grand total is 40% of my wage .

Dancing_Shoes

nadine273 wrote: »

Sorry I did not mean to "thank you" I was meant to click on "Quote"

My friend's ex is posting on this forum begging for help when in fact he is totally non-compliant and has been so for the past 8 years!
And so is my ex!

Also, if one read carefully some of the posters threads one will realise that the story keep changing!

I must admit that it brings such a big smile on my face when a non-compliant NRP use the forum as a way of getting help for it shows that they are reaching a point when it is becoming extremely difficult for them to get away from their responsabilities.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Well if a non compliant nrp came on here asking for help with avoiding payments (if thats waht you mean) then I would like to think that the majority of us that post wouldn't help them. I have said it before and i'll say it again I have NO TIME for anyone who avoids paying for their children when they can afford to:mad::mad:
There are lots of ways that people try to avoid paying the csa but they will always catch up with those people eventually and with csa3 being bought in it seems like they will have even more powers so their time avoiding payments will really be coming to an end:T

Alot of people post on here because they are confused by the csa (not difficult!) and so they want help/advice and I would hate for anyone to be put off posting because they may think their posts could be interpreted as "stories". I think there is a good mix of people who post in the best interests of the children first and foremost and I have not yet come across any posts advising non compliant nrp's ways to avoid paying, but then I have a life outside of this board and haven't the time to read them all:D

nadine273

To Dancing Shoes,

They are cunning not completely stupid.
Mind you one of them did start a thread that immediately caught my intention as it was obvious that he was fishing for information on how not to pay CM.
Won't say the name or thread but I trust that most of you can read between the lines.

To Chriss,

That is a very sad story. Hope your daughter will come to term with not seeing her dad.
I used to call my ex to let him know how our child was but he would hang up on me so I would tell my little darling that daddy could not stay on the phone because he was on the plane.
Poor little darling thought for many years that daddy lived on a plane :-(

nadine273

By the way Dancing Shoes,

I do have a great life outside this forum! ;-)
But must admit that I read nearly all the posts (read all of them at first but for the past couple of month I have only been reading those that catch my attention.
When I first joined this forum it was not because I wished to post asking for help or to give advices.
I would normally not consider joining a forum simply because I actually hate communicating with people through a computer screen -I need to be able to see the "real" person!
However, never did a forum caused so much interest in me!
Many of the stories are purely amazing: the pain, the anger, the stress, the loss, and so on...
It is beyond me that the media (newspaper and tv) talk so little of what really happens to the children when a relationship breaks down -and yes, I do mean the "children" not the parents because at the end of the day whatever the adults go through (pain, anger,...) the children have to go through it too. And it is much harder for a child because he/she cannot comprehend what is really happening so whilst you (not you in general but "you" as in all parents) blame the ex the children blame themselves.
I wish it was me who felt the pain instead of my child!

N.B: I see we both joined the forum in July 2009.
130 posts versus 30 posts, uh?
Well done for your dedication to this forum. I wish I had your energy ;-)

kelloggs36

Chris - how would you suggest that a court forced contact on an NRP who does not want it? That's the point isn't it? They CAN just walk away, and the only thing open to ensure that they face their responsibility - because having children is a responsibility which should never be taken lightly - is to force them to pay financially for their upkeep. We can't make them have a relationship, but we CAN make them realise that they can't make children and then change their minds by ensuring that they continue to remain financially in their child's life. It would be great if they thought that as they are paying, they may as well get something good from it, ie the relationship, but sadly some just aren't interested. I don't like to think that we would allow that to happen in a modern society. Children are for life, not just for Christmas!!!!!!! And children are expensive - fact.,

chriszzz

[QUOTE=kelloggs36;25426419]Chris - how would you suggest that a court forced contact on an NRP who does not want it? That's the point isn't it? They CAN just walk away, and the only thing open to ensure that they face their responsibility - because having children is a responsibility which should never be taken lightly - is to force them to pay financially for their upkeep. We can't make them have a relationship, but we CAN make them realise that they can't make children and then change their minds by ensuring that they continue to remain financially in their child's life. It would be great if they thought that as they are paying, they may as well get something good from it, ie the relationship, but sadly some just aren't interested. I don't like to think that we would allow that to happen in a modern society. Children are for life, not just for Christmas!!!!!!! And children are expensive - fact.,[/QUOTE]

Point I was making was that the nrp has also a emotional responsibility to the child and the pwc felt it was safe to have children with the nrp, so why should that change when the nrp leaves the family home?

The nrp may not be interested in the emotional responsibility but wont also be interested in the financial responsibilty but we must ensure that we take the nrp to court or csa to make sure he does one of the two things he doesnt want to do, so we go for the money!!!

Yes children are for life!! and parents should be for life and not just for christmas

chriszzz

chriszzz wrote: »

Point I was making was that the nrp has also a emotional responsibility to the child and the pwc felt it was safe to have children with the nrp, so why should that change when the nrp leaves the family home?

The nrp may not be interested in the emotional responsibility but wont also be interested in the financial responsibilty but we must ensure that we take the nrp to court or csa to make sure he does one of the two things he doesnt want to do, so we go for the money!!!

Yes children are for life!! and parents should also be for life and not just for christmas

Just to add.... the nrp who was a parent living in the family home still has the responsibility when leaving the family home, so why should we allow for him to diminsh that responsibility just because he is not interested...does that mean he wasnt interested when he was living in the family home??? I think its just a cop out for them, so why shouldnt we give them back there responsibility, if safe to do so!!

kelloggs36

chriszzz wrote: »

Point I was making was that the nrp has also a emotional responsibility to the child and the pwc felt it was safe to have children with the nrp, so why should that change when the nrp leaves the family home?

The nrp may not be interested in the emotional responsibility but wont also be interested in the financial responsibilty but we must ensure that we take the nrp to court or csa to make sure he does one of the two things he doesnt want to do, so we go for the money!!!

Yes children are for life!! and parents should be for life and not just for christmas

Yes parents should be, so how do we get that message to those who have changed their minds at being parents?

kelloggs36

chriszzz wrote: »

Just to add.... the nrp who was a parent living in the family home still has the responsibility when leaving the family home, so why should we allow for him to diminsh that responsibility just because he is not interested...does that mean he wasnt interested when he was living in the family home??? I think its just a cop out for them, so why shouldnt we give them back there responsibility, if safe to do so!!

I agree - I think we are talking about the same thing here!! As nobody can force a parent to face up to their emotional responsibility, they do indeed get away with this. However, they must not then also be allowed to get away with not facing up to their financial responsibility - no matter how much they squeal!

Blob

So in makeing them face up to their responsibility to their children, and I have no problem with that responsibility! Should they be driven to the point were they cant take responsibility financially for themselvs and meet their own commitments?