I work at CSA Bolton

Dancing_Shoes

speedster wrote: »

sorry mate. but you're full of it.

you work for the csa about as much as i do.

the word is "busted"

That is totally uncalled for!:mad:

kelloggs36

Steve40 wrote: »

The child supprt agency was originally set up to releive the pressure on the courts and chase those NRP's that refused to pay maintanance for the children , But it has become quite apparent over recent years that the child support agency are conconetrating there efforts on persecuting the NRP's that are paying for there children . Is this because its easier to boost there statistics by concentrating on sitting ducks than it is to do the job they were set up to do in the first place and that is to locate NRP's that refused to pay.

Why does the CSA make everybody believe that they endorse private agreements but ignore there existance when it comes to collecting arrears ? even though they send out documents saying they are aware that the agreements in place .

Why do CSA say that children are not entitled to provision unless the CSA gives permission for it

Why does the secretary of state help himself to NRP's maintenance payments when the PWC has a private case.They don't unless arrears are owed for a period when the PWC was on income support. If PWC has never been on benefits, then the CSA cannot take money and allocate to SofS.

Why do CSA agents say they have sent out warning letters when they have not . Many are system generated and can be traced as to when and where they were sent. Just because you didn't get letters, doesn't mean they weren't sent.

Why is it when you write to the CSA with your address at the top of the letter they respond to a different address?

Why is when an NRP challenges the CSA decision they become referred to as non compliant? Depends on what they are challenging. If arrears exist and NRP is challenging how much to pay, it could be deemed as being non-compliant because they don't want to pay what is being asked - regardless of what their circumstances are!!

Why is it when we phone the CSA the person we want to speak to is nearly always on sick or on holiday. But when you phone back the same day the person you want to speak to answers the phone?

Why do the agents tell lies over the phone why do they pass the buck why do cases get moved around from office to office to office when there is a problem?

Why do vital documents get lost ? becasue they are opened somewhere else and redirected to the relevant office/department. Easily lost.

why does every person at the csa give a different amount when asked to work out figures

Why does it take months and sometimes years to recognise qualifying children?
why does it take the ICE team to secure provision for certain children?

Why is the computer still used when cases are clerical?

Why does information from clerical cases not get put on to the computer .

Why does it say in the booklet that the CSA are able to deal with cases of multiple parents and children but the CSA agents or computer are unable to?

Why do the CSA lie about the powers they have to enforce when they have to send cases to the M court for enforcement action .what powers have they lied about having?

Why do NRP's that have been providing provision for there children get DEO's when they Dispute arrears .

to ensure that the arrears are paid off. NOt saying I agree, just stating what is.

Steve40_2

as i have previously stated on another thread i have documented evidence that proves the secretary of state has taken £11000 from on person in particular for no apparent reason . when there is money to be repayed for benefits am i right in saying it is listed as deferred debt to the secretary of state. if this is the case then £11000 is missing

I spoke to an agent in stockport whilst dealing with me case she informed me that they dont always get sent . so the question remains

There has a been a notionwide search for the documents supporting there claim against me . but they openly admit in there statement that the documents have been mispllaced

they say they have the power to remove driving licences , freeze bank accounts,and comit people to prison but they have to apply to the court for this . these are just scare tactics and blatant lies


most arrears cases are found to be incorrect when they are challenged so why doo they go for enforcement before the inquiry's are complete it would appear to be something to do with performance related bonuses they are awarded

another thing i have noticed when reading through the guidelines is NRP's are forced to overpay maitenance or arrears dont get all there money back a percentage is retained by the secretary of state .

shell_542

Why do vital documents get lost ? becasue they are opened somewhere else and redirected to the relevant office/department. Easily lost.

That's really not good enough is it?

If I had sent documents into a company and was advised they had been lost, because "you know, it's easily done" I would not be impressed.

If the CSA ring up an NRP and ask them if they received their paperwork, to receive the reply "Oh it was opened by my wife, but got lost when being redirected to me. It happens." would they be OK with that? I don't think so.

Dancing_Shoes

shell_542 wrote: »

If the CSA ring up an NRP and ask them if they received their paperwork, to receive the reply "Oh it was opened by my wife, but got lost when being redirected to me. It happens." would they be OK with that? I don't think so.

Shell I have actually been on the floor laughing at this:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

chriszzz

shell_542 wrote: »

That's really not good enough is it?

If I had sent documents into a company and was advised they had been lost, because "you know, it's easily done" I would not be impressed.

If the CSA ring up an NRP and ask them if they received their paperwork, to receive the reply "Oh it was opened by my wife, but got lost when being redirected to me. It happens." would they be OK with that? I don't think so.

Well said shell!!!! These places think they can say what they want and we are supose to believe it!!!! Heard it too many times!! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

CRANKY40

Steve40 wrote: »

as i have previously stated on another thread i have documented evidence that proves the secretary of state has taken £11000 from on person in particular for no apparent reason . when there is money to be repayed for benefits am i right in saying it is listed as deferred debt to the secretary of state. if this is the case then £11000 is missing


most arrears cases are found to be incorrect when they are challenged so why doo they go for enforcement before the inquiry's are complete it would appear to be something to do with performance related bonuses they are awarded

another thing i have noticed when reading through the guidelines is NRP's are forced to overpay maitenance or arrears dont get all there money back a percentage is retained by the secretary of state .

1. No it's not. Deferred debt is something completely different, relating to old CSA1 cases

2. Don't blame the ordinary staff. account breakdowns used to be done to check every case, then the announcement was made that this was no longer required. Do not assume CSA staff in general think this is good practice.

3. If an NRP has overpaid, the overpayment can either be adjusted from any outstanding arrears if applicable, or repaid to the NRP. Either way it is repaid in full. There is no % retained by the secretary of state.

Can't help you on the others sorry.....

Steve40_2

CRANKY40 wrote: »

1. No it's not. Deferred debt is something completely different, relating to old CSA1 cases

2. Don't blame the ordinary staff. account breakdowns used to be done to check every case, then the announcement was made that this was no longer required. Do not assume CSA staff in general think this is good practice.

3. If an NRP has overpaid, the overpayment can either be adjusted from any outstanding arrears if applicable, or repaid to the NRP. Either way it is repaid in full. There is no % retained by the secretary of state.

Can't help you on the others sorry.....

Sorry to disagree but it clearly states in the child support act that not all the money needs to be paid back the secretary of state keeps a % for a certain fund . i will look in the act and tell you paragraph section no etc

Viper_7

shell_542 wrote: »

That's really not good enough is it?

If I had sent documents into a company and was advised they had been lost, because "you know, it's easily done" I would not be impressed.

If the CSA ring up an NRP and ask them if they received their paperwork, to receive the reply "Oh it was opened by my wife, but got lost when being redirected to me. It happens." would they be OK with that? I don't think so.

As with most government schemes - they are way way behind the times.
Most I.T. companies worth their salt look and laugh, they are totally inept and an embarrassment to the country.
My company would be hung drawn and quartered if we lost information like that ( not that it is ever on a peace of paper!), do they not have external auditors? how the hell can they continue to operate in this climate?

Steve40_2

Steve40 wrote: »

Sorry to disagree but it clearly states in the child support act that not all the money needs to be paid back the secretary of state keeps a % for a certain fund . i will look in the act and tell you paragraph section no etc

here you go its the last sentence in this chapter
(1) This section applies where—
(a) the Secretary of State is authorised under section 4, 6 or 7 to recover child support maintenance payable by an absent parent in accordance with a maintenance assessment; and
(b) the absent parent has failed to make one or more payments of child support maintenance due from him in accordance with that assessment.
(2) Where the Secretary of State recovers any such arrears he may, in such circumstances as may be prescribed and to such extent as may be prescribed, retain them if he is satisfied that the amount of any benefit paid to the person with care of the child or children in question would have been less had the absent parent not been in arrears with his payments of child support maintenance.
(3) In such circumstances as may be prescribed, the absent parent shall be liable to make such payments of interest with respect to the arrears of child support maintenance as may be prescribed.
(4) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision—
(a) as to the rate of interest payable by virtue of subsection (3);
(b) as to the time at which, and person to whom, any such interest shall be payable;
(c) as to the circumstances in which, in a case where the Secretary of State has been acting under section 6, any such interest may be retained by him;
(d) for the Secretary of State, in a case where he has been acting under section 6 and in such circumstances as may be prescribed, to waive any such interest (or part of any such interest).
(5) The provisions of this Act with respect to—
(a) the collection of child support maintenance;
(b) the enforcement of any obligation to pay child support maintenance,
shall apply equally to interest payable by virtue of this section.
(6) Any sums retained by the Secretary of State by virtue of this section shall be paid by him into the Consolidated Fund.