NRP opts out of employment

racheylou

Does anyone know what can be done about support if the NRP opts out of employment? She is able to live off her new partner now so she has given up work. She is capable of working and earning her own money, but chooses not to and therefore is not liable for child support. The assessment was post 2003 so the NRP partner would not be taken into consideration, but as a result of her newly funded lifestyle she can avoid paying anything for her child.... I don't think it’s fair to assess a partner who should have no financial responsibility for our children, on the other hand I have to work; surely someone who is capable of working should at least be assessed at their earnings capability?

Dancing_Shoes

I don't know if the CSA would be able to do anything about this as she isn't actually working, have you spoken to a solicitor?

racheylou

Hi, no. She left a council job and supposedly went the work for her new partner. We took her assessment to a tribunal last year on the grounds that portrayed herself as being employed by his business. Her line changed as soon as we applied for CSA and she then claimed she was a kept woman. We lost the tribunal because the onus is on the PWC to prove that she works. The truth is she probably does very little so would agree you could hardly class it as a job. BUT her and her partner did have to confirm that he put at least £20,000 (yes twenty THOUSAND pounds) into her bank each year to "help her out". In her own right she is probably only likely to ever earn about £15k a year (before tax). Its really that amount i think we should be assessed on out of principle at the very least.

Dancing_Shoes

Definately go to see a solicitor, they should offer a free initial consultation (this will be limited to approx half an hour), check first before you book the appointment and then you should be able to see whether you would get more joy out of pursuing her through the courts. She is quite clearly trying to dodge paying for her children:mad:

Soubrette

racheylou wrote: »

Hi, no. She left a council job and supposedly went the work for her new partner. We took her assessment to a tribunal last year on the grounds that portrayed herself as being employed by his business. Her line changed as soon as we applied for CSA and she then claimed she was a kept woman. We lost the tribunal because the onus is on the PWC to prove that she works. The truth is she probably does very little so would agree you could hardly class it as a job. BUT her and her partner did have to confirm that he put at least £20,000 (yes twenty THOUSAND pounds) into her bank each year to "help her out". In her own right she is probably only likely to ever earn about £15k a year (before tax). Its really that amount i think we should be assessed on out of principle at the very least.

I think you might be stuffed CSA is only assessed on the income of the parents of a child. If an NRP chooses to live off the NRPP then, as far as I know, there is nothing that can be done.

I have one friend who's NRP gave up work to look after his partner's children while she worked and he has a nil assessment because he has no income, they live off of the NRPPs income. He sees his own four children occasionally but pays nothing and has sustained a campaign of complaining about the PWC to social services and so called neglect of his children :rolleyes: (no complaint has ever been upheld).

Another friend has an NRP job hopper husband, he has paid about £15 over the last 12 years but he only works in minimum wage jobs which were plentiful at one time. He avoids payment because the PWC can't be bothered to keep track of his employment because she knows once it is sorted, he'll just leave (might not be too keen in this economic climate but she's long given up now). Now he would be liable but he is too hard to actually catch for any length of time.

Basically even if you take someone to a Tribunal - if they can prove that their lifestyle is due to something other than their own earned income then there is little the CSA can do about it.

With regards to the amount that you feel she should be assessed on - I believe the CSA have the ability to assume an income but this is based on very special circumstances such as when a person has control over how much salary they will take. I don't think in instances such as yours that it will carry much weight but it may be worth discussing this further with the CSA (or your MP).

Sou

Soubrette

I also wanted to say - how mean to have £20,000 a year to spend but be too tight to want to pay child maintenance.:mad:

Sou

Dancing_Shoes

This is again where it is all wrong, if you can work as an nrp then you should work and you should be made to support your children!

Dancing_Shoes

Soubrette wrote: »

I also wanted to say - how mean to have £20,000 a year to spend but be too tight to want to pay child maintenance.:mad:

Sou

Exactly! Could she not be assessed on this?

Loretta

Does her new partner have his own business? does he pay her a wage or use her as any sort of tax allowance? she can't have it both ways. Many men claim a tax allowance for their wives or partners who are working for them even if they do nothing at all, like MPs do with their families! she is either not working at all and cannot pay or she is not working but they are claiming some sort of tax allowance for her because of new partner's business, she can't have it both ways. I hope this makes sense. You need to do some digging about

Soubrette

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

This is again where it is all wrong, if you can work as an nrp then you should work and you should be made to support your children!

Yes, this is the only instance where I actually agree that there should be some minimum payment that a parent must pay towards the upkeep of their children (PWC and NRP) based on putting reasonable food in the child's belly, some kind of roof over it's head and clothing on it's back.

Even if it were something like £1500 a year, I would like to see all parents liable for this and if they didn't pay then they would be fined (with the fine put in trust for the child).

Of course and as ever, the practicalities of such a policy make it impossible

Sou

Soubrette

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

Exactly! Could she not be assessed on this?

No, because it's not income - it's pocket money her rich partner chooses to give her.

If the NRPP has a ltd company then you can buy annual accounts from companies house, they will also have details of who the shareholders are.

Sou