the next step???

shell_542

But the fact is what Sou posted BB. There is no law against taking photos of young children without their parent's permission (unless of course pornography was involved).

Those people who tell you to put your camera away at school, swimming pools etc etc are making their own guidelines for their own institutions/businesses.

It would pee me off someone taking pictures of my child to try and stir up trouble like the poster's PWC but there isn't actually any thing the police can do about the photo taking ... unless you go down the route of harassment (which the poster has)

The police cannot possibly charge every person who catches a child in a photo they take. If they could, I'd be in trouble as I've done it on holiday in the past or on the beach. Lol

If someone asked me to put a camera away on a public beach I would ask them where this rule is written because that is ridiculous. Nanny state gone mad.

bdt1

Thanks for all of your replies, it just disturbs me that the PWC is so determined/bitter, to clarify, my hubs the NRP is paying child maintenance, just the PWC seems to want more and more. I'm also a PWC and my ex earns nearly 200k per year lives in a house worh 3/4 million so obvioulsy money is no object, guess how much I got per month maintenance £243, this is because his housing was so expensive, at the time I didn't know you could go for departure on 2 counts which would have been appropriate a) his girlfriend was living with him and could contribute to housing b) his housing costs were excessive, he lived in a 6 bed house for 2 of them??????? He never gave me a penny over the £243 and is still years later paying the arrears - my hubs would never do this to any of his children if he were in such a position, this is what annoys me with our PWC, we are struggling with 4 children in our household, as she too will be with 2, but we simply cannot give her money we do not have, in the same breath we cannot lavish money on our children that we simply do not have either - there is only a measureable amount of money coming in each month - not that money tree in the garden that our PWC seems to believe exists

Dancing_Shoes

bdt1 wrote: »

Thanks for all of your replies, it just disturbs me that the PWC is so determined/bitter, to clarify, my hubs the NRP is paying child maintenance, just the PWC seems to want more and more. I'm also a PWC and my ex earns nearly 200k per year lives in a house worh 3/4 million so obvioulsy money is no object, guess how much I got per month maintenance £243, this is because his housing was so expensive, at the time I didn't know you could go for departure on 2 counts which would have been appropriate a) his girlfriend was living with him and could contribute to housing b) his housing costs were excessive, he lived in a 6 bed house for 2 of them??????? He never gave me a penny over the £243 and is still years later paying the arrears - my hubs would never do this to any of his children if he were in such a position, this is what annoys me with our PWC, we are struggling with 4 children in our household, as she too will be with 2, but we simply cannot give her money we do not have, in the same breath we cannot lavish money on our children that we simply do not have either - there is only a measureable amount of money coming in each month - not that money tree in the garden that our PWC seems to believe exists

You don't have a money tree??? Are you sure???:rotfl:;)

bdt1

If we did she would have taken a photo of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dancing_Shoes

bdt1 wrote: »

If we did she would have taken a photo of it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LMAO:rotfl::rotfl:

enemes

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

Yes I agree that nrp's who avoid payment are the lowest sort of people but do you really want to see balliffs go round to his house or him put in prison?

erm ... yeah!!

smoothassilk

Dancing_Shoes wrote: »

If you read my previous posts you will see that I never advocate letting the nrp who doesn't contribute off the hook:rolleyes:

I don't have the answer but it appeared that the op was keen for her nrp to have baliffs go round (although she said it wouldn't turn anything up) and then we started talking about prison etc. I am sure there are many nrps who avoid maintenance who would much rather serve a sentance than pay so how will this help the children anyway?

Are you saying that for example if an nrp goes to the pwc and says "because of my outgoings in building my new life I can only afford to pay you £10 per week" then the pwc goes to the csa and they say he has to pay £20 per week which the pwc knows he can't afford and goes for it anyway who is in the right and who is in the wrong? There are a few cases on here that are exactly that example.

Just to clear this up i never said i was keen for the baliffs to go round, i also dont want him to go to prison (but if im honest if thats what the CSA have to resort to then so be it) , i have given him every chance to sort this out between ourselves even saying that we could have a private arrangement and he pays me £20 a week rather than the £95 a week that the CSA said he should pay, but unfortuanatly he never made one payment. its got to this point because he is one of those that thinks if he ignores it then it will go away.
The reason i asked is because as soon as he finds out whats going on he is going to go mad so i just wanted to know the steps that the CSA take from people that might have experienced it for themselves because as we all know what the CSA say and what they do are 2 totally different things.

Dancing_Shoes

smoothassilk wrote: »

Just to clear this up i never said i was keen for the baliffs to go round, i also dont want him to go to prison (but if im honest if thats what the CSA have to resort to then so be it) , i have given him every chance to sort this out between ourselves even saying that we could have a private arrangement and he pays me £20 a week rather than the £95 a week that the CSA said he should pay, but unfortuanatly he never made one payment. its got to this point because he is one of those that thinks if he ignores it then it will go away.
The reason i asked is because as soon as he finds out whats going on he is going to go mad so i just wanted to know the steps that the CSA take from people that might have experienced it for themselves because as we all know what the CSA say and what they do are 2 totally different things.

Ahhh, that puts a very different slant on things. I wouldn't worry about what action the CSA takes to recover the monies owed as that is then between them and the nrp. I would just ring the CSA at regular intervals for updates on whether your money is in without probing what punishment he has had that way it appears that your only concern is the money for your child and not any sort of revenge. As for him thinking the CSA would go away then he is in for a complete shock, I personally would say nothing to him and let the CSA deal with him regarding the money......he is going to wish he took you up on that offer;)

enemes

smoothassilk wrote: »

i also dont want him to go to prison (but if im honest if thats what the CSA have to resort to then so be it)

Surely jail would be a deterrent to nrp's who deliberately avoid their responsibilities ... it is a crime to neglect your children's needs, both emotional as well as financial)

smoothassilk

i dont plan on talking to him again but i know he will send me lots of abusive messeges, which i will try to ignore, sometimes thats easier said than done though when someone has brought a situation on themselves then starts trying to play the victim, especially after the chances i gave him, for me it was more about the effort rather than the money.
As for the prison thing i would rather it didnt get to that point but i fear that it will and im just concerned about all the hassle i will get, the CSA have told me that they have a contract for 60 days with a baliffs and if they have no joy then they will go for a commital. didnt realise it would be that quick