CSA and confirmation from a manager

reallyreally

Why would a NRP refuse to pay maintenance? Many refuse because of all the things that get inc which i can totally sympathise with, and because they have to pay yet cant see there children

I do not know what an acceptable figure is, it should be done on a % of there salary, that differs with everyone, someone could earn 1 million and pay the same as someone who earns £20k, which clearly isnt fair. But the % figure should be the same to all NRPs on there salary not on what there partners earn plus whatever else comes into the household

reallyreally

Soubrette wrote: »

I think they have your assessment wrong but I have no direct experience of stepchildren.

I'm actually inconsistent in my view - a family tends to benefit from the income of the household it is in so I feel a second family should be taken into account, after all if the first family had stayed together and further children were born - all the children would have less spent on them, assuming income stays stable.

I'm uncomfortable for the NRPPs child credits to be used as part of the assessment yet I am perfectly happy for my own child tax credits to be based on both mine and my other half's income thereby leading to a reduction in my children's tax credits.

I don't really know how to bring those contradictory beliefs together though I'm am glad that they don't mean I believe it's ok to screw over the other side though

Sou

Would you be ok with it if you had disabled children and there was a disablility element in your CTC that was also taken into consideration for 2 healthy children that CSA was being paid to?

tiggerkian

reallyreally.....you have made my year...someone who thinks along the same lines as me....i said to my mp only on monday "why does my ex not see me fit to be a father to my child,and won't let me see her,but my money is good enough for her to take from me for her" i also said pwc should lose benefit money for keeping children away from their fathers to put us on an even keel....i mean who as money for solicitors when the csa take there cut of your wages......

reallyreally

tiggerkian wrote: »

reallyreally.....you have made my year...someone who thinks along the same lines as me....i said to my mp only on monday "why does my ex not see me fit to be a father to my child,and won't let me see her,but my money is good enough for her to take from me for her" i also said pwc should lose benefit money for keeping children away from their fathers to put us on an even keel....i mean who as money for solicitors when the csa take there cut of your wages......

I totally agree with you 100% your money is good enough but you arent, bet you were good enough when you were together to look after your child

Lets hope they listen

Good luck I wish you all the best

Soubrette

Why would an NRP refuse to pay maintenance - perhaps you should ask my wealthy ex :rotfl:

I went to the CSA because I foolishly believed that he would always pay a fair share towards the girls that he adored when we were together.

We had a shared care court order - put through by me with advice from the court as his solicitors tried to persuade him to go for individual care and he put through a misspelled, evasive care agreement to the court allowing me none - and an agreement through the solicitors that neither of us would go for child maintenance because we would both look after the children.

Shared care to him means 6 days a month and a 2 week holiday per year. Not once has he offered to share school holidays despite being in effect self employed and having flexible workings. When one child asked to see on a weekend that was not 'his' he said that that was time for him and his partner. He says he is available whenever they want to come over but always has excuses as to why they can't.

To cap it all, over the four years that we spend not involving the CSA he spent approx 2% to 5% of his net income and diminishing each year. Last year I spent 50% of my gross income on my girls (my actual earned income - I also spent 100% of any child related benefits on them).

He has had every chance to be an involved father (and still does - I do not believe it is my place to withhold access) and to spend his money on how he wanted on them - all I asked is that he spends roughly what parliament has deemed is an appropriate proportion of his income on his girls whether than be nicer clothes than I can afford, nicer holidays etc or putting it away into savings for them for university (speaking of which, if they live with him they will be expected to pay rent while accruing student debt).

The income of this person who wants to spend so little in time or money on his children - approx £60,000 to £90,000 a year.

Perhaps you would have some idea on what motivates a man like this? I wanted to remain mum and dad even though we had split up but my ex has passed up this offer that it seems many nrps would chop a leg off for.

His loss

Sou

Soubrette

reallyreally wrote: »

Would you be ok with it if you had disabled children and there was a disablility element in your CTC that was also taken into consideration for 2 healthy children that CSA was being paid to?

Reread my post very carefully. :mad:

I do not feel comfortable with the NRPP's child benefit being taken into account at all when calculating child maintenance.

With that as my stated opinion - why would I feel any different about the disability element.

If you cannot let your bias go then at least be very careful on how it blinds you.

Sou

chriszzz

I agree really-really that if a pwc denies the nrp access then she should not be allowed to have the money, vice versa.

I would bet my life that pwc who behaves that way would soon stop their little controlling games.

I also agree that the nrp 1st children child support should just be based on the nrps earnings.

Soubrette

chriszzz wrote: »

I agree really-really that if a pwc denies the nrp access then she should not be allowed to have the money, vice versa.

I would bet my life that pwc who behaves that way would soon stop their little controlling games.

I also agree that the nrp 1st children child support should just be based on the nrps earnings.

I can't agree - two wrongs don't make a right.

If a person withholds maintenance then yes they may well be greedy and mean - but they may be good parents in other ways.

It is wrong for the PWC to withhold access full stop. If there are child protection issues then social services should be involved and they should make the decision to withhold access.

Sou

reallyreally

Soubrette wrote: »

Reread my post very carefully. :mad:

I do not feel comfortable with the NRPP's child benefit being taken into account at all when calculating child maintenance.

With that as my stated opinion - why would I feel any different about the disability element.

If you cannot let your bias go then at least be very careful on how it blinds you.

Sou

You have clearly quoted that you have no problem havin your CTC taken into account I asked whether you would be so happy if it had a Disability element in it, Child Benefit is not CTC

Soubrette

reallyreally wrote: »

You have clearly quoted that you have no problem havin your CTC taken into account I asked whether you would be so happy if it had a Disability element in it, Child Benefit is not CTC

No, I said that I have no problem with my husband's income being taken into account as the PWCP (that's why I clearly stated my own tax credits ie the ones I get now). Because his earnings take us over a certain threshold we get a reducion of child tax credits and no working tax credits. Rightly so I believe - these benefits should be target at low income households - not households where a PWC is the only low earner and a PWCP takes the household income to a reasonable income.

If I were the NRP then I'm sure I would feel the same as I do now - I don't feel comfortable having child benefit, child tax credits or any element of child related disability benefits being taken as part of income that can be used to calculate child maintenance.

Sou