Interim Maintenance Assessment

Newtothis_2

They had a joint bank account but he has not kept anything - I've kept everything since we have been together but he's a man ....

We could write to the bank - it would have been around 1997/98 to confirm but I've asked him and he's a bit worried as after he left she said she ran the account into an overdraft of approx £3K - he's doesn't want another surprise bill to deal with.

Also, where he worked at the time will have this address/telephone number etc - is it worth writing to them? It was a family run farm and she used to ride her horse up there so they will probably remember her as will as him.

kelloggs36

I would go for it - you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. You need to exhaust every single avenue.

Newtothis_2

Kelloggs I don't know how to use this site properly yet but thank you.

I will start drafting some letters ... and will let you know the outcome.

blimey40

The data protection files should contain information on whether a IMA was set up. I am in a similar case whereby my daughter is 24 and they are going back to 1996. I am surprised they are not seeking a liability order for arrears which they have done in my case. If the case is CSA 1 it will be clerical, so you can see all the notes CSA staff have written down, if you do not have this, it must requested again. In my case, they have practically no worthwhile detials but notes have been taken. Its good to have this in writing. one has a senior staff member writing in 2004 "this should not be a IMA, as the NRp will be unaware this in place", which will come in very handy.

If you can prove that the NRP was not at the address when they sent original documentation, you should okay. The CSA will play dirty tricks giving you the impression monies have to paid whilst you are appealing and even threatening baliff action. This is simply a scare tactic. The system in place does not allow for two sides of the coin arguments, its simply an attitude they are right.

I would advise to get legal help. A friend of mine is a solictor and he has helped enormously, if thats difficult then I recommend NACSA who have finger firmly on the pulse. Above all, don;t be bullied or put into a corner.

My case is so old, it has cobwebs and the CSA have done nothing since last June when they finally made contact and practically nothing since they got a liability order in January this year. They will not let it go, but if it does eventually go to tribunal or court than they will lose, thats why CSA are so persistent to get it done, as they play on your ignorance of the law. Hope this helps.

Newtothis_2

Thanks Blimey

They are threatening us with a LO but our MP has put pressure on to stop this while they answer our complaint.

I am going to send them our address details so that they can see that the IMA was not received - at the very least I think they should recalculate this based on true details but my main aim is to get the whole thing quoshed on the basis that the NRP and PWC reconciled.

I'll keep you posted. We do have a solicitor involved but it's really expensive so we try to do as much as we can ourselves.

kelloggs36

I found a commissioner's decision based on whether a case should be reassessed retrospectively due to not notifying the NRP to the correct address - surprisingly it was decided that it was not to be and the assessment which the NRP did not know about was upheld and he had to pay! It was based around the fact that the MEF was received and so the NRP knew about the CSA's involvement and he had notified them of a change of address, yet when they did the assessment, they sent it to his old address.

kelloggs36

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j2764/CCS%201385%202009-00.doc

kelloggs36

The reconciliation is going to be the key issue - because he was no longer an NRP and so the CSA no longer had jurisdiction.

kelloggs36

http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j2094/CCS%202332%202006-00.doc

this refers to a case where a temporary period of reconciliation still resulted in the NRP being liable as the living together in the same household was not proven to be a true reconciliation! The PWC in your case may argue that she was living in the same house but was not a partner of the NRP and still win. There needs to be evidence of them being a couple - the bank statements, can your hubby get copies from the bank showing them jointly on there? It wil cost him, but it could be crucial.