CSA could cost me my career

DX2

Nixxx wrote: »

Ah i see, didn't think of it like that, please ignore my post.

thanks

:whistle: the armed forces are probably the CSA biggest customers.
(flame proof suit on standby)

ses6jwg

DX2 wrote: »

:whistle: the armed forces are probably the CSA biggest customers.
(flame proof suit on standby)

As a bloke living in a town with an army base nearby and I have to say you're probably right there.

They seem to get girls from "lower incomes" pregnant who then moan that the father has ran off :rolleyes: what did you expect..

RoyalBlues

Whatever, whatever.............................

at the end of the day, the CSA has far too many powers and they abuse them (with much glee). They throw a blanket over each and every NRP without caring, thinking or investigating and they assume that all NRPs are complete scum who hate their own kids.

The CSA does not 'means test' each and every NRP scenario, we are ALL the same (and why should they? every NRP is a complete scumbag). They don't care, they have no feelings (except for the PWC, who is ALWAYS best for the kids).

So.............................who is to blame?? The CSA employees (who recite their pre determined script very well, in their cold, uncaring and misled pro-PWC way) or the Government who have got it all completely wrong?

the bottom line is.................the CSA sucks (and the vast majority of their brainwashed employees subscribe to their organisations b***s**t). I am truly saddended to the bottom of my heart because I know the true extent of their powers. It is all wrong and the CSA needs a complete revamp from Governmental level.

Simply, the CSA is a national disgrace...........nuff said :rolleyes:

LizzieS_2

RoyalBlues wrote: »

The CSA employees (who recite their pre determined script very well, in their cold, uncaring and misled pro-PWC way)

You will find the pwcs hear the scripts too, and they are not pro-pwc then.

skiTTish

"Simply, the CSA is a national disgrace...........nuff said :rolleyes:"

Nah ,the national discrace is the amount of men that cannot keep it in their trousers then moan that they are expected to pay to raise the product of that!
If they lived with the child they would always be skint ,trust me ,whatever you get paid ,kids always manage to skint you ,so why should it be any different for an absent parent ?

13Kent

skiTTish,

I understand your comment, and maybe in some cases it does apply, however things are not always so black and white. What about the fathers who love their children and their family life and have this turned upside down by their wife/partner who goes on to have an affair and subsequently throws the father out through no fault of his own. He has lost his family and his home, and then he is dropped into this scandalously unfair CSA system which makes it even harder for him to pick up the pieces and rebuild himself a life, trying to balance seeing his children, paying a fair amount for their upkeep and then trying to make another life for himself with another partner and maybe another family who through no fault of their own will often find themselves playing second fiddle to the ex wife (who holds all the cards as she has custody) and first children. Trying to balance all this so that all concerned are happy and can get on with their lives is a nightmare as it is without the CSA system to complicate things and by it's very nature open to dishonesty and fraud on both sides causing more bitterness and nastiness to an already delicate situation.

DUTR

skiTTish wrote: »

"Simply, the CSA is a national disgrace...........nuff said :rolleyes:"

Nah ,the national discrace is the amount of men that cannot keep it in their trousers then moan that they are expected to pay to raise the product of that!
If they lived with the child they would always be skint ,trust me ,whatever you get paid ,kids always manage to skint you ,so why should it be any different for an absent parent ?

It could be equally argued that the National disgrace is the 'ladies' that open their legs to any passer by.
In fairness , I think someone somewhere on the board is aware of the consequences the csa can have on families, there would not be an overnight change, but some changes like not having to use the csa , to me has come about from some of the troubles the csa involvement can bring to a situation,
I remember not too long after starting to pay my csa I had an 'invite' to participate in a goverment survey, oddly I asked some of my friends if they had an invite too, strangely only the ones who had become 'customers' of the csa had had a survey invite of that type .

mitchaa

DUTR wrote: »

It could be equally argued that the National disgrace is the 'ladies' that open their legs to any passer by.

Agree here, It is the lady that chooses to have the child from a 1 night stand.

That's a bigger national disgrace than the males 2min drunken fumble in my opinion as she gets to think about morning after pill and abortion for the next 18wks, the unsuspecting male does not have a choice, only that 2min fumble.

To O.P..If it were me, and I had no contact with my child, I'd leave my job and start self employed. No point busting a gut and earning a pittance especially for someone you have no connections with.

Child maintenance in my opinion should be a fixed fee per child across the board that is not dependent on the NRP's income. It should be an amount that can support the basic needs of a child, not to support the lifestyle of an ex partner like it does so in many cases.

What difference is there with a child getting £25pw to another that gets £250pw? Both sets no doubt will have similar basic need costs, so where is the £225 difference going every week? If the NRP is ''well off'' it should then be their choice if they want to spoil their children or not with more.

Add child related benefits into the equation that the NRP does not get and it is more than fair.

IMO anyway

13Kent

I agree mitchaa it would be a much fairer system if there was a set amount payable for a child dependent on age perhaps. Then both the NRP and the PWC would know how much to expect, and it would avoid a lot of the nastiness created by the CSA system which is open to fraud and dishonesty on both sides.

Loopy_Girl

mitchaa wrote: »

That's a bigger national disgrace than the males 2min drunken fumble in my opinion as she gets to think about morning after pill and abortion for the next 18wks, the unsuspecting male does not have a choice, only that 2min fumble.

"the lady chooses to have the baby after a one night stand"...but the man chooses to have unprotected sex...so you are saying that it's okay for men to shag about with no thought to sexual health as the women can always go down to the clinic and get the results hoovered out? He chooses to dip his knob unprotected then it's quite right he should put his hand in his pocket for the next 18 years should a pregnancy occur...maybe make him think twice the next time eh?
Yes, lets leave the contraception and murdering of babies to the women...hurrah, we are back in the 19th century:rolleyes: The 'unsuspecting male' DOES have a choice as he can whap a condom on the end of his knob and quite frankly, if he doesn't and the female decides to proceed with the pregnancy then he is as much responsible as her. Babies don't just appear from nowhere...we don't just fall onto willies unsuspectingly and I would think that in actual fact it is a very small minority of the CSA cases that are one night stand jobs. Most children are born out of love. And oh yeah, if she turns round and says that she 'can't have kids' or I'm on the pill' then condoms should still be getting used...jesus these days a baby could be the least of the problem.

p.s 2 mins eh mitchaa? I tell you, Mrs mitchaa is one lucky lucky lady:p