out of the blue arrears demand

speedster

kelloggs36 wrote: »

In what context?

for tax credits. i dunno, that's why i asked.

kelloggs36

NRPs unless they get maintenance from another ex wouldn't have any maintenance to declare to the tax credits, but if they did get some from an ex, that wouldn't be counted either.

speedster

so, does CM count as income for the pwc when applying for TC?

DX2

DX2 wrote: »

Child maintenace is not counted as income for working tax purposes.

speedster wrote: »

so, does CM count as income for the pwc when applying for TC?

.................................

Loopy_Girl

Sidekick wrote: »

When you seek the financial advise the financial adviser should run through the options available to you. You would not be told but advised of your options, that is very little difference between what the csa state in the phone calls.

The IFA would run through your options, quite correct. He/she would then make a recommendation specific to your financial circumstances. This is classed as financial advice as they are allowed to do this as they have sat appropriate exams and are regulated by the FSA.

The CSA going through your options are doing just that...giving you options. No advice on what is the best course for you is given merely that there are various avenues out there.

Lets use an analogy...a frightened 15 year old goes to her local FPC as she is pregnant and doesn't know what to do. Do they a) demand that an abortion is in her best interest (i.e making recommendations) or b) give her a run down of the options and tell her to have a think about what is the best route for her.

The answer would be b of course and that is exactly what the CSA re doing...giving people choices...not financial advice.

kelloggs36

speedster wrote: »

so, does CM count as income for the pwc when applying for TC?

It doesn't

Sidekick_2

kelloggs36 wrote: »

The CSA are forcing people to do things they don’t want to all the time. you mean pay the debt that they owe?
Yes, but the point I am trying to make was that we all are forced to do something we’d rather not through laws of the country i.e. go school or pay tax
They bend or break the laws to get results, and they don’t care if they are right or not. if any staff is caught doing that there is disciplinary action and the possibility of being sacked.
Really? maybe I should give you a list!


The two year steer to collect debts is the problem. Many of these debts have taken not to 10 years to accumulate making it impossible to pay back in 2 years. I agree in part, but only if the CSA have taken 10 years to create the debt and this is rare compared to the number of NRPs who have refused to pay over that period! If refused to pay then there is NOBODY to blame but themselves!
When you say refused to pay you mean not that or not contact CSA for years then demand thousands of pounds in arrears? Or do you mean they refuse to pay?
If Other organisations including the Tax Office would not allow a debt to accumulate for that length of time, nor could they go back that far. They are better at compliance but there are also fewer people who would dodge tax compared to NRPs who fail to pay child support because tax is seen as much more powerful than the CSA - totally the senior management's fault as they allowed the CSA to get and keep the reputation that it was okay to fail to pay; hence many NRPs dodged it. Had they been more like the tax office in the first place and hit them hard at the beginning they would not be in this mess in the first place.
Can’t agree with this, CSA had the power to chase the NRPs and there are many people who do dodge tax or employ accountants to reduce their tax burden. The problem is as you have pointed out, bad management.

Agreed, everyone is responsible for choices in life. So when this agency miscalculates, breaks its rules and makes mistakes why doesn’t it not take responsibility and put it right.
They do actually - they have to put assessments right; it is getting them to recognise it is wrong that's the problem! There has been a history of non-ownership of cases so nobody keeps their own cases so mistakes are made as things are missed and quality control was very poor. Can't say if it is improving, but having a carp computer system which makes many cases clerical doesn't help!
Again, taking responsibility for one’s cases or work is what is expected by clients in any organisation or business. Mistakes are not put right for years causing hardship for both NRPs and PWCs. Blaming the computer simply isn’t good enough!

Loopy_Girl

Sidekick wrote: »

there are many people who do dodge tax or employ accountants to reduce their tax burden.

Stick around. You'll see this practice get actively encouraged by some posters:rolleyes:

Sidekick_2

Loopy Girl

The IFA would run through your options, quite correct. He/she would then make a recommendation specific to your financial circumstances. This is classed as financial advice as they are allowed to do this as they have sat appropriate exams and are regulated by the FSA.

Yes, they are allowed to do this because they are regulated by the FSA but CSA are not.

The CSA going through your options are doing just that...giving you options. No advice on what is the best course for you is given merely that there are various avenues out there.

Have you received a phone call? I have, and although they were giving options they also gave advice of in respect that, to spread payments over a longer period of time would ease my monthly outgoings.

Lets use an analogy...a frightened 15 year old goes to her local FPC as she is pregnant and doesn't know what to do. Do they a) demand that an abortion is in her best interest (i.e making recommendations) or b) give her a run down of the options and tell her to have a think about what is the best route for her.

1) I think you’re in the wrong forum
2) The CSA only demand, they do not give you time to think of your best route forward.

The answer would be b of course and that is exactly what the CSA re doing...giving people choices...not financial advice.

They do not give choices, you have to pay or face the consequences. Asking you to borrow from other sources without knowing your financial position is irresponsible.

Sidekick

kelloggs36

Sidekick wrote: »

The CSA are forcing people to do things they don’t want to all the time. you mean pay the debt that they owe?
Yes, but the point I am trying to make was that we all are forced to do something we’d rather not through laws of the country i.e. go school or pay tax you say the same thing - CSA making people pay who don't want to. They cannot force anybody to take out a loan - advising somebody they might consider it is not forcing them to do it.
They bend or break the laws to get results, and they don’t care if they are right or not.if any staff is caught doing that there is disciplinary action and the possibility of being sacked.
Really? maybe I should give you a list! Provide the evidence that you have make formal complaints along with the evidence of the law breaking and that the CSA have not investigated the complaint.


The two year steer to collect debts is the problem. Many of these debts have taken not to 10 years to accumulate making it impossible to pay back in 2 years. I agree in part, but only if the CSA have taken 10 years to create the debt and this is rare compared to the number of NRPs who have refused to pay over that period! If refused to pay then there is NOBODY to blame but themselves!
When you say refused to pay you mean not that or not contact CSA for years then demand thousands of pounds in arrears? Or do you mean they refuse to pay? I mean those who refuse to pay but there are also those who are fully aware that the CSA made contact in the first instance and then conveniently forgot to chase anything up = there was nothing to stop them. They should have expected to pay unless they had letters saying that their assessment was nil. If not, then they should have saved something and chased up their case.
If Other organisations including the Tax Office would not allow a debt to accumulate for that length of time, nor could they go back that far. They are better at compliance but there are also fewer people who would dodge tax compared to NRPs who fail to pay child support because tax is seen as much more powerful than the CSA - totally the senior management's fault as they allowed the CSA to get and keep the reputation that it was okay to fail to pay; hence many NRPs dodged it. Had they been more like the tax office in the first place and hit them hard at the beginning they would not be in this mess in the first place.
Can’t agree with this, CSA had the power to chase the NRPs not so, in the beginning their powers were very limited; over the years powers have been increased because it has been recognised that they were very restricted. and there are many people who do dodge tax or employ accountants to reduce their tax burden. they do, but ask people and most will say that they fear the taxman more than the CSA (maybe less so now that the CSA have finally recognised that action is what should have been taken in the first instance) The problem is as you have pointed out, bad management. MPs and advisors who advise senior management about what powers they should be enforcing and using.

Agreed, everyone is responsible for choices in life. So when this agency miscalculates, breaks its rules and makes mistakes why doesn’t it not take responsibility and put it right.
They do actually - they have to put assessments right; it is getting them to recognise it is wrong that's the problem! There has been a history of non-ownership of cases so nobody keeps their own cases so mistakes are made as things are missed and quality control was very poor. Can't say if it is improving, but having a carp computer system which makes many cases clerical doesn't help!
Again, taking responsibility for one’s cases or work is what is expected by clients in any organisation or business. Mistakes are not put right for years causing hardship for both NRPs and PWCs. Go back a few years and remember that the Govt announced 100,000 DWP workers were to lose their jobs - this resulted in many front line staff losing their jobs, doubling and sometimes tripling the workload of the remaining staff. But as long as it saves money it doesn't matter what service we provide the public - headlines is all that matters afterall; except when it affects the individual, then they wake up and realise what 'cuts' actually means. Blaming the computer simply isn’t good enough! you try working with a system which doesn't work - it makes your normal day to day life extremely difficult so that you cannot actually do what you are supposed to do. Put that right and more time is freed up so you can actually carry out your duties more effectively.

..............................................................