We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Father Gets £250 Refund..After CSA 30,000 Arrears Demand
blimey40
Posts: 573 Forumite
*Board guide comment*
Link removed but body of the text detailed below with identifying details removed
Link removed but body of the text detailed below with identifying details removed
0
Comments
-
Is this your case as it sounds familiar? Well done for getting closure if it is.0
-
IPSWICH: A lorry driver who faced a £30,000 demand from the Child Support Agency (CSA) for two grown-up children has received an apology from the body.
The fathe 45, branded the CSA as “incompetent” after it said it was wrong to demand the grandfather pay the hefty figure for two children who are now in their mid 20s.
The organisation admitted the blunder in a letter this week and offered to paythe father £250 in compensation for the fiasco.
The father, said: “I am lost for words. They are incompetent.
“The past five weeks have been horrible but it was brilliant to get the letter.”
The father first thought the demand was a joke as his son is now 25 and lives at home with him and second wife.
But when pressure to pay the £30,590.75 mounted, the father feared he may lose his home or be forced to go bankrupt.
He said: “It brought me down to my knees and almost put me in a box.
“I was scared because there was no way I could pay and I thought I could lose everything I have worked for.”
The father first grappled with the CSA in 1997, when he was told he must pay £110 a week for his children, which forced him to leave his job and go on benefits.
But after a few phone calls, the father was told the situation was cleared up and returned to his job assuming all was fine - until the bombshell demand last month.
The agency has now admitted there should never have been a claim. It has also refunded the £110 first taken from the fathers account in 1997.
“I felt relieved but after what they have put me through, £250 is an insult,” he said. “I feel totally let down by the CSA.
“They have destroyed me twice and I want some compensation for their error.”
The father now plans to demand a more substantial sum from the CSA, to compensate for the time he was forced to take off work to take legal advice and challenge the demand.Free/impartial debt advice: Consumer Credit Counselling Service (CCCS) | National Debtline | Find your local CAB0 -
this sort of error is commonplace with this incompetent organisation.
luckily, they didn't manage to destroy him. others aren't so lucky.
the mere thought of the draconian powers bestowed on these imbeciles makes me shudder.
and they're giving them more!! at least they've backed down on the ridiculous idea of issuing in house LO's........ for the time being.
and given that they've now lost their crown immunity, the FSA investigating them and other issues now coming to light, the days of them running amok and making up laws could well be drawing to an end.
and not a day too soon.NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. THEY'LL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL AND BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
and, please. only thank when appropriate. not to boost idiots egos.0 -
this sort of error is commonplace with this incompetent organisation.
luckily, they didn't manage to destroy him. others aren't so lucky.
the mere thought of the draconian powers bestowed on these imbeciles makes me shudder.
and they're giving them more!! at least they've backed down on the ridiculous idea of issuing in house LO's........ for the time being.
and given that they've now lost their crown immunity, the FSA investigating them and other issues now coming to light, the days of them running amok and making up laws could well be drawing to an end.
and not a day too soon.
It is a shocking story, however, the CSA realised their error and that was the end of it. They no longer persued arrears from this poor guy. (I agree that payment of £250 doesn't begin to cover the amount of stress this incorrect assessment must have brought to the NRP!)
Others that you refer to who are "not so lucky" may possibly be 'unlucky' because their arrears are likely genunine and need to be persued.0 -
PlayingHardball wrote: »It is a shocking story, however, the CSA realised their error and that was the end of it. They no longer persued arrears from this poor guy. (I agree that payment of £250 doesn't begin to cover the amount of stress this incorrect assessment must have brought to the NRP!)
Others that you refer to who are "not so lucky" may possibly be 'unlucky' because their arrears are likely genunine and need to be persued.
likely genuine??
not had many dealings with the CSA have you?NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. THEY'LL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL AND BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
and, please. only thank when appropriate. not to boost idiots egos.0 -
Have they? Is this true and if so, for how long?
apparently they cant be trusted yet with this power.
they could only be trusted with this power when hell freezes over. they abuse every power they already have.
the mere thought of them getting more powers makes me shudder.NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. THEY'LL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL AND BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
and, please. only thank when appropriate. not to boost idiots egos.0 -
likely genuine??
not had many dealings with the CSA have you?
My point was simple. The CSA can and will admit error. They also CAN and WILL enforce true debts. They can and will only do this if they can prove the debit is legite, if the CSA can't, isn't that what ICE is for? Surely anyone with disputed arrears would go down the ICE route, in which case if the debt is likely to be genuine, this is where the buck stops, unfortunately in your case in favour of the PWC.
As for my dealings with the CSA. The answer is yes.0 -
Fact: The CSA is not fit for purpose, even the Government agree with this.When dealing with the CSA its important to note that it is commonly accepted as unfit for purpose, and by default this also means the staff are unfit for purpose.0
-
furthermore, i am merely pointing out facts as they are.
if you choose to remain ignorant to these facts, then that's your choice. don't deflect the attention away from the fact that your knowledge in these matters is clearly limited.
that's not bullying or being agressive. it's you not having anything of relevance to add.NEVER ARGUE WITH AN IDIOT. THEY'LL DRAG YOU DOWN TO THEIR LEVEL AND BEAT YOU WITH EXPERIENCE.
and, please. only thank when appropriate. not to boost idiots egos.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards