CSA & Self employed

shell_542

speedster wrote: »

that's ok as long as the pwc admits it is child support payments. if they claim they are gifts, he could well end up paying twice or it not being taken into account with his assessment for pwc2.

i would advise anyone paying direct to get reciepts clearly marked "child support payment" or bank to bank transfer with the same reference.

It doesn't matter for the payments between him and the PWC2 now and in the past though. The CSA have nothing to do with those payments as she hasn't contacted them yet. They can't make him pay them again.

Once she contacts them, that is when he needs to either stop paying her direct and keep the money aside until the assessment is done and the payments are recorded as going through the CSA (or if directly to the PWCs, standing order marked CHILD SUPPORT is best)

speedster

not really.

he is being assessed incorrectly as only one pwc is on the system, so arrears are building up rapidly. and morally, half of those arrears belong to the other pwc. but as she isn't on the system, all the arrears will go to the other pwc.

he needs to stop paying the other pwc direct and get her to put a claim in. then get his assessment sorted based on current earnings.

finally, if he so chooses, and as he gets on ok with the eldest's pwc, he could top her money back up privately.

the other contact blocking witch can swing! :rolleyes:

kelloggs36

speedster wrote: »

not really.

he is being assessed incorrectly No he isn't being assessed incorrectly - he is being assessed absolutely correctly as the law states that it should be as only one pwc is on the system, so arrears are building up rapidly. and morally, half of those arrears belong to the other pwc no they don't as it is quite clear that both PWCs have to claim via the CSA. but as she isn't on the system, all the arrears will go to the other pwc.

he needs to stop paying the other pwc direct and get her to put a claim in. then get his assessment sorted based on current earnings. He can himself make an application to pay the other PWC via the CSA - if he tells her that he won't pay anything now that the other claim has gone in, she will have a choice - half or nothing.

finally, if he so chooses, and as he gets on ok with the eldest's pwc, he could top her money back up privately.

the other contact blocking witch can swing! :rolleyes:

###..............................................................

speedster

and your point is????

you, of all people should know that an IMA is not correct. it maybe lawful, but it's a long way from being correct. that's why they can be overturned.

as far as forcing the other pwc into doing anything, that may inflame an otherwise ammicable relationship. so why approach it with that attitude???

bad day at the office perhaps??

kelloggs36

It is not an IMA it is a default maintenance decision which is actually correct also as per the NRP circumstances - ie there are no submitted accounts as yet. When there are, the DMD will be changed to reflect the true income and so any overpayment will be offset against future payments.

speedster

nit picking really.

the advice i gave earlier still stands up though. submit something to them rather than waiting for end of year.

are you anti nrp?? only you don't seem to be offering anything of use to the thread.

kelloggs36

No I'm not anti NRP but I am giving the facts as they stand.

speedster

kelloggs36 wrote: »

No I'm not anti NRP but I am giving the facts as they stand.

not always quite so black and white though, is it?

for instance, why upset a good nrp/pwc relationship to solve the issue?

kelloggs36

I'm not making my views known - the facts are that the second PWC has to make a claim to be taken into account - this is a fact, whether we agree or not does not matter but the CSA have acted entirely correctly.

speedster

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I'm not making my views known - the facts are that the second PWC has to make a claim to be taken into account - this is a fact, whether we agree or not does not matter but the CSA have acted entirely correctly.

He can himself make an application to pay the other PWC via the CSA - if he tells her that he won't pay anything now that the other claim has gone in, she will have a choice - half or nothing.

so what's that comment about then?

and the pwc would have to ok a case requested by the nrp.

thought you'd know that.