Any idears

kelloggs36

Is he interested in the fact that if any arrears get wiped, that the children are the ones who lose out in the end - afterall, if the debt is due, it is due!

Blob

If as you say the debt is due, and if the children are the ones that will lose, then please answer one very simple question, why do the govenment keep the money and not pay all of the money that they take to the child/PWC? If as is the case the money goes to the gov then they have a very real interst in sorting this out!

CSA_Help

Blob wrote: »

If as you say the debt is due, and if the children are the ones that will lose, then please answer one very simple question, why do the govenment keep the money and not pay all of the money that they take to the child/PWC? If as is the case the money goes to the gov then they have a very real interst in sorting this out!

Good point Blob .I was accidentaly told by the agency what my pwc gets and how much goes back into the public pot after my mess got sorted out .But the pwc managed to quote me my total arrears before my mess got sorted even though she wasn't due all the so called arrears

kelloggs36

Blob wrote: »

If as you say the debt is due, and if the children are the ones that will lose, then please answer one very simple question, why do the govenment keep the money and not pay all of the money that they take to the child/PWC? If as is the case the money goes to the gov then they have a very real interst in sorting this out!

In private cases, they do indeed pay out ALL of the money! It is only benefit cases where they offset some of the money and that is because the taxpayer is paying.

Blob

Private cases don't usually involve the CSA as the parents act as real people. This only really became an option reacently. In my case the PWC was on benefit and getting money over and above this to the tune of £16k the Criminal Compliance Team looked into it when the CSA found out, but I don't think they did anything as it would have been against the mother and a PWC to boot, but then they say the system is not onesided.

The investigation in to the CSA and C-MEC is to look into the action of makeing people homeless when an agreement is in place, but the agreement is outside of the 2 year law, sorry policy, sounding like someone from the CSA for a munite then! It is also looking into the abuse of power that has been given to these people with out any checks put in place to controle them!

chall1964

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Is he interested in the fact that if any arrears get wiped, that the children are the ones who lose out in the end - afterall, if the debt is due, it is due!

Expect that could depend on whether the actual arrears that 'get wiped' were due to an incorrect calculation OR the result of a penalty assessment and therefore over inflated.

kelloggs36

Oh blob you are so misguided - you will find that there are many, many private cases in the CSA, my own included. Why? Because in my case the NRP couldn't, or rather wouldn't pay a single penny nor would he have anything to do with his daughter - so it isn't as simple as you try to make out.

Chall, as I said in my post, for arrears due, meaning true arrears.

kelloggs36

Blob wrote: »

Private cases don't usually involve the CSA as the parents act as real people.no they don't! If this were the case, then there would be no private cases at all. This only really became an option reacently.no it didn't, it has been there all along. In my case the PWC was on benefit and getting money over and above this to the tune of £16k the Criminal Compliance Team looked into it when the CSA found out, but I don't think they did anything as it would have been against the mother and a PWC to boot, but then they say the system is not onesided.

The investigation in to the CSA and C-MEC is to look into the action of makeing people homeless when an agreement is in place, but the agreement is outside of the 2 year law, sorry policy, sounding like someone from the CSA for a munite then! It is also looking into the abuse of power that has been given to these people with out any checks put in place to controle them!

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

chall1964

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Chall, as I said in my post, for arrears due, meaning true arrears.

Thanks for the clarification. BTW, you actually stated 'if any arrears get wiped'

You and I both know that 'due' arrears and 'true' arrears are not necessarily the same thing, when dealing with the agency.

Blob

As you say I may be misguided but then there are too many of us that are that way for the Gov to ignor, and it would seem that my MP is also misguided as are other MPs that think the CSA is out of control and destroying lives because they have nothing better to do! You will therefor forgive me if I fight to get the system changed into a system that is accountable to the Courts and to Parliment something that it is not at this time, and is trying to make me homeless to boot.

The system is floored at this time that is accepted by the majority pos not by you that is your decision. The last PM Mr Blair stated that it was unfit for purpus, they then gave them more power and less accountability! The actions that they are taking at this time is going to cost the country £Bn to recover from on an economic level. There is not enough housing to put people into that these people make homless to start with, then the cost in benefit that will go up because they have got to the stage of throwing it all in and letting the Gov or tax payer take the strain and keep them. The list goes on, then the ones that end up taking their own lives the list goes on, yet to try to change this is misguided. Well I am happy to be that way!