Obligated To Tell Changes In Circumstances?

woody01

kelloggs36 wrote: »

There is no obligation to notify the CSA of any changes in circumstances UNLESS they have specifically asked you.

It doesn't matter if the NRP can prove that he paid the PWC or not unless she agrees that the money he paid her was specifically for child maintenance in respect of a specific period. So, whilst he had a nil assessment, if he paid her, then nice for her, but he didn't have to, so it would make no difference to the arrears period. If the PWC signed an agreement to the contrary and said that the money she received was in respect of arrears of maintence, then they would accept it and take it off what is owed.

Is this true? Or just old?
I read alot of information here (just curious), and although this was a very old comment, does it still stand.

The reason i ask is that i read many threads stating you have to inform the CSA of any changes but this is contrary to that.

Loopy_Girl

Kelloggs would have been referring to financial circumstances.

The NRP is under no obligation to advise the CSA if their financial circumstances change (although I doubt many wouldn't advise if their income went down). If an assessment is calculated and payments are being made month in and month out and the NRP gets a whopping big pay rise (or any kind of rise really) then they do not have to tell the CSA unless a reassessment is requested in which case they would have to advise of the new salary figure and the new assessment figure would be from that date.

This does not count however if there is a DEO in place. In that case the NRP must inform the CSA immediately.

Hope that satisfies your 'curiosity'

Donedoingdebt

However, a change of NRP's address should always be notified.

LG, I'm not sure you have to notify them of a pay rise/cut, even with a DEO.

Athough, with a DEO, you do have to notify the CSA of a change of employer, whereas this is not necessary with any other method of payment.

This information is correct for pre March 2003 old CS1 cases, I'm not sure if CS2 is any different.

alwayspuzzled

How does this work in regard to the self employed? I understand that they work to the most recent tax return but if a return in april shows an increase or decrease in income from what date does the change apply. And if the tax return isn't completed to the following Jan and they are then notified of the new income then from what date does it apply?

woody01

Hope that satisfies your 'curiosity'

Not entirely.
The answers are vague.
To be so cynical you must be equally, if not more bitter.

Loopy_Girl

woody01 wrote: »

Not entirely.
The answers are vague.
To be so cynical you must be equally, if not more bitter.

I fail to see the vagueness...but then it does take a degree of comprehension to understand CSA rulings so I can see where the confusion would lie for you

And as for your (as per) stab in the dark 'perceptions' *cough* of people then, little man, I shall ignore it as per.

There was nothing cynical about my reply. It is clear as day that you were trolling and trying to start an arguement. You got your information so I fail to see what else there is to say

speedster

woody01 wrote: »

Not entirely.
The answers are vague.
To be so cynical you must be equally, if not more bitter.

woody, woody, woody. tut, tut, tut.

you should know by now that men aren't aloud on the "wimmin's" bit asking for advice. how dare you!!;)

you're better off coming on here and asking as a PWC if the bad man NRP has to notify the csa of changes. :T

Loopy_Girl

Aloud? Is that like Girls Aloud? Or is that just the paranoia that you have telling to you type things in a subliminal way.

And I am not a 'wimmin'. End of. Lack of contact is certainly not on my part and I am getting mighty hacked off with it.....lack of contact is upsetting enough for me without being accused of something I am not.

woody01

Its such a pity that i ask a valid question and LoopyGirl decides to jump down my throat.
No trolling, just a 100% valid question, yet accused of starting an argument.
Did she even read the OP? Did she not try sarcasm to the valid questions in her first response?
You even question my intelligence and call me 'little man'. Another classic example of your lack of credibility.

As Speedster said though, if i was a dead beat dad, or some woman that has been dumped i could say what i liked in this section. Luckily i am neither as i can't imagine what it would be like dealing with sour ex's all the time.

Problem with LoopyGirl and a few like her, is they are so bent out of shape they know no better. She has obviously been 'binned' before (and that's no suprise) and is still twisted. This is why her advice is ignored.
Kelloggs appears to be the only one with any knowledge that isn't clouded in here, and hopefully she will give an accurate and informed answer.

kelloggs36

I understand that there has been plans to make any changes in circumstances a reportable issue - will look it up and post on here the latest.

At time of posting, there was no legal obligation to report any changes in circumstances but it was an offence to refuse to provide information if it were asked for. Those NRPs on a DEO have a legal obligation to report changes in their employment now.

woody01

kelloggs36 wrote: »

I understand that there has been plans to make any changes in circumstances a reportable issue - will look it up and post on here the latest.

At time of posting, there was no legal obligation to report any changes in circumstances but it was an offence to refuse to provide information if it were asked for. Those NRPs on a DEO have a legal obligation to report changes in their employment now.

Thankyou.
The answer will clarify for alot of people.