Re Assesed Due to Benefit Fraud

CSA_Help

Can i ask the nice people at the CSA to re asses all my assesments if the PWC has commited benefit fraud .DWP did nothing but the Inland Revenue stood up and took notice due to PWC for not paying tax and claiming WTC etc .:)

Blob

You can always ask, but don't hold your breath for anything to happen against a PWC, they walk on water as far as the CSA are concerned!

CSA_Help

Blob wrote: »

You can always ask, but don't hold your breath for anything to happen against a PWC, they walk on water as far as the CSA are concerned!

Just a pipe dream just now but the inland revenue are seeing to take more notice .Thing is if she didn't declare all her earnings (which are documented on open source websites ) she might still be eligable for WTC so deemed as no means for CSA purposes .Might not benefit me financially but will be a laugh after the years of torment she has put me and my family through .

What a !!!!! i am :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Her words im going to f**k you for the CSA . My words now im going to F**k you to the Inland revenue now

CSA_Debt_Bod

I may be mistaken but I don't think the PWC's circs would make a difference to how much you had to pay? Whether she was working or on benefit, you would still have been required to pay the same amount. I think PWC income only comes into the calculation if they are very high earners.

SuziQ

My husbands ex was reported to the DS for claiming IS etc whilst still working p/t and not declaring her new boyfriend was living with her and giving her money. Her best friend reported her as she thought it would help my husband and I (it felt like I was working f/t for the privaledge of watching a large chunk of our income being given to her and her new boyfriend. They were living in relative luxury whilst we were struggling from month to month.) She got a slap over the rist and paid a proportion of it back and it made not a jot of difference to what my husband paid her. We subsequently had a baby who had special needs and I took the decision to take a career break to look after him. We then ended up better off as our payment to her went to nil and we were eligible for more tax credits. He has since started paying to her again. As already said,the income of the pwc seems not to affect the amount needed from the nrp: my husbands ex is now widowed and yet his payment to her didn't change.

kingfisherblue

Under CSA2, the NRP has to pay a percentage of their wage to the PWC. I don't think this would change even if the PWC was prosecuted for benefit fraud.

In my area, benefit fraud is taken very seriously and results in all overpaid benefit having to be paid back. There is often a further punishment of community service, a fine, or a custodial sentence as well.

Blob

The point is that if the PWC is claiming money that she is not declearing that is a criminal act and should be treated as such. This then brings in the point as to wheather the CSA will act on this information, answer in most cases no, this then means that the CSA are aiding a criminal act and should be taken to task over it.

They have proved beyond doubt that that have no issues in destroying lives of NRP's and NRPP's so it should be a two way thing!

DX2

Blob wrote: »

The point is that if the PWC is claiming money that she is not declearing that is a criminal act and should be treated as such. This then brings in the point as to wheather the CSA will act on this information, answer in most cases no, this then means that the CSA are aiding a criminal act and should be taken to task over it.

They have proved beyond doubt that that have no issues in destroying lives of NRP's and NRPP's so it should be a two way thing!

Income Support benefit fraud has nothing whatsoever to do with the child support agency.

Blonde_Bint

yeah you got a point there.

For me though shes benefitting by lying and the country aint exactly flush at the moment so the IR should be involved. If she gets away with it shes costing all of us.

We claimed benefits ages back. When DH got a job he went to the job centre with the details start date etc. He was told all the benefits bar 1 of them would stop straight away, cant remember which one now but 1 of them we would get 1 more payment of anyway we ended up getting about 3 payments we shouldnt have lol. Wasnt really funny, it was hard to get it stopped and we had to pay it back:D you know what its like the money comes in and the direct debits swallow it up. They were good about it they eventually stopped the payments and let us pay it back in monthly installments.

There was no way we were going to let the money keep coming in month in month out even though it would have been handy.

elisebutt65

DX2 wrote: »

Income Support benefit fraud has nothing whatsoever to do with the child support agency.

Surely though, if she has income coming in that she has not declared then that should lower the NRP's contribution???

CSA_Debt_Bod

As mentioned before, the PWC's income has no bearing on how much the NRP is required to pay.