Variation for child with long-term sickness

JulietAmber_2

I am a NRPP. I have 3 children.
I have written on here before about my case so I'm not going to go into details - that's not why I'm writing.
I'm writing because I've just helped my partner fill out a variation form - to take into account expenses incurred for my youngest child who has a long-term and possibly terminal, illness.
I try not to think about her condition - I know she may not reach adulthood but I try and think positively about each day and only think about it when she is ill or when we have a hospital appointment.
I work as a preschool teacher to care for her (my husband is dead - he died of the same illness - so I don't receive any maintenance) and my earnings, and that of my partner plus our tax credits was enough to see us through.
My partner has always paid for his children through private arrangement, but when we moved in together, his ex went to the CSA. Now the CSA are not only using my partners earnings to estimate maintenance, but also our tax credits. Not only that, they have imposed a 40% payment because he has arrears he didn't even know he had.
So I am forced to copy hospital letters and write about my beautiful, innocent daughter, just to try and rake back some of the money my partner's ex and the CSA are trying to drain from us so that we can give her the best life we can.
I am sorry to go on. I am just tired and depressed of the battle with the CSA - one that isn't over yet.
It isn't just the NRP's and PWC's that suffer - right now, as a NRPP, I am struggling to find a smile each morning and dread what each day may bring.

Caz3121

It does seem unfair that they use tax credits as income but they also give a discount for children he is living with (so will be 25% for your 3)..not that this helps now due to the arrears (in my opinion it should be neither - no tax credits and no other child discount)
How long have they calculated the arrears to be paid over? they seems to have a 'target' of max 2 years .. if it has been calculated at less than this you should be able to get it reduced

JulietAmber_2

Yes - before the 40% was imposed, the 25% discount for my 3 was a small consolation although it still didn't make up for them taking the tax credits as earnings. It seemed ludicrous - my partner has 3 children so it was 25% of his earnings plus tax credits - then take off 25% for mine!
A fairer system would be to use NRP's earnings only - and no discount for new children.
The arrears date back to 2002 - 2004, for a child he has who is now in her twenties. It only surfaced when the new CSA claim came into affect. It came to £12,000 and they have given him 2 years plus they want evidence of assets he may have.
It is all such a headache - I may sound dramatic but it's driving a wedge between me and my new partner. I'm considering taking on more hours at work to make up for the loss of tax credits and it is making me unhappy and resentful. To make matters worse - his ex is awful, has stopped the kids staying overnight and laughs at me when I plead with her to stop being like this just for money. I am finding it difficult to cope.

kelloggs36

The only problem is that the money being asked for is purely arrears - so no variation can apply as it is only applicable to assess the amount of maintenance payable. If you didn't apply at the time, they can't backdate it now, unless he did apply and they didn't action it.

JulietAmber_2

But at the time, I didn't even know he existed so how could he have applied!
I've been reading up about the CSA and the laws and policies. In 1991, one of the laws states that any enforcement imposed must not be at the detriment of any child. These arrears are being paid to the CSA, of no benefit to a child. But by imposing this enforcement, I am not going to be able to pay the mortgage and my children, including Katie, may lose their home.
NACSA told us not to begin paying the enforcement until they've read everything, but that's very hard to do when the CSA are threatening court action and bailiffs and calling the house every 5 minutes.

FBaby

In one hand, I totally sympathise with your situation, what you are experiencing, noone who isn't in your situation can trully comprehend, but on the other hand, I feel that you expect your partner to take on your children and prioritise them over his own children, and i don't think this is right. I assume if his ex decided to go to the csa, it is because he told her he wanted to lower the payments because of having to support your children. I can understand her frustration in defense of her own children. Why should they do with less because their dad is taking on three children who are not his? Personally, I think it is very wrong that child tax credits should be taken into consideration, but just as wrong that children from a previous relationship living in the household should inccur a reduction. Parents should prioritise their own children, whether they live with them or not.

I understand your frustration with the 40% attached, even though I don't really understand how it came to it, but again, would you feel the same feeling of unfairness if he had accumulated the same debt but for something else? A debt is a debt, whether it is for maintenance or anything else. It is not because of his other children or the ex that you guys are struggling financially.

gratefulforhelp_2

God bless and keep your little one, juliet amber.

JulietAmber_2

FBaby wrote: »

In one hand, I totally sympathise with your situation, what you are experiencing, noone who isn't in your situation can trully comprehend, but on the other hand, I feel that you expect your partner to take on your children and prioritise them over his own children, and i don't think this is right. I assume if his ex decided to go to the csa, it is because he told her he wanted to lower the payments because of having to support your children. I can understand her frustration in defense of her own children. Why should they do with less because their dad is taking on three children who are not his? Personally, I think it is very wrong that child tax credits should be taken into consideration, but just as wrong that children from a previous relationship living in the household should inccur a reduction. Parents should prioritise their own children, whether they live with them or not.

I understand your frustration with the 40% attached, even though I don't really understand how it came to it, but again, would you feel the same feeling of unfairness if he had accumulated the same debt but for something else? A debt is a debt, whether it is for maintenance or anything else. It is not because of his other children or the ex that you guys are struggling financially.

Thanks for your reply. No, I do not expect my new partner to take on my own children. I have always worked and supported them myself. I do, however, expect him to be able to contribute to the household now that we are together as I now pay more in council tax, bills etc.
My new partner has always paid for his children - in no way whatsoever did he suggest that payments would lower, as I said, a private arrangement was based on his earnings and he had the children every other weekend. Nothing was changing financially for the ex.
As soon as we moved in together, his ex blatantly said 'great, now it's my turn to cash in'. She stopped the children from staying over and went to the CSA, knowing full well that they would take my CTC into account. The kids have begged my partner to speak to their mother to let them stay over and it is heartbreaking as she won't budge (she's saving up for a new BMW).
I fully agree that maintenance should be paid to his children based on his earnings and not taking my own children into account - please note that and I feel offended by your response.
Using my CTC and my child's disability allowance, however, is immoral and wrong and no, my partner's children are not suffering because he has 3 new stepchildren - his stepchildren are suffering because my partner's ex is greedy and manipulative and the CSA let her get away with it.

JulietAmber_2

As for the debt. We could suggest to a creditor a much lower payment method that took into account our income and they would have to accept that. The CSA are a different entity all together.

Thank you - Gratefulforhelp - Katie is at this moment playing with her 'My Little Ponies' by my feet completely oblivious!!!

kelloggs36

JulietAmber wrote: »

Thanks for your reply. No, I do not expect my new partner to take on my own children. I have always worked and supported them myself. I do, however, expect him to be able to contribute to the household now that we are together as I now pay more in council tax, bills etc.
My new partner has always paid for his children - in no way whatsoever did he suggest that payments would lower, as I said, a private arrangement was based on his earnings and he had the children every other weekend. Nothing was changing financially for the ex.
As soon as we moved in together, his ex blatantly said 'great, now it's my turn to cash in'. She stopped the children from staying over and went to the CSA, knowing full well that they would take my CTC into account. The kids have begged my partner to speak to their mother to let them stay over and it is heartbreaking as she won't budge (she's saving up for a new BMW).
I fully agree that maintenance should be paid to his children based on his earnings and not taking my own children into account - please note that and I feel offended by your response.
Using my CTC and my child's disability allowance, however, is immoral and wrong and no, my partner's children are not suffering because he has 3 new stepchildren - his stepchildren are suffering because my partner's ex is greedy and manipulative and the CSA let her get away with it. she isn't the one who made the rules though is she?

As I said, a variation isn't what you should be seeking as it won't apply to arrears. All you can hope for is that they will be more lenient and reduce the monthly payments and spread collection of the arrears over a longer period of time.

FBaby

I apologise for assuming that your partner had suggested lowering the payment when this wasn't the case. If the sole reason for his ex to go to CSA, then this is depicable and I agree 100% with you, the help you are receiving for your children should in no way benefit her children.

I also apologise for my statement about you expecting your partner to look after your children. When you wrote 'and no discount for new children', I interpreted this as saying no discount for new children in the new relationship rather than 'new' children including those of the nnrp.

In regards to the debt, I think csa used to be more flexible, but then arrears ended up rarely paid, and in the end, it is for children up to the age of 18, so defeats the point if repaid over many years.

For info, I'm a pwc who gets little maintenance from my ex. It's been 6 years and i am still resisting going to the csa because I know it will just make things worse (he would never forgive me for it and would make me pay for it by being horrible to me and the kids, not worth it). Even when he managed to get decent paid jobs (which never lasted more than a few months) and he decided to contribute, I agreed to much less than the 20% he would have assess to pay through the csa. I am better off financially than he is, but that doesn't mean I am rolling in it far from it. All goes to my kids way before me, and when he doesn't pay, it is not them who suffer because I will put them as a priority, but me who has to cut down, which makes him happy. I have often felt the urge to pick up the phone especially towards the end of the month when I check my bank balance, but then I look at my kids and I don't because I know their dad getting angry will affect them directly and I prefer to do with less but see them happy and stable than to be less stressed about money, but worried about their well-being. He gets away with murder when it comes to responsibilities with the children, but that's his own conscience he has to deal with.