Csa update need advice .......

londonbabe73

well

Thanks to all the tips ive had from here made another complaint and asked for a copy of my file and advised as soon as i get my file off to vincent cable i go ... apart from the caseworker pointing out i can only go to him if he is my mp ( he is duh) i can now report that the deduction is in place and my ex had to cough up just under £1k this week and the payment has been confirmed as paid so i will get it this week plus £445 pcm , the weekly assessment has dropped by a third to £50 but the arrears are going to get paid off at last and they have really put the squeeze on him at last.

plus when he refused to give any details last year and they asked me for his earnings and i said £1k a week and he didn't contest it they have made it stand from july to dec last year SO he is landed with paying that despite he wasn't earning it because he did not get back to them he tried to dispute that he didn't get the letter and they just said we called you over 15 times on the same number we are satisfied you got the messages and turned down his appeal yay so hopefully everything is sorted as he has been warned that any more delays in payments will not be tolerated and and the next step is court so at last some cash in the end .........

a big THANK YOU to all the help given.......... :j

ps i was helped by someone in the parliamentary complaints team ???

emma+_6

did they inform you that the amount you'd be getting will drop? got a earnings deduction order for my ex (only 2 months after i first claimed as he refused to answer their letters) and they said he'd have to give me £55 a week including backpay. Taken a month to get first payment and it's only £19.30 so i'm guessing they've reassessed him but they haven't written to me

PreludeForTimeFeelers

emma+ wrote: »

did they inform you that the amount you'd be getting will drop? got a earnings deduction order for my ex (only 2 months after i first claimed as he refused to answer their letters) and they said he'd have to give me £55 a week including backpay. Taken a month to get first payment and it's only £19.30 so i'm guessing they've reassessed him but they haven't written to me

Hmm, if you've not received a new assessment letter then it sounds as though he still has to pay the same amount. When there's a DEO in place the employer can only take a maximum of 40% of his wages, the rest are classed as 'protected earnings' - is there any chance that he may have been off sick, or working reduced hours lately? It could be that he only received £19.30 more than his protected earnings, so that was all that his employer could take from him.

emma+_6

well after the first payment went out he mysteriously nedded 'unpaid personal time off'. No idea if he's back at work yet, we work in the same place but i'm on maternity leave and have decided not to go near him. But the first payment would have went out when he was still at work and we get paid weekly. I know they assessed his income wrong, so the 40% sounds like its a possibility. They had him down fopr £197 a week which is fill time hours and he would only get £130ish a week

know i should call the CSA but i'm tired fighting. all i wanted was him named as the father when i started this and i've got that now but i'm still curious what's happened

jetta_wales

How much less than the 1k a week you told them does he actually earn? While I can understand your satisfaction at him finally being made to be accountable, being glad he's got to pay potentially a huge amount more than he ever should have had to makes you no better than he in my opinion.

vasseur

jetta_wales wrote: »

How much less than the 1k a week you told them does he actually earn? While I can understand your satisfaction at him finally being made to be accountable, being glad he's got to pay potentially a huge amount more than he ever should have had to makes you no better than he in my opinion.

But he didn't contest the amount did he? This leads me to think that it was reasonably accurate, probably slightly in his favour even.

In the OP's shoes I would feel a sense of satisfaction at him having to pay out more. She has probably had a huge amount of outgoings whilst chasing for CM anyway.

Blob

I love this idea that an employer can only take 40% income if a DEO is in place! Please wake up and smell just what you are pushing, the CSA was taking up to 67% of mine! So please stop this propaganda, they are not bound by the law and do as they please, until people stand their ground, then they cry and say that you are being non-compliant! The law is the law and if you feed it to them they don't like it, end of!

OP stick at it you will get there in the end, but don't think for one second that these people have the slightest idea of just what they are legally allowed to do. They are just after getting their targets and thus bonus payments!!!

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Blob wrote: »

I love this idea that an employer can only take 40% income if a DEO is in place! Please wake up and smell just what you are pushing, the CSA was taking up to 67% of mine! So please stop this propaganda, they are not bound by the law and do as they please, until people stand their ground, then they cry and say that you are being non-compliant! The law is the law and if you feed it to them they don't like it, end of!

OP stick at it you will get there in the end, but don't think for one second that these people have the slightest idea of just what they are legally allowed to do. They are just after getting their targets and thus bonus payments!!!

60% of your income would have been protected earnings - if your employer was deducting too much and breaching the protected earnings then it is them who were in the wrong, not the CSA.

Also, the CSA staff bonuses aren't linked to targets.

Marisco

Must agree with Blob here!! I don't know what the % was, but it was well over 50% they were taking off my oh, and this was 15 years ago!!!! It only came down when we got our MP involved! And what was worse, the arrears were their fault!!:mad:

Blob

The ICE report stated a number of occasions that they took over 50% and up 67%, notwithstanding the fact that they had payslips to prov what they were up to they would not change it! They only got round to this after the ICE report and the Ombudsman had a go at them!

It is possible I suppose that both ICE and the Ombudsman were wrong and thew CSA were correct, but it then begs the question as to just why they paid out compensation and sent one of many written apologies that I have had for the unforced mistakes they make on my case. The number of people that come to me for help is still very high, so I know that they have not improved on this point!

As for bonuses they should not get any and should be held accountable for the errors that they make personally. This might just get them to get it correct and not make it up as they go along!