CSA are planning to charge us for there services

Sensemaya

Roy_G_Biv wrote: »

Not sure I entirely agree.

I do think the UK law should fall into line with the rest of the EU, e.g. maintenance be based on needs of a child, curerently is a % of a parents income. And a PWC whose circumstances as a single parent are self-inflicted cannot claim maintenance at all (parent exil!).

I say we should get out of the EU and we should never have gone in.

What's this, Roy, self-inflicted single parents????? NB I did not say single parent mother or father:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Circumstances are self- inflicted. Stratching my head with that one.

DUTR

Sensemaya wrote: »

Oh for heavens sake don't bring up the fathers and mothers thing! How many times we read it on the forum.

Well as well balanced people ,stop blaming the blokes all the time, it's not politically correct, and MSE deserves better, it is a forum for all walks of life irrespective of gender :j

msgigglewick

ok sorry i've not read back.. im now married so no longer a single parent but the csa still collects the maintenance for my 3 dd's from when i was on income support for a little while.. when these changes come into play will i then beable to opt out of using the csa and get the money paid directly to me from the dd's father? (if he will?) or will these charges be taken automatically?

£100 is more than the maintenance he pays but what he does goes straight out towards our rent.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

msgigglewick wrote: »

ok sorry i've not read back.. im now married so no longer a single parent but the csa still collects the maintenance for my 3 dd's from when i was on income support for a little while.. when these changes come into play will i then beable to opt out of using the csa and get the money paid directly to me from the dd's father? (if he will?) or will these charges be taken automatically?

£100 is more than the maintenance he pays but what he does goes straight out towards our rent.

It's been a few years since Csa involvement was compulsory, you could close the case or tell the Csa you will be paid direct now if you wanted.

robbies_gal

this is ridiculous if this goes ahead

my sister only went to the csa because her stupid ex wasnt paying on time and not enough money she had enough and applied through them

why should she pay any charges or fees because her ex doesnt want to pay the correct amount and not set up regular payments to her?

PreludeForTimeFeelers

gabbyevs wrote: »

this is ridiculous if this goes ahead

my sister only went to the csa because her stupid ex wasnt paying on time and not enough money she had enough and applied through them

why should she pay any charges or fees because her ex doesnt want to pay the correct amount and not set up regular payments to her?

Because its a government agency that is very expensive to run, so the government want to reduce the cost to the taxpayer..?

kitkatt1982

AnxiousMum wrote: »

My Ex had to pay penalties for two late payments in a one year period - at the end of his child support obligation, he will owe FMEP in Canada $400 (they charge either one months maintenance or $400 whichever is less for two late payments in a 12 month period). As his late payments incur administrative costs, it's only fair that he should be the one dinged for them.

That's all well and good, and completely agree if you don't comply, you should be charged for their services to recoup the money. But, so many times now we have been classed as being in arrears simply because of how their system works (on a monthly basis where my husband gets paid weekly) when my husband has never ever missed a payment, that we would constantly be being charged for their mistakes.

If the CSA start charging for any part of their services, they should have a clear customer service charter that they actually abide by, and be accessible to anyone wanting to query anything.

When faced with charges, people should have the right to query them rather than just being told 'tough luck, we can't retrieve your file now as it's back in the filing cabinet, we are right and you are wrong, and we'll just take the money out of your wages whenever we like and you'll be fine as you still have 60% of your income to live on' as we have been told so many times when each time it has been down to their error which has then had to be reimbursed. They'll find that they'll soon spend the money they've collected on charges dealing with complaints and people issuing counter-fines against them which they will be able to do if they are unlawfully charged!

kitkatt1982

gabbyevs wrote: »

this is ridiculous if this goes ahead

my sister only went to the csa because her stupid ex wasnt paying on time and not enough money she had enough and applied through them

why should she pay any charges or fees because her ex doesnt want to pay the correct amount and not set up regular payments to her?

She shouldn't if she has tried to get him to pay and he is not complying, the charge should pass to him. Same as why should my husband have to pay a charge for every payment he makes because his ex won't give out her details and screwed him over when he was paying her cash, but I can't see such a large organisation looking at individual circumstances. The costs will probably be a lot less than hiring a solicitor to go through the old court system.

robbies_gal

yes thats wot i mean people who withhold payment s or information shouldnt have to pay the carge as its not their fault

she tried to not use the csa but he made up his own amount to give her and she always had to ask for it so it was irregular aswell

Bluemeanie_2

gabbyevs wrote: »

this is ridiculous if this goes ahead

my sister only went to the csa because her stupid ex wasnt paying on time and not enough money she had enough and applied through them

why should she pay any charges or fees because her ex doesnt want to pay the correct amount and not set up regular payments to her?

I agree. Also why should the NRP who is willing to pay the correct amount be penalised because the PWC does not believe his earnings. This happened to my Hubby (he is on CSA2). We put his earnings in the online calculator and paid her that. But she wasn't happy with the amount so went to the CSA and she got 43p a week more. He didn't underpay her deliberately, that is just what the online calculator said.

I don't think he should be forced to pay when he will gladly pay the correct amount, she just does not believe it.