CSA Payments seem way too high - HELP!

fannyanna

AnxiousMum wrote: »

You mention she has a new partner - but why is it his financial responsibility to provide for another man's child? Most do to a great extent - the Pwc not working so being supported by the new partner - which by default, means they are also supporting the child. The child has two parents, and each one of them is responsible for the financial wellbeing of that child.

Agree with this. I think most partners end up supporting their partners children either directly or indirectly - whether they're the partner of the PWC or NRP.

grimsbyavon

i didnt say that him working shifts was an excuse to not contact them, i stated earlier that he did contact them and was making payments.

at the end of the day he was making payments monthly which he shouldnt be put down for doing, he was making steps in correcting his wrongs from the debt he owed. The fact that from starting new jobs and moving home etc the csa didnt inform him of or tell him about the amount he owed untill many years after he split from his previous relationship.

people say its up to both parents to support the child by paying maintenence etc but what about the right that he should have to see his son in the first place, she was the one that said he couldnt see their son even though my husband had done nothing wrong to her or the child. What gives her the right to dictate if or when he can see his own child and be there for his upbringing. She doesnt want him around for that but she will happily take his money from him - now thats not right!!! in effect my husband and his son have missed out on years of bonding etc that they will never be able to get back yet she gets the money paid to her what the csa seem a right amount, what about the emotional needs of the child not just the financial needs. my husband has to pay her a high amount of money yet doesnt even get a say in his upbringing and thats not through his choice, thats her decision and the fact she wouldnt let him see the child.

Loopy_Girl

Contact and child support are differing issues and thankfully childen aren't viewed as 'pay-per-view' in this country.

But the problem is that you don't see the child support payable to your stepchild as a priority...they get 'what they can when Dad can afford it' and you seem to think that the 2 children he lives with now should be top priority over everything.

Thankfully the CSA have rulings to stop people thinking they can 'pay what they can when they can' whislt making sure their essentials are met.

Your husbands 3 children have all the same priority.



If the child support had been paid on time and what was being asked and there were no arrears due then the sum due would be much lower. So instead of him paying 'what he could when he could' he should have paid what he was being asked to - just like every other cash strapped Dad has to. He knew he had a child and he had a case with the CSA - why wasn't he on top of it making sure he was up to date. Whether you admit it or not, he was dodging them and then they caught up with him and he thought token payments would keep everyone sweet....and it's not happened. The CSA are asking for their arrears and normal maintenance as your husband has proven to be non compliant...I'm guessing he didn't tell them exactly when he moved house etc...



If you are asking if you can get the sum reduced then the answer is no unless they have mucked up the figures but you have been given loads of advice on how to check your assessments.

I also advised how good this site was but claim to have everything in order so not sure what else anyone can say to you to be honest....

grimsbyavon

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

Contact and child support are differing issues and thankfully childen aren't viewed as 'pay-per-view' in this country.

thats not what i am saying it should be!!!

But the problem is that you don't see the child support payable to your stepchild as a priority...they get 'what they can when Dad can afford it' and you seem to think that the 2 children he lives with now should be top priority over everything.

I do see the child support as being priority, i havent said once that he shouldnt be paying as i know and agree he should, like i keep saying i just thought it was a high amount!

Thankfully the CSA have rulings to stop people thinking they can 'pay what they can when they can' whislt making sure their essentials are met.

for your information it wasnt what he could pay when he could pay, he paid a decent sum of money monthly even when he was out of work, once he had details of what he owed etc he set up a direct debit to pay it straight away, does that sound like somebody that was ignoring the matter trying not to pay a single penny...NO. fair enough if you see it that we should pay high amounts to support his son (like i keep saying, i know he needs to make payments, im not trying to get out of paying) but the way youre making it sound is that we dont need our essentials to be met, aslong as his son has a roof over his head it doesnt matter if we and our children do. surely we arw going to want to cover our essentials, after all they are ESSENTIALS, who wouldnt want to cover those costs? if i was talking about holidays abroad and luxury cars etc then i could understand your point, im on about essentials as in mortgage and food etc, or shouldnt our children be fed???

i know what you are saying and i appreciate he needs to pay back what he owes, i was only after advice, i didnt want to be judged and made to look like the bad one as though we are trying to dodge payments when we are not!

AnxiousMum

grimsbyavon wrote: »

i didnt say that him working shifts was an excuse to not contact them, i stated earlier that he did contact them and was making payments.

at the end of the day he was making payments monthly which he shouldnt be put down for doing, he was making steps in correcting his wrongs from the debt he owed. The fact that from starting new jobs and moving home etc the csa didnt inform him of or tell him about the amount he owed untill many years after he split from his previous relationship. Did your husband notify them of new circumstances, new address etc.?

people say its up to both parents to support the child by paying maintenence etc but what about the right that he should have to see his son in the first place, the rights actually belong to the child - the parents have responsibility, the child has rights she was the one that said he couldnt see their son even though my husband had done nothing wrong to her or the child. What gives her the right to dictate if or when he can see his own child nothing, just as if she wanted child support and your husband said no, then she has to take steps through the appropriate channels - ie, CSA, your husband has the courts to hand in order to gain access to his son, and be able to rebuild that relationship and be there for his upbringing. She doesnt want him around for that but she will happily take his money from him - now thats not right!!! in effect my husband and his son have missed out on years of bonding etc that they will never be able to get back yet she gets the money paid to her what the csa seem a right amount, what about the emotional needs of the child not just the financial needs. my husband has to pay her a high amount of money yet doesnt even get a say in his upbringing again, he can use the courts to get access (not that he should have to, but then, pwc's shouldn't have to use CSA either hey ho) - it's horrid that a parent here can deny access to another parent - and though it could be a long hard slog, there is a system in place to gain access and thats not through his choice, thats her decision and the fact she wouldnt let him see the child.

It was mentioned earlier in the thread - are you able to work? After all, your husband needs to try and meet the needs of all three children, and maybe you could also work part time to help fill the void where his full time wages used to be sufficient.

Rebecca01

I think you need to sit down and work out if what the CSA have calculated is actually correct. When your partner was not working was your partners assessment at 5 pounds a week or nil etc. You need to sit down and work it out what he should have been paying and when , then add it up. The CSA often get it wrong and will not correct it unless you check it yourself. You also need to check your children are being taken into account as someone has already said. See it as a maths problem and get calculating!

Then maybe we can debate about priorities. I see both points having had 40 percent of our income taken , due to maladminstration, but then children must be supported. The CSA is often unfair to both sides and there is no perfect system to make everyone happy. It's not going away , so best bet is to check calculations from Day 1 and see if it's correct.

FBaby

The reason you feel the way you do is because you are focussing on yourself and your family rather than looking at the whole picture. At some stage, the pwc had to support her child on her own because your partner wasn't providing any financial support for their child. Maybe during that time, she found herself in the exact same situation than you are now, struggling to keep a roof over her and her child's heads through no fault of hers. Did you consider the impact on them then? You say she got tax credits, but surely so do you?

The only reason why you are struggling now is because he is paying his debt, there is no escaping it. The csa is doing nothing wrong (assuming the sum is correct) and his ex has a right to get money back to pay the debts she might have accumulated when she had to support her child on her own.

The only way to look at the sitution without feeling resentful and angry is found out how long he will have to pay this sum and work out how you can adjust your budget to make the payments. If the only way is for you to take a few hours work to support your child so your partner can support ALL his children, then that's the way it might have to be.

fannyanna

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

you seem to think that the 2 children he lives with now should be top priority over everything.

Of course she does - she's their Mum and as their Mum she's going to always want what's best for her children. We can all sit her and argue all day whether this is right or wrong but ultimately it's human nature.

fannyanna

FBaby wrote: »

The only way to look at the sitution without feeling resentful and angry is found out how long he will have to pay this sum and work out how you can adjust your budget to make the payments. If the only way is for you to take a few hours work to support your child so your partner can support ALL his children, then that's the way it might have to be.

Some good advice here. As others have suggested first of all contact the CSA to establish whether calculations are correct. It's also worth trying to negotiate a slight reduction in the amount of arrears you pay every month. They might not budge (as ultimately they can take up to 40% but you have nothing to lose from trying).

But ultimately it looks like he'll be paying back a fair wack for a while so as suggested by FBaby you might want to look at your budget to see how you can accomodate the payments.

As I said having been in a similar situation to you I really can sympathise. We both know that the maintenance has to be paid and from what you've said I have no doubt that you are fine with maintenance being paid. I think from an NRPP point of view it's unfortunate when things like this happen. I'm sure when most families have financial difficulties they tighten their belts and cut back to reduce their outgoings. However if you're an NRP you can't cut back with child maintenance and you still have to pay a set percentage (even though if you were still in the relationship you and the ex would probably cut back and provide slightly less for the child).

Ultimately as someone else said the CSA is generally unfair to all parties involved at some points. At some point it will be the NRP getting the raw deal and at some point it will be the PWC who gets shafted.

charlieismydarling

Surely this is not half your income. Do you not receive tax credits and child benefit?

If the arrears have built up then I think you will find the csa won't budge. He has three children and he must support three children, obviously at some point in the past he hasn't adequately supported one of those three and now it is payday.

How did the arrears build up in the first place? Surely his mother felt as you do now when money she was relying on did not appear.