The CSA keeps badgering me to go back to work, but work doesnt pay, suggestions pleas

gillypkk

Marisco wrote: »

Then TBH, I don't blame you for doing it the way you are! There has to be flexibility on both sides, and if one side won't co operate, then they shouldn't moan if the other side digs in!!! It sounds like (and I know we've only got one side here) that the PWC is cutting off her nose to spite her face!! If Happy's figures are correct, then surely she would be better off with 40 quid a week than the nowt she's getting at the minute!!

the only reason she isnt getting anything is coz the OP refuses to work coz he will only be £65 a week better off. its him making his kids suffer to spite her imo.

gillypkk

JamesP1976 wrote: »

REad my posts.

I dont have a problem paying, but only to the maximum the law says I have to pay. Currently I have paid well above that maximum.

but you have been told how to solve that by appealing and you are refusing!! :mad:

JamesP1976

gillypkk wrote: »

my attitude is disgusting? by wanting you to provide for your children? wow, you just reached a new low!!

if their mother is that bad why not go for custody? then the kids can decide who to live with and its your ex who has to pay CSA.

She wouldnt pay the CSA anything, she has never worked more than a few months at a time, always trying to claim the sick, or find another reason.

As for custody we are in early states of exploring that, but like the CSA, the legal profession has an obsession with money.

JamesP1976

Marisco wrote: »

Then TBH, I don't blame you for doing it the way you are! There has to be flexibility on both sides, and if one side won't co operate, then they shouldn't moan if the other side digs in!!! It sounds like (and I know we've only got one side here) that the PWC is cutting off her nose to spite her face!! If Happy's figures are correct, then surely she would be better off with 40 quid a week than the nowt she's getting at the minute!!

On the right track, All I ask is for a reasonable quality of life if I return to work. My ex gets one, benefits plus CSA, so why should I receive the same?

Its not fair.

Marisco

JamesP1976 wrote: »

REad my posts.

I dont have a problem paying, but only to the maximum the law says I have to pay. Currently I have paid well above that maximum.

James, I'm a bit confused here!!! How are you paying over the odds, if it's the maximum the law says you have to pay???? Did you have arrears? If so then the maximum to pay is 40% (I presume you are on CSA 1) Are you wanting her to go onto CSA 2? Try pointing out that if she stays on CSA 1, she'll get nothing, but if she's willing to close the case, and reopen on CSA 2, then she'll get 20% of whatever you earn.

gillypkk

JamesP1976 wrote: »

On the right track, All I ask is for a reasonable quality of life if I return to work. My ex gets one, benefits plus CSA, so why should I receive the same?

Its not fair.

well appeal!!! its been explained to you how many times already?!?!

JamesP1976

gillypkk wrote: »

well work and save up then!!

.

Save up on £65 a week, when it may cost more than that just to travel to work and in-work expenses.

None of these are consession for CSA and neither are lawyers fees. I have already asked for them

JamesP1976

gillypkk wrote: »

glad its not just me thats getting p****d off with this bloke!

.

Nobody forces you to post, you can leave the thread at any time.

Transformer

Disgusting carry on. Should refuse offering him any more help as he is just trying to pay nowt it would appear rather than pay for his kids and not begrudge it like many many others who happily support their kids.

My kids know exactly where every penny of their csa money goes, also they proudly tell dad what his m oney bought them wether clothes or like a while ago after saving a brand new bike each for xmas. Dad got the recodnition and the label on the bikes said from DAD.

Call youself a dad, I call your type a 'bum' (If he can call mums hens, I can call him a bum)

You do realise your kids will see through you!!!!!!

erdd2

This is reading like parent saving money v parental responsibility