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

JamesP1976

gillypkk wrote: »

based on everything you have written in this thread thus far i and many others will have a very very hard time believing that statement!

It goes well beyond that. I will use the money get a custody order and the children can live with us. They will get a better family life my ex can ever give them.

The children will be much happier and that is priceless.

Marisco

It was your landline I meant!!!! No one who I don't want has my mobile, and certainly no organizations, I always give my land line number if one is required! If it's really important they can leave a message or phone back if I'm not in

gillypkk

ah ok now i see your plan. dont pay child support while they live with their mother so their life isnt as comfortable as it ought to be then when you have suitably lined your own pockets say to the kids "daddy is better off than mummy so come live with me so i can claim even more money for you guy"

kids are not stupid. and depending on their ages they get to decide who to live with and unless there is a danger to the children your ex will retain at least partial custody.

everything you have posted is about bettering yourself and your kids have barely been a consideration. you really should be ashamed to call yourself a father.

JamesP1976

so you detriment the children to better your own life.

JamesP1976

Marisco wrote: »

It was your landline I meant!!!! No one who I don't want has my mobile, and certainly no organizations, I always give my land line number if one is required! If it's really important they can leave a message or phone back if I'm not in

amazed they still phone me knowing they were caught making false statements the first time round. Doing it twice is plain stupidity.

Marisco

Well, if you've "had" them for fraud, they'll be out for blood!!!! It's a shame they don't pursue all non paying NRP's in the same way. There is a thread just below this one about SE NRP's, they seem to get away with murder!!!!

PreludeForTimeFeelers

JamesP1976 wrote: »

Your advice is contradictory.

You say I am assessed for CTC (which in any event, is awarded to my partner) for a child that lives with me and paid to the primary carer named on the form

Now you imply that same CTC is paid to the CSA for children that dont live with me.

I don't see how this is contradictory - your 'New Rules' assessment would be based on your income, and CTC is part of your income. You will get a reduction in the amount that you have to pay based on having a child in your household, so surely it's only fair that the income you get for having the kid in your house is also taken into account?

JamesP1976

Marisco says similar and I will be making enquiries. But do see post #250 Paragraph 3

JamesP1976

Marisco wrote: »

Well, if you've "had" them for fraud, they'll be out for blood!!!! It's a shame they don't pursue all non paying NRP's in the same way. There is a thread just below this one about SE NRP's, they seem to get away with murder!!!!

I am sympathetic for PWC who did not choose to be single with an NRP who leaves the household under his own free will.

I see that on this forum, in fact I have never come accross a forum that is so polarised in opinion on this subject.

If DWP deals with out of work benefits, and HMRC deals with in-work 'benefits' or tax credits. The CSA is targetting working parents, then surely the CSA is a job for HMRC?

Marisco

JamesP1976 wrote: »

If you want, I can scan the HMRC letter showing who it is addressed, and to whom the CTC award is made. I really cant see how the CSA can infer anything different.

You mean this? James, I've already told you, it doesn't matter whose name is on the letter, it comes into your house, for your child, so it is counted as family income. The only way it wouldn't be counted as your income, is if your gf lived somewhere else without you. Say for argument sake, your ex lived with someone, and he had to pay CM, then her CTC, would be used to pay her partners CM. It is unfair all round, but it's how it works.