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

FBaby

Marisco wrote: »

You can't honestly expect a NRPP to pay CM for kids that are not hers surely? I'm not saying the op shouldn't be working and paying himself, he clearly should. But a NRPP's wages should never be taken into account to pay CM!

Yet it is often expected that pwcp should do that, why? - btw I do agree with you, just as I believe that pwcp shouldn't be expected to contribute either.

anguk

gillypkk wrote: »

if i get a new partner and he moves in with my children he will be expected to pay towards their upkeep so why should it be any different for NRPs?

they are living together as a couple and share everything. his kids are her step kids. when you get into a relationship with someone with kids you are taking them on too - CM and all!

I think it boils down to children you are responsible for. A new partner would be responsible for any children living in the house with them but they wouldn't really be responsible for any children who were living elsewhere.

For example my nieces new husband completely financially supports her 2 children from a previous marriage who live with them (her ex has never paid a penny maintenance in over 5 years). But if the 2 children weren't living with them her new husband wouldn't be financially responsible for them.

Marisco

Orville wrote: »

Your a loon tune. Take into account the nrpp's wages as income. You need to get a grip. Of course if the nrp partner had say a few kids of their own, i am sure you would agree then that the nrp should actually pay less as there are more kids in the household?.

They do Orville. If a woman moves in with a bloke, and she has three kids of her own, they are taken into account when CM is worked out. This I think is where the CSA are skewered. Nothing but the NRP's wage should be taken into account! No kids living there, no WTC or CTC, just the NRP's income. Can you imagine the can of worms that would be opened if a NRPP's income was taken into account!!!! :eek:

Orville

Marisco wrote: »

They do Orville. If a woman moves in with a bloke, and she has three kids of her own, they are taken into account when CM is worked out. This I think is where the CSA are skewered. Nothing but the NRP's wage should be taken into account! No kids living there, no WTC or CTC, just the NRP's income. Can you imagine the can of worms that would be opened if a NRPP's income was taken into account!!!! :eek:

It would be utter madness. I mean you'd have people never having relationships with someone who had a child they paid maintenance for, for fear of the csa taking part of their wages to give to a pwc to look after children that arn't theirs and don't live with them.

anguk

I've come to the conclusion that maintenance & the CSA is just one giant mess and headache!

It would be so much easier if the parents, who are supposedly 2 grown adults, could put aside petty differences and bitterness and just come to a reasonable financial and contact agreement that suits them both and would benefit the kids.

Marisco

anguk wrote: »

I've come to the conclusion that maintenance & the CSA is just one giant mess and headache!

It would be so much easier if the parents, who are supposedly 2 grown adults, could put aside petty differences and bitterness and just come to a reasonable financial and contact agreement that suits them both and would benefit the kids.

Here, here!! :T

SingleSue

anguk wrote: »

I've come to the conclusion that maintenance & the CSA is just one giant mess and headache!

It would be so much easier if the parents, who are supposedly 2 grown adults, could put aside petty differences and bitterness and just come to a reasonable financial and contact agreement that suits them both and would benefit the kids.

We've managed one half of that.....the fnancial part (private agreement). He doesn't want to talk about the contact part as he enjoys his freedom without children too much.

Unfortunately in the process, he has also lost his children's respect (and I didn't say a word, didn't have to, he did!).

gratefulforhelp_2

Orville wrote: »

Your a loon tune. Take into account the nrpp's wages as income. You need to get a grip. Of course if the nrp partner had say a few kids of their own, i am sure you would agree then that the nrp should actually pay less as there are more kids in the household?.

There is probably a nicer way of saying this.

I am thanking God that DH treats my child of a previous marriage no differently than my two with him.

I can't imagine how a family could work another way?

FBaby

anguk wrote: »

I think it boils down to children you are responsible for. A new partner would be responsible for any children living in the house with them but they wouldn't really be responsible for any children who were living elsewhere.

My partner (pwcp) isn't responsible for my children, me and their dad are.

anguk wrote: »

For example my nieces new husband completely financially supports her 2 children from a previous marriage who live with them (her ex has never paid a penny maintenance in over 5 years). But if the 2 children weren't living with them her new husband wouldn't be financially responsible for them.

Doesn't this come down to pay per view then?

anguk

FBaby wrote: »

Doesn't this come down to pay per view then?

I guess so but my niece loves her children too much to ever restrict contact with their Dad because they love him. He sees them whenever he wants, they stay at his overnight and he does have a good relationship with the kids. In a way they're like one big family, they all get along with each other and my niece is good friends with her ex's new partner, they go to sports days and school functions together my niece & her husband and her ex & his partner.

I know it does annoy my niece that her ex doesn't pay anything but if she said "no maintenance, no contact" it would be the children that suffer. Luckily she has a very supportive husband who treats the boys as his own and they're all financially taken care of. Maybe when the boys do get older and realise that Dad didn't contribute they may see him in a different light, who knows?

I won't say what my husband thinks about her ex's lack of financial support!