Legal Enforcement Officer Visit

star_016

Thank you all for all your helpful advice. It has been very useful as I have no idea how csa works. I've never needed to deal with them before. I told my boyfriend today to refuse the visit and to call the office to arrange to meet them at their office. He was fine with this and my boyfriend now has a meeting with him in two weeks at the office instead of him coming to our property. This has put me at ease a bit for now anyway.

We are not trying to hide from this but believe the arrears to be incorrect but he may be out of the timeline now to dispute it. I don't know. We are willing to pay as much as we can afford to clear the arrears but whether they will accept an offer off us now or refer it to court remains to be seen. I'll guess we'll find out in a couple of weeks.

Thanks again to everyone.

manglesey25

Take a friend as a witness and have them write everything down.

Remember: there is no time limit to have the CSA comply with child support regulations. Time limits only apply to decisions.

If the CSA tells you otherwise then make a note and end the meeting. Contact your MP and make a complaint under Section 2 of the Fraud Act because giving factually inaccurate information with intent to obtain money from you is a criminal offence. If the CSA gets it wrong, its you that could end up losing lots of money. If the CSA officer says he made a mistake when he is interviewed by the SFO remember, ignorance of the law is no defence.

Collate the paperwork and go through it, work out why it is wrong. Use this meeting as an opportunity to get the CSA to to put it right.

PlayingHardball

star_016 wrote: »

We are not trying to hide from this but believe the arrears to be incorrect but he may be out of the timeline now to dispute it. I don't know. We are willing to pay as much as we can afford to clear the arrears but whether they will accept an offer off us now or refer it to court remains to be seen. I'll guess we'll find out in a couple of weeks.

Thanks again to everyone.

Hiya, use the next two weeks to get all your facts and paperwork straight. Does your boyfriend have a complete breakdown from the CSA detailing the arrears? If not, he should request one be sent to him before the meeting.

Does he know clearly why he is appealing the arrears, if so, he should bring the documentation (payslips, previous correspondence with the CSA).

Definately get him to ask the CSA for his data protection file, it cost £10 and will take upto 40 days. NACSA has a template letter on their website with CSA address for doing this, and they are also very helpful for advice if things get complicated.

It might help your b/f if you could post some of the details in order that forum users could give you clear guidance? Lots of us on here with YEARS of CSA experience! Unfortunately

Fission

manglesey25 wrote: »

If a defendant at a committal proceeding shows the magistrate the CSA is non compliant then, unlike liability order hearings, the magistrate has a power to strike out the entire assessment. He will owe nothing.

Total nonsense. The court has no such power and is specifically forbidden from questioning the assessment because they have no power in relation to it.

The man at the centre of the discussion needs better advice then you are giving.

F

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Fission wrote: »

Total nonsense. The court has no such power and is specifically forbidden from questioning the assessment because they have no power in relation to it.

The man at the centre of the discussion needs better advice then you are giving.

F

Some of the 'advice' given on this board at times it absolute bunkum!

manglesey25

Fission wrote: »

Total nonsense. The court has no such power and is specifically forbidden from questioning the assessment because they have no power in relation to it.

The man at the centre of the discussion needs better advice then you are giving.

F

You are talking about Liability Order proceedings.

No such restrictions exist at a committal proceeding.

See s.33(4) of the Child Support Act 1991.

Section 40 deals with commital proceedings, Where does it say "The court has no such power and is specifically forbidden from questioning the assessment because they have no power in relation to it."[SIC]?

manglesey25

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

Some of the 'advice' given on this board at times it absolute bunkum!

Kimitatsu wrote: »

Let him in -.

Amen ....

Fission

manglesey25 wrote: »

You are talking about Liability Order proceedings.

No such restrictions exist at a committal proceeding.

See s.33(4) of the Child Support Act 1991.

Section 40 deals with commital proceedings, Where does it say "The court has no such power and is specifically forbidden from questioning the assessment because they have no power in relation to it."[SIC]?

It doesn't say that anywhere and neither should it be expected to because those are my words to describe the situation in short, not a quotation of the law.

As to the wording of Section 33, are you even trying to be serious?

How about:

<http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/o-0301.pdf&gt;

33.—(4) On an application under [this section], the court or (as the case may be) the sheriff shall not question the maintenance assessment [maintenance calculation] under which the payments of child support maintenance fell to be made.

manglesey25

You are confusing yourself with Liability Order hearings and committal proceedings.

Take 2:

At a LO hearing, the magistrate cannot question how the liability arose.

At a committal proceeding, the magistrate CAN - and DO challenge liabilities at the request of the defendant NRP. Most commonly the magistrate will ask the ICE to look over the case. In some cases, the magistrate (usually a District Judge on the bench) can refer the case to the Serious Fraud Office if the NRP says the CSA is using false information (whether or not given to them by a PWC) to create a debt.

Fission

manglesey25 wrote: »

At a committal proceeding, the magistrate CAN - and DO challenge liabilities at the request of the defendant NRP. Most commonly the magistrate will ask the ICE to look over the case. In some cases, the magistrate (usually a District Judge on the bench) can refer the case to the Serious Fraud Office if the NRP says the CSA is using false information (whether or not given to them by a PWC) to create a debt.

That is a fantasy.

Following a reference of the issue to court (Section 39), the only power given to the court under Section 40 and its later extensions in the form of Sections 40A and 40B is to issue, or not to issue, a warrant for imprisonment or a disqualification from driving. There is no power under those sections (40, 40A, 40B) for the court to assess child maintenance.

I hope no-one relies too heavily on your advice.