Liability Order

PlayingHardball

manglesey25 wrote: »

These internet lawyers really know their stuff.

No, I'm not a lawyer, I'm a PWC who has fought tooth and nail for some financial support for my daughter, whilst ex figured he'd be safe in another country, I speak with very clear first hand experience, unlike you. I have experienced both REMO and a UK Tribunal Hearing, all the while the NRP is living abroad!!!

The CSA and the Tribunal service never send documents an address outside the UK. If you are not in the UK then enforcement comes to nothing.

Utter nonsense! You are wrong again. Both the CSA AND the Tribunal Service sent documents to my NRP OUTSIDE of the UK!!! And surprise surprise, he responded. You can't respond to something you never received, now can you?

As for REMO, only a PWC can apply, and the application often falls at the first hurdle if the PWC is a single parent by choice.

You are yet again very wrong. The application wouldn't fail for the reason you spouted, not in the UK.

I won't respond to anymore of your posts Mangle, as you clearly are not helping anyone, least of all the OP. The OP had questions, which unfortunately, are very difficult for anyone to answer as there are not enough facts given and it is very complex, quite obviously. One really that only a solicitor could help, and one that has experience of such cases.

What I posted are the facts, according to first hand experience and UK legislation.

manglesey25

Wow! you are easily rattled.

I think the OP can make up his own mind now.

manglesey25

PlayingHardball wrote: »

You are yet again very wrong. The application wouldn't fail for the reason you spouted, not in the UK.

Sorry, I missed that bit. PWC's dont apply for a REMO against an NRP in the UK.


REMO is about enforcing child maintenance from someone who is outside the UK and living in a REMO participating country. Its based on the financial needs of the child, whereas the UK calculate it on the earnings of the parent regardless of the childs actual needs.

If the PWC is on benefits then the REMO assessment is NIL, because from last year, the UK changed the law to meet the financial needs of the children of parents who are claiming benefits.

PlayingHardball

REMO

Introduction

Reciprocal Enforcement of Maintenance Orders or REMO is the process by which maintenance orders made by UK courts on behalf of UK residents can be registered and enforced by courts or other authorities in other countries against people resident there.
This is a reciprocal arrangement governed by international conventions, which means that foreign maintenance orders in favour of individuals abroad can likewise be registered and enforced by UK courts against UK residents. The precise nature of reciprocity available between the UK and another jurisdiction depends on the convention or agreement to which the other country is a signatory.

• How to apply
• The role of the REMO Section
• UK legislation
• Conventions and other Agreements
• List of REMO reciprocating countries

How to apply

A UK resident who wishes to apply to obtain maintenance from a person overseas should approach

• their local magistrates' court (or county court where the order was made) if they have an existing court order for maintenance; or
• their local magistrates' court if there is no existing order

They may apply for their order to be enforced in the country where the payer resides.




Benefits and REMO have nothing to do with each other, neither does child support and benefits, as of April thisyear.

So put simply (you may appreciate that), if a PWC is on benefits, she/he can apply for REMO (successfully).

Oh, and child support in a REMO country is based on the what the UK court order says, not as has been wrongly quoted as being based on 'the child's financial needs'.

Also, a PWC that applies for a REMO will not fail (within the UK) if they are seen to be single by choice, as has been stated.

clearingout

how on earth do you determine whether someone is single by choice anyway? 6 of one, half a dozen of the other situation.....

manglesey25

I dont speak for every EU nation, but France for example, goes something like this. (you will find the majority of the EU is similar). This is a rough translation from a Cour de cassation leaflet.

1. If married, look at the name on the divorce petition, if its the NRP then REMO is usually granted following representation.

2. If no petition, does NRP have a document showing an injunction, arrest/bail preventing contact with children for violent offence against PWC or children?

a) If yes, then i) Is there a finding of fact? if no, ii) has the NRP been convicted of the offence? if no then NRP is not liable for child maintenance.
b) if yes to either the above (i) or (ii), and is earning, NRP has a duty to maintain the children.

3. If none to (2) above, the Court of First instance will hear represntation from NRP and PWC to determine if the REMO applicants circumstances are self-induced.

a) if yes, REMO application is dismissed and returned to the UK.

b) if no, REMO application is granted, if the NRP is earning, assessment is made.

In the EU, Roman Catholicism stigmatises single parenting among the low-income communities, thus, cannot claim child amintenance if their circunstances as a single parent are self-induced.

The UK has a similar policy when a person chooses to become homeless or jobless, they cant claim benefits or housing. Its the same in the EU for single parents who choose to be single parents.

The law amended April last year following a change in UK policy, a REMO PWC who is in receipt of benefits cannot get any money at all, this is because the needs of the child is now being met by the UK.

kevin137

Thank you for your responses so far, i think the point is being overlooked though, i WAS notified by the CSA 2 days before the hearing, and the court despite having correspondence with them previously at the same address in Norway failed to notify me...

They then used there discretion to decide that i had been notified.. How can this be if by there own admissions they never notified me...?

So what i need to know is how and who do i appeal the liability order to from abroad...

clearingout

manglesey25 wrote: »

I dont speak for every EU nation, but France for example, goes something like this. (you will find the majority of the EU is similar). This is a rough translation from a Cour de cassation leaflet.

1. If married, look at the name on the divorce petition, if its the NRP then REMO is usually granted following representation.

2. If no petition, does NRP have a document showing an injunction, arrest/bail preventing contact with children for violent offence against PWC or children?

a) If yes, then i) Is there a finding of fact? if no, ii) has the NRP been convicted of the offence? if no then NRP is not liable for child maintenance.
b) if yes to either the above (i) or (ii), and is earning, NRP has a duty to maintain the children.

3. If none to (2) above, the Court of First instance will hear represntation from NRP and PWC to determine if the REMO applicants circumstances are self-induced.

a) if yes, REMO application is dismissed and returned to the UK.

b) if no, REMO application is granted, if the NRP is earning, assessment is made.

In the EU, Roman Catholicism stigmatises single parenting among the low-income communities, thus, cannot claim child amintenance if their circunstances as a single parent are self-induced.

The UK has a similar policy when a person chooses to become homeless or jobless, they cant claim benefits or housing. Its the same in the EU for single parents who choose to be single parents.

The law amended April last year following a change in UK policy, a REMO PWC who is in receipt of benefits cannot get any money at all, this is because the needs of the child is now being met by the UK.

so basically a PWC (of either sex) isn't able to leave a relationship simply because it makes them unhappy and by default, there needs to be a separation of parents and thus the children need to live with one or the other? If I make that choice, because I just no longer love my partner, I'm not eligible for child maintenance? Do we live in the Dark Ages?

manglesey25

You cant.

Even if you did gio before a magistrate and get a quashing order, the CSA will only get another one.

Conserve energy getting the CSA to correct the assessment. The ICE is your best route and apparently, you can file your case online.

If your stay in Norway is permanent, then theres no hurry because this leaves REMO the only route, and the CSA never pursue it. Any debt owed to the CSA itself becomes inert. The PWC files the claim and the burden of proof usually passes away from you, to the applicant PWC.

If you want to know how to overturn a REMO application, or reduce a liability amount on an existing one according to local child maintenance regulations, there is a checklist doing the rounds, if you havnt already got it, send me a PM.

manglesey25

clearingout wrote: »

, because I just no longer love my partner, I'm not eligible for child maintenance? Do we live in the Dark Ages?

In many countries, to use your choice or words, they live in the dark ages. Some are even worse. e.g. the UAE, Saudi Arabia, women have no rights at all. Children are the property of the man.