Stick With Private Agreement or Involve CSA?

jarhead66

£200 amonth for two kids the CSA are taking £106 aweek from me for one kid on CSA1 !!!!! i don't that the CSA would take that much under CSA2

Ladyshopper

pd001 wrote: »

A private agreement set up 10 years ago?
Was it set up properly? Was it a written agreement?

No, and not really! He sent me a solicitors letter stating he would give me £400 a month maintenance for children, and in return I would give him a certain % of equity in the house we were living in at the time. About 2 months after that he cut his payments in half as he said he couldn't afford it, so I said I wouldn't be giving him as much equity.

This carried on for a while, and to cut a long and extremely complicated story short, he lied to his parents, obtained the amount from them that he told them I was giving him, and said I would pay them back! Didn't tell them he'd cut his maintenance and we were discussing the equity! In the end, I paid out a figure of around 75% of that originally agreed, but it went in trust for the children. Ex didn't lose out as his parents had handed money over. I lost out on half agreed sum of maintenance, and inlaws lost out on a lump sum. It turned hairy for a while, but sorted itself in end, and as I say I get on very well with inlaws. Ever since then, he has just stuck to the £200 a month, nothing in writing, and paying via inlaws.

I have raised it before, but he's always just said he paid enough, and I didn't want to rock the boat or get inlaws involved and fall out. 10 years down the line though I've had enough, I did raise it back in May this year and he said he would "look into it, but that he felt he was paying enough". Suprise suprise, he has never come back to me. I would like the figure assessed once and for all.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Doing a little bit of working out (taking into account the child who lives with him), I think if he was on about £21,000 gross (works out to £400 per week before tax and NI) then this would equate to the £46 per week you're getting.

Ladyshopper

jarhead66 wrote: »

£200 amonth for two kids the CSA are taking £106 aweek from me for one kid on CSA1 !!!!! i don't that the CSA would take that much under CSA2

I think had I have gone to the CSA when we first split up over 10 years ago he would have been on CSA1, but because he initially seemed good at paying the maintenance I left it. Then he halved it, and then he was in and out of work a bit, but his parents always paid if he couldn't, so I felt I was probably better off leaving it as it was.

This is honestly not about greed, "screwing him over" or control, I just want to know that the figure he is paying is correct, as most people I know seem to think it is low for someone who is working full time to be paying for two children.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Ladyshopper wrote: »

PreludeForTimeFeelers (phew, thats a long name!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aem9NlKm7BE

surreybased

Hi,

Have a look on the CSA site for the calculator that will give you the guide. If he has the children for 2 nights per week (104 nights) per year and there is another child at home then his gross earning would be circa £25k.

He may also be paying into a pension which will reduce the net earnings and the CSA assessment.

The approach I would take to this is to outline what the costs are for the children and then if each of you are making a contribution of £200 per month plus child benefit what is the delta? If their costs are in excess of this then I agree he should be paying more. I assume, as he has them 2 nights a week, he also provides a bedroom so he has in addition housing costs. (as you have).

I would feel very angry if my ex demanded to see my P60..No way would I tolerate that and I'm a PWC.

I guess your children must be close to growing up (if separated for 10 years) If you have managed to have a reasonable relationship with their dad, and they have a good relationship with each of their parents then well done.That is worth so much more than materialistic stuff.

If you do want to discuss finances I would recommend you do so on the basis of what the children's costs are..involving the other parent, rather than insisting they pay more is a much more productive way to go.

Empty_pockets

As a seperated single father I'd suggest going going to the CSA would not help things. It's lilkely to strain relationships.

If you are struggling for money then a reasonable disscussion about costs with the father would be the best way to progress. Wanting more just because CSA would pay more isn't reasonable. Needing more to provide for the kids is reasonable. If he can't pay more, could he have them for longer periods. Look at all the options.

buttercup73

Empty_pockets wrote: »

As a seperated single father I'd suggest going going to the CSA would not help things. It's lilkely to strain relationships.

If you are struggling for money then a reasonable disscussion about costs with the father would be the best way to progress. Wanting more just because CSA would pay more isn't reasonable. Needing more to provide for the kids is reasonable. If he can't pay more, could he have them for longer periods. Look at all the options.

I was going to write the same thing, but from a PWC point of view. Sounds like you've got a "good ex" that's interested in his kids and willing to support you - that's a lot more than most PWC on this forum. CSA is a flaud organisation that lives to punish the NRP whether they've done wrong or not. They just put the sticker on and get the bat out. Do you really want to complicate and/or potentially destroy his life just to get more money out of it?

karenx

It might rock the boat if you went to the csa and he might make things difficult, and if he knows how to play the system he might stop working or reduce his hours thus meaning you get less than what you get now. He is happy to pay you every month so far, I would keep it like that. If you are struggling you could maybe ask him to buy their next pair of shoes etc.

jojo_2012_2

I'd get the CSA assessment done. If it's more then claim. If it's not then don't.