Not the father

Marisco

kevin137 wrote: »

Yet they can impose fees for collection, why not impose for DNA testing as well, then there can never be a mistake...

I've got nothing against it, but if it's going to be compulsory then it's a bit unfair to impose a couple of hundred pounds charge on it! So the taxpayer would end up paying for it, which is also unfair. As I understand it, the collection fees will only be charged if people cannot come to a private agreement, so at least with that you do have a choice, work it out between yourselves and pay nowt!

clearingout

Marisco wrote: »

The only ones who should fear that would be lying PWC's! But like pd001 says, it would probably be prohibitively expensive. I wouldn't have thought there would be many cases like the op anyway, so it wouldn't be worth the expense of DNA ing everyone.

It's nothing to do with lying or having anything to fear. My ex knew there was no doubt whatsoever over the paternity of our third child - he just demanded a test because it suited him to do so and because he knew it would cause me an incredible amount of distress. Why on earth should potentially every woman who goes through the break up of a relationship be faced with paternity testing? It's downright insulting to the by far the majority of people who have no doubt whatsoever about the paternity of their children. And I cannot begin to convey on an internet forum just how upsetting it is to receive 'that' phone call.

kevin137

clearingout wrote: »

It's nothing to do with lying or having anything to fear. My ex knew there was no doubt whatsoever over the paternity of our third child - he just demanded a test because it suited him to do so and because he knew it would cause me an incredible amount of distress. Why on earth should potentially every woman who goes through the break up of a relationship be faced with paternity testing? It's downright insulting to the by far the majority of people who have no doubt whatsoever about the paternity of their children. And I cannot begin to convey on an internet forum just how upsetting it is to receive 'that' phone call.

But if you knew it was the government saying that you had to do this to be able to claim from them so as to stop any fraudulent claims, would you agree..?

Knowing how many fathers out there are not actually fathers and being screwed by the CSA if it was them and NOT your ex then would it be ok...?

clearingout

Kevin, believe me, if I had thought I had a choice, I would have refused the test. But as I thought I needed the maintenance (given it's now been 3 years without any and I seem to have managed, I now think a bit differently!), I knew I had to agree and as I had 'nothing to fear' I reasoned it was 'reasonable'. I would now, on principle, refuse a demand for a test and if that meant that the third child didn't receive maintenance, then so be it (just to say, my ex was refused a DNA test by a judge). I would allow the child concerned and his father to sort it out between themselves when he was of an age where he could consent to a test himself. I feel very strongly about it and do not believe that I should be subjected to such abuse (because it is abuse) when it was my ex who was having an affair. Having everyone from your doctor, health visitor, midwife, playgroup leader, childminder.....say 'the baby is your husband's, isn't it?' is very, very upsetting when your hormones are raging and you are also dealing with the fact you've been betrayed by the one person who was supposed to love you. Ho hum.

As for stopping dads having to pay and therefore forcing the issue? I see your point. It would be interesting to trial it from a cost effectiveness point of view. Would it be cheaper to the tax payer to DNA test every new case or to have to pay back the one in however many where it's later found dad isn't dad? I am inclined to say it's probably cheaper to pay back the one in....but that's a guess and I do accept men bring up children without knowing they're not theirs.


From a more emotional perspective, I see this as something which would be used by many, many NRP's looking to cause upset and simply using it against their ex in exactly the same way PWC use the threat of the CSA. Saying, 'your mother was a sl*t and I had to have a DNA test to make sure you were mine' is exactly the same as, 'see, your father was so crap, I was forced to go to the CSA and have the money forcibly removed from his wages so he'd support you'. It shifts the CSA crap onto the PWC away from the NRP but that doesn't make it right!!!!

Marisco

clearingout wrote: »

Would it be cheaper to the tax payer to DNA test every new case or to have to pay back the one in however many where it's later found dad isn't dad?

From a more emotional perspective, I see this as something which would be used by many, many NRP's looking to cause upset

But why should the taxpayer pay it back? It should be the lying PWC who does that!

If it was mandatory, the NRP wouldn't have anything to do with it, it would be something that would be automatically done on a case being opened.

Fission

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

I'd be interested to know if he had ever denied paternity...checking CSA legislation, there's not really anything that would back up a refund at some point down the line, unless paternity doubts had been raised - any refund to an NRP (where the PWC had already been paid) would be funded by the taxpayer.

What is more, there hasn't necessarily been an overpayment at all. Many parents paying maintenance under the older scheme (assessable income, etc) are liable to pay quite small sums which would be the same whatever the number of children involved.

F

clearingout

Marisco wrote: »

But why should the taxpayer pay it back? It should be the lying PWC who does that!

If it was mandatory, the NRP wouldn't have anything to do with it, it would be something that would be automatically done on a case being opened.

so who's going to pay for all the other DNA tests?

monicaj

Hi
I’ve just picked up this thread and thought I would give my input as I was the author of the thread mentioned – Negative Paternity Test - https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/1499263

If I can say first and foremost, to find out that you are not the biological father of a child whom you have loved, nutured, cared for, spent precious time with over 9 years is much harder emotionally that it is on the pocket.

My husband was married to PWC when his “son” was born, (conceived 9 months into the marriage) he had no reason whatsoever to doubt paternity and he was named on the birth certificate. They later separated/divorced and he had regular contact and paid maintenance, took his “son” on holiday etc etc. Many years later information was made available to him which planted those seeds of doubt, and regretfully the PWC’s deceipt and inability to declare monies paid directly to her when she was claiming benefits were landing us with £6k arrears demand from the CSA. At this point my husband had a huge decision to make do I pay £6k when I have doubts or do I get to the truth – he paid for private counselling and from that he decided for a number of reasons that it was the correct thing to do and get a DNA test.

The results were devastating ………. Despite best efforts to continue a relationship, my Husband has not seen his “son” for 2.5 years, I have not seen my StepSon , my children have lost a step brother and our daughter aged 6 has lost a half brother – and this is all down to the lies and deceipt of PWC.

We were fully refunded by the CSA for maintenance paid via them (Old Rules) – all we did was send the results of the approved DNA test to them – they said they would persue the PWC for the £30k she had defrauded the Government from. The refunded monies have been invested in savings for our “son” and daughter’s futures . If you have read through our thread - you will see that we in NO WAY blame the CSA – my husband paid maintenance for his “son” - we blame totally and utterly the evil PWC who has caused so much emotional distress to her son, his “father” and our children – I will never ever forgive her for that.

As an aside and who would ever have thought – 12 months ago I was diagnosed with a very rare terminal genetic disease, and my husband was tested to determine the risk to our daughter- 100000/1 chance he has a part defect gene – now that was a surprise, and in terms of the high risk to our daughter there would no doubt have been testing done on his “son” – all I can say that despite the horrible emotional ride our “son” and we have encountered , we have no regrets whatsoever in our decisions – the truth is always out there …………… and we continue to hope that when our “son” matures, he may need some questions answered – we will always be there to honestly answer any questions.

Monica

kevin137

monicaj wrote: »

We were fully refunded by the CSA for maintenance paid via them (Old Rules) – all we did was send the results of the approved DNA test to them – they said they would persue the PWC for the £30k she had defrauded the Government from. The refunded monies have been invested in savings for our “son” and daughter’s futures . If you have read through our thread - you will see that we in NO WAY blame the CSA – my husband paid maintenance for his “son” - we blame totally and utterly the evil PWC who has caused so much emotional distress to her son, his “father” and our children – I will never ever forgive her for that.

1stly i'm sorry that you have been through all you have.

2ndly, i understand NOT blaming the CSA, what i was trying to get at, is that if you split on reasonably good terms, and you are one of the 70% of people that always pay regularly, have no problems paying, and they leave you alone, then all is well and good.

For this who have had nothing but grief with the CSA it is an entirely different matter, they made my life hell, crucified my credit rating in to the ground and then proceeded to lie and manipulate the courts for there own figures...!

So you can understand why so many people hate them. And they really are not to be trusted in my opinion..

jarhead66

even if you don't get the full amount back, which i think you should, Will the CSA find the P.W.C. £1000 for providing false information as is stated on alot of the forms sent to the N.R.P. Or all us N.R.P's just like david cameron called us "worse than drink driver's who should be out casts of society!" (sunday telegraph fathers day 2011)