how do CSA work out my protected earnings?

Kimitatsu

You need to ring them then Jarhead and check that they have given you an allowance for it. CT is a mandatorybill and is enforceable by prison sentance so the CSA HAVE to leave you enough to pay it which is why it should be given as a seperate allowance (or that your income leaves enough to be able to pay it after your liability).

Blob

jarhead66 wrote: »

The protected earnings if you are on CSA1 are what you would get on income support and you morgate/ rent payments per week, for some reason council tax is not included in the protected earnings, which is strange as if you own rent a property then you have to pay council tax, Maybe if you work for the CSA you are council tax exempt??

This, in theory is true, but try to enforce it if you are a NRP and on CSA1 as I am and you will be called every kind of abusive and trying to avoid paying! They even tried to argue this in Court and said that the PI is only based on benefit payments, but they can and do take people below this level and it is lawful! As we can do this even though the letter from the then Minister stated different, the Court was powerless at that level to do anything about it. Proves that they are above the law ish!

jarhead66

Thanks for the information Blob!! This whole protected income is a complete con,
When you work it out if you where unemployed you would get housing costs, income support, council tax, perscriptions, £20 aweek what you are allowed to earn without effecting your claim.
I think thats works out about £665 amonth, When my protected income is only £494 amonth
As my maintenance payments also includes my overtime, if i don't do any overtime i bring home about £800 amonth so without overtime i am earning £135 amonth more than someone who is unemployed, So when you think most working people get between 4 - 5 weeks holidays a year I have to be very carefull when i take my holidays, in fact last year i gave two weeks back as i couldn't afford the time off in case i missed the overtime that the CSA have told me ive got to work. So i class myself as working unemployed!! lol

JSB43

I can see why CS1 NRPs go and sign on.

jarhead66

Yes JSB46 thats the way the CSA rules are for CSA1, Alot of the public don't know how unfair CSA1 is to N.R.P's. Alot of N.R.P's pack in work because they can't afford to pay the CSA and goto work. But the govement and the CSA pass it off that these N.R.P's pack in work or go self employed cos they don't want to pay when in truth its the CSA1 scheme that is forcing the N.R.P. to pack in work. I know that there are N.R.P's out there who do pack in work to avoid maintenance payments but most want to pay its just the amount that the CSA take off them and as it is based on income support there is not alot of difference between working and being unemployed.
The sad thing about is that David Cameron as he stated in the sunday telegraph that runaway dad's are worse than drink drivers, so i guess by that statement i don't see my kids but pay maintenance i am lower than a snakes belly. If he thinks different of us then why hasn't he pushed for a fairer child maintenance scheme and get it up and running ASAP.

Blob

CSA 1 is a disaster as is the move to CSA 2 and will be the move to CSA 3 when that comes around. In effect it will mean that you will possibly have three people working together on the same wage wit say 2 children and paying 3 different amounts, for the sake of discussion let us say that they all have the same housing costs as well before this point comes up!

Under CSA 1 the Law states [SI1815/1992 section 28 I think but have to check] that you should be left with more than you would get on Benefit again I think it is £30 pw, this is not taken into account by the CSA at any level. The Court of Appeal has made a Judgment that states that no assessment can be set for over 48 hours, that means that someone can't have an assessment than means that the NRP has to work more then 48 hours to meet this liability. This is to be looked into by ICE when they get to my case, their findings will be sent to the Minister to look into, as to my certain knowledge the CSA have breached this and as such have committed an Offense under the Working Time Regulations as amended! I am sure that they will cover this up and nothing will happen, what a surprise! I can hear the defense already, this is "incompatible law and ours takes preference". In the event that this comes out, then it will be forwarded to the Law Lord that made the Judgment, I then suspect that someone might be sent an invitation to his Court to explain to him that he is wrong and does not know the Law, you can bet your life that if it is possible, I will be there to hear what is said, is it will be interesting.

If anyone has a case pending with ICE please give them time as their backlog is about 18 months, due to the total incompetence of the CSA this shows the type of people that you are dealing with there, being the CSA! I am sure that the Ombudsman is not far out on this time frame as well, I am sure that I will find out in the next few months!

g-sharp_major

jarhead66 wrote: »

The sad thing about is that David Cameron as he stated in the sunday telegraph that runaway dad's are worse than drink drivers

David Cameron is being very naive to call me a deadbeat dad. This is an open letter to David Cameron

Events:

• Ex wife wants a divorce
• Ex wife accuses me of assault and harming my kids, Im arrested and taken away from my own house
• Ex wife gets rent free use of my house, injunction and occupation order.
• Ex wife sign on benefits, and mandatory at the time, the CSA to charge me 30%
• Ex wife get legal aid to sue me for everything I’ve got including my house and its contents
• Im refused legal aid and cannot get a solicitor, CSA refuse me to retain income to pay for my own defence.
• Court dismisses Ex wife claim for assault, prosecution drops case against me against harming my kids
• Civil court gives Ex wife the house as divorce settlement. I get nothing, not even a contact order
• House is repossessed; the council is forced to re-house them.
• CSA cheats by not allowing me to pay my travel to work costs when the law says I can
• CSA cheats again by saying I cant pay my own rent on my temporary flat when the law says I can
• Left with an income that is below (the CSA) protected income, I sign on
• I get a pay rise for not having to work!! I get JSA, my rent is paid, I get free prescriptions and free council tax plus I can work for cash all tax free.
• I now qualify for legal aid and successfully overturn a costs application from Ex wife solicitor for injunctions and occupation order. Finding of fact dismissed. Ex has to pay all her own costs.
• CSA admits getting it wrong, but promises to put it right AFTER I return to work
• I got back to work. CSA cheats again and charges me full whack 30% DEO
• Not enough money to pay my travel to work, I fail to turn up
• Offered job overseas, I accept and I am no longer a UK tax payer.
• Remarried and restarted family live over again, we all live happily ever after
• REMO application fails on two counts. I was deliberately excluded from my children and the UK pays the needs of the children with state benefits from early 2010, thus no money is needed anyway.
• David Cameron says I am a deadbeat dad

Explain please David Cameron, I played by the rules, the CSA didnt. Why am I a deadbeat dad?

Blob

That is simple, the CSA has to meet its targets and anyone that wont comply with their interpretation of the law is abusive and therefor a 'Deadbeat Dad'! The law and the rights and wrongs of it don't get a look in, as an NRP you have no rights and are there to be milked end of!

The CSA don't care about the NRPs or the hardship that they cause to countless children by their actions, and the problems that they causes between people that in some cases, not yours, have no problem with each other, but can't live together anymore. The damage that this causes to the children will come back to haunt society in the years to come with the generations of maladjusted kids that have had no contact with one of their natural parents. Before people start to jump on me for this, gov research backs this up, that is why we have the Children's Act, and the rights of the children to see both parents is enshrined therein!

kevin137

Blob wrote: »

Gov research backs this up, that is why we have the Children's Act, and the rights of the children to see both parents is enshrined therein!

Someone needs to tell the judges that decide the contact orders this fact, as they have NEVER seen this in my eyes...!

Wasteland_Drifter

Contact Orders are not worth the paper they are printed on.

The PWC is responsible for making it work, but there is no enforcement procedure. The PWC can stick two fingers and say up-yours mate! I'm still taking you for everything youve got!