'The Child Support Management of Payments and Arrears' - consultation period

Blob

In short it is an unforced error on the part of the CSA, and they are allegedly 'Professionals', it must therefor follow that they are responsible for this, as if you try to get them to correct it they will and do go off on one. They have brought this down on their own heads as they don't get it wrong and if they do then it is not their fault but yours!

PreludeForTimeFeelers

clearingout wrote: »

And a question for Prelude - do you not run these figures through some kind of computer programme or are they done by hand with a calculator?

It's all done via the system - sensible caseworkers will also work it out by hand to make sure that they tally up...

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Rustic100 wrote: »

Hi Clearingout,


How about this scenario.

In 2004 a NRP gets a better job, and informs CSA of various changes of Circumstances including the new job straight away. payments change and NRP pays according to CSA calculations for 6 years.

Over those 6 years the NRP spends most of disposable income left after CSA on the child CSA have done calculations and two other children who are not assessed through CSA. (making own arrangement as is now fashionable)

If the CSA said in 2011, oops we have now made a mistake we didn't assess your new salary in 2004, is it fair to land the NRP with £15k arrears?

Could your family budget pay £15k due to someone elses mistake?
Is it fair on the NRP who spent a lot of income voluntarily on all other children, which is then not counted by CSA?

In this hypothetical situation, if the payments have changed is that not the reassessment taking place..?

PreludeForTimeFeelers

Like Clearingout says, surely there has to be an element of personal responsibility by the NRP and PWC too. If the CSA are responsible for an assessment taking longer, then they will be more lenient when it comes to negotiating arrears repayments - the key word there is *negotiating*, if (as many advise here) you don't take calls from the CSA, and only communicate with them via letters then you can surely see that there's no negotiating going on, and therefore the CSA are more likely to set arrears repayments at the default rate of 40%.

clearingout

For me, one fundamental flaw in the process is the fact that the 'case' is passed from department to department with no one taking overall responsibility for it. This is not how I have 'caseworked' (although I haven't caseworked in the CSA sense!) in previous jobs. For me, a caseworker holds full responsibility for a file and whilst may sometimes have to hand it to a different department, he/she knows where it is and what is being done with it and can, if you pick up the phone to them, tell you exactly what's going on. The trouble at the CSA is no one is taking that responsibility, you're unable to build any kind of relationship with anyone and everyone seems unable to tell you what's happening - other than reading the notes on the computer screen which don't seem to mean very much at all.

I don't know. It's an imperfect system but for now, it's all we've got.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

clearingout wrote: »

For me, one fundamental flaw in the process is the fact that the 'case' is passed from department to department with no one taking overall responsibility for it. This is not how I have 'caseworked' (although I haven't caseworked in the CSA sense!) in previous jobs. For me, a caseworker holds full responsibility for a file and whilst may sometimes have to hand it to a different department, he/she knows where it is and what is being done with it and can, if you pick up the phone to them, tell you exactly what's going on. The trouble at the CSA is no one is taking that responsibility, you're unable to build any kind of relationship with anyone and everyone seems unable to tell you what's happening - other than reading the notes on the computer screen which don't seem to mean very much at all.

I don't know. It's an imperfect system but for now, it's all we've got.

I think it depends where in the lifecycle of the case things are - new applications and general case maintenance are usually held in one area, rather than with a particular caseworker, if payments are missed or if there are legal issues then a caseworker will have ownership. I agree that case ownership in all departments would be a better way of working, it would reduce clients from having to repeat things over and over, and would encourage staff to have more of a vested interest in progressing the cases, but for some reason the higher-ups disagree.

Rustic100

Clearingout, you wrote "where does the issue of personal responsibility start/stop?"

Well I know you mean this in the sense that even though the CSA force NRP's to provide info, do calculations you are suggesting, the NRP should be policing the CSA!

My definition of personal responsibility is that I was paying for my child before the CSA got involved (7 years), and for my other two children for 20 years.

I will make another point, if the CSA had acted on my letter in 2004, I could have formalised my payments through them for my other two children, drastically reducing any arrears.

clearingout

No, I don't think it's about the NRP or the PWC 'policing' the CSA. I think it's about taking responsibility for our own bills, payments, receipts etc.....I bet you know how much you should be paying each month for, say, car insurance and run over your bank statement briefly when it comes in and mentally just check that everything is as it should be? You also know full well that just because the insurance company got it right last month, there is always the possibility of something going astray this month? So why not the same with the CSA? Why on earth wouldn't you mentally run over an assessment and check that it makes sense to you and that it's about what you were expecting to pay or receive?

My latest re-assessment was out by £30 a month on what I was expecting. But when I went through it, I saw where my error had come from and agreed with what the CSA had assessed. But if I hadn't, I'd have been on to them asking for an explanation. I fully accept I might never have got one - but equally, we all know that sometimes the car insurance company also can't explain why something went wrong and that it can take months to sort it out. Yet we're not advocating the people at the car insurance company should be personally liable for their mistakes (which, with the best will in the world, happen)?

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to the personal responsibility issue with the CSA. But I do know that it's perhaps not as clear cut as some would like it to be and I don't think it's always the CSA that is at fault in the way some of us would like to believe. I fully expect my ex to be posting here - or some other forum - in the years to come when he's due at a commital hearing the next day with a ton of paperwork in his hands that he doesn't understand and hasn't actually bothered to look at for 10 years and at that point, is expecting answers! He'll blame the CSA for getting it wrong (and I have a couple of questions myself about how they have arrived at his arrears if I'm honest but as they're busy dealing with him, I'm happy to leave well alone for now) but won't take any responsibility for the fact he's had 10 years to ask questions....

NewStart09

Poor Management of NRP payments

I cant decide if I am utterly disgusted or bewilder by the incompetence of this governmental organsition.

It seems to me that the NRP has more rights than the PWC. afterall this money is for the support of the children, it is not allimony.

As lame as the rules are and having read some of the comments on here, it seems quite clear to me that the NRP can play the system by simply not paying the support.

If this were council tax or any tax for that matter, the NRP would be pursued and penalised eventually being court ordered to pay.
However since it is child support it seems more to be optional and the CSA will not pursue nor admit their liability to payments not being made promptly to the PWC until a significant amount of arrears are owed.

To ask the PWC to 'write off' the arrears is just insulting not just to them but the children.

I have found the organisation frustrating and can honestly state that I have paid more in phone calls to them about my case than the meagre £10 check I have received in the last 5 months, and of course the NRP has once again not made his/her payment and this is a person who only pays £5 per week for two children.

How is this system fair, and trying to pursue the employees is rather pointless. They can at the end of the day just simply get another job and the case just gets passed onto another inexperienced case worker.

Death and he/she still does not owe anything - Excuse me any debts held by that individual should be included in probate and paid according to his/her assets - period

NewStart09

Blob

I accept that there are horror stories on both sides.

If you take the analogy of the car insurance company making a mistake, you have redress against that company, and they will be held to account it is that simple. The cost to them will be substantial and rightly so. What redress do any of us have with the CSA, that is worth a light?

Then to the point of phoning the CSA rather than writing to them, I have received a letter from the Solicitor Generals office informing me that all contact with the CSA from me has to be in writing, as they did not like the fact that I quoted the conversations with them and had time and sates as well in Court and the Court took this as 'Best Evidence', It is down to them that all communication has to be in writing. Some have phoned me and had to be reminded of this. and yes it is o the file as I have seen it and it has been confirmed to me, this confirms the incompetence of the people that work there, they don't read the file, case proven.

There has to be responsibility taken by the CSA for the actions or lack of them by their staff, they can't just keep passing it off to the NRP or the PWC. If is the case that the NRP/PWC is being a prat and not paying or playing the system for no good reason other than to get more money or not paying, then yes they should be hammered, and the Law is there for this, however to say that the system is in favor of the NRP is lunacy. It can be that someone comes out of a relationship with nothing is on the brink of bankruptcy, because they have taken all of the debt from the relationship, then get hit for CS payments that don't take this into account it can and does push them over the top.

In the event of death, if the person dies without a will then the law comes into play as to who gets how much, and yes the Gov gets most of it, but the children will get a large payout from the estate. In the event they the person has made a will most though not all will make a provision for the children, again if they don't then this can be challenged in the Courts. The point is that if provision for the children has been made should this money be taken from them to pay any arrears or should they be left to sort it out and get on with their lives. If they are not of an age to do this then the money should be put into a trust and payments made from the trust for the children, but not given as a lump sum to the surviving parent as they may well spend it on things that are not for the children.

The question has to be asked as to just who is responsible for the arrears, be it a non compliant NRP/PWC or a CSA case worker if there is such a thing! I believe that an investigation by a body such as ICE should investigate and that the findings of that body are then acted on as to who the responsible party is and then they carry the responsibility for the arrears, who every that may be and are then held accountable for them.