Advice for a father please

kevin137

Well...

You can follow there complaint procedure, you can involve your mp or you could take them to court...

How did you notify them 16 months ago...???

If this was by letter, then it will be in your file, so start by making a SARs request...

Personally i would use the small claims court, take the date you notified, calculate the money and give them notice in writing that due to there failure to correctly assess in accordance with the law, that you consider this a debt owed by them. And give them 14 days to fully recompense you or you will start legal proceedings through the court.

You can claim the amount due, all costs and interest from that date at base + 3%

If you have proof you notified them 16 months ago, they have no defence, if you don't it could be harder, but still doable...

They MUST by law keep all data paper and phone call recordings from your case, if you apply and they do not disclose it, after you issue proceedings then come up with something they did not include they leave themselves open to not complying with a SARs request and falling foul to that, it could also be inadmissible in court as tainted evidence having not been disclosed legally...

This would be my preferred method, and is far quicker than most others, but make the SARs request and contact your MP, they have 40 days for the SAR's, and then you can write giving them 14 days if not resolved with the MP helping...

Best of both worlds...

Callum_77

Thank you very much, a lot of advice I will follow there.

15 months ago I notified them via phone. They said because she was still claiming child benefit they couldnt stop the csa until the child benefit stopped. So I also rang child benefit and told them the circumstances. Both were supposed to be looking into it. Then csa said they couldnt stop it as child benefit was still active.

I have no idea what either did (nothing by the looks of it) Her business is over 1 year old over there, so they cant of done many checks.

They should have the phone records of this, especially as I was ringing for an update on it every week.

I did think about small claims court too. Your advice on how to handle it is perfect too, thank you.

Im awaiting a letter with what they think they owe me, then I will take it from there.

Much appreciated.

kevin137

They have to take ANY reassessment from the date of notification, so if you notified them, then by LAW that is when you should of been refunded from, regardless of how you notified them... But writing is preferable, but not a necessity.

What checks they carry out is a completely different case, probably none, but that is not your concern, all you need to worry about is if you notified them...

Get your SAR request in, contact your MP and then wait for the paperwork... Be clear in the request that you want copies of ALL recorded conversations, if you have itemised billing for your phone this will make it easy to see if they have provided them all, and if they haven't raise a formal complaint immediately, once you have that, if you are getting no luck with the MP in the interim period, then write giving them 14 days to refund in full. If they do not, then issue against them online using moneyclaimonline easy to find on google...

FBaby

This thread makes me so so angry. What a horrible person to deprive her child of a chance of building a relationship with her father, just because it suited her. I hate these selfish women who conveniently convince themselves that they are doing best for the child when all they are doing is best for them. They feel no shame because they look at their child who seem happy and think 'see, she is a happy kid, doesn't need him in her life', yet don't think of all what they are missing, and more importantly how it will affect them in the future.

Of course, maybe OP is a violent man, who used to beat her up, or has a criminal history and that justified her wanting to protect her child, but hard to believe this would be the case when she has had to qualms continuing to pocket in £60 a week in maintenance from a man she wants nothing to do with

It is real sad that the authorities are so laxed dealing with such people. She SHOULD be made to repay all child benefit AND all maintenance to the OP...with interests!

Just very cross reading threads like these!

shoe*diva79

FBaby wrote: »

Of course, maybe OP is a violent man, who used to beat her up, or has a criminal history and that justified her wanting to protect her child, but hard to believe this would be the case when she has had to qualms continuing to pocket in £60 a week in maintenance from a man she wants nothing to !

This is the only part i disagree with FBay.

A friend of mine has recently contacted the CSA for CM for her 6 month old twins. The father has never met them and never will unless he tales my friend to court. The reason being he beat her up when she was pregnant trying to get her to miscarry the babies because it turned out he was already married (unbeknown to my friend). He was charged and in October last year the case came to court. My friend still has a injunction out so he cannot come near her and she has moved to he no longer knows where she lives. Going by your theory, why would she be happy to accept his money? Well, kids cost and a round of applause to any single parent who manages by themselves but quite frankly the money that he will have to pay will enable my friend to offer the twins a better standard of living.

The CSA contacted my friend this week as they had spoken to the NRP and he has denied paternity so the DNA route is being taken to prove (there is no doubt) that he is the father. Once that has been confirmed it will be interesting to see if he wants to have contact... But that doesn't mean shouldn't contribute financially.

kevin137

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

The CSA contacted my friend this week as they had spoken to the NRP and he has denied paternity so the DNA route is being taken to prove (there is no doubt) that he is the father. Once that has been confirmed it will be interesting to see if he wants to have contact... But that doesn't mean shouldn't contribute financially.

And that is right he should contribute, however, the OP's case is very different, he had an order, she breached that order and as such, regardless of wether she had custody she has "abducted" the child/ren and removed them illegally from the country, and he should under these circumstances NOT have to pay...

Or is the law that specific that she can break it and he has to pay still...???

Very one sided when you have an attitude like that don't you think...?

FBaby

I did hesitate to typed what you quoted because indeed, maintenance and contact shouldn't (and isn't) linked. However, in my personal opinion, if you are going to go out of your way to insure there is no contact, not even allowing supervised contact, so not even giving the relationship between the child and the father a chance, then I think you should accept that the father is nothing to the child and therefore not a financial cushion either.

Well, kids cost and a round of applause to any single parent who manages by themselves but quite frankly the money that he will have to pay will enable my friend to offer the twins a better standard of living.

Many single mother get nothing from their ex, even when they have regular contact (as in my case). We all cope. Maybe it's a personal issue. I would too proud to accept cash from someone I want nowhere near my child.

Callum_77

FBaby wrote: »

This thread makes me so so angry. What a horrible person to deprive her child of a chance of building a relationship with her father, just because it suited her. I hate these selfish women who conveniently convince themselves that they are doing best for the child when all they are doing is best for them. They feel no shame because they look at their child who seem happy and think 'see, she is a happy kid, doesn't need him in her life', yet don't think of all what they are missing, and more importantly how it will affect them in the future.

Of course, maybe OP is a violent man, who used to beat her up, or has a criminal history and that justified her wanting to protect her child, but hard to believe this would be the case when she has had to qualms continuing to pocket in £60 a week in maintenance from a man she wants nothing to do with

It is real sad that the authorities are so laxed dealing with such people. She SHOULD be made to repay all child benefit AND all maintenance to the OP...with interests!

Just very cross reading threads like these!

The bold part...she has no reason to stop me seeing my child. What she has done my daughter will remember and thats what I am clinging to with the age she is now at.

Long story short...she never told my daughter about me and another bloke brought her up, with her calling him dad. All through this I was fighting through court for access. The only reason it took so long was because she kept vanishing, wanted dna tests etc. For 5 years I missed one court hearing due to an injury playing sport.

I've been through the familys forward, had to do life story booklet, court has ruled I must have access to my daughter...the first time was amazing....after that I cant help but think my ex said some bad things to her because for a few weeks they wouldnt come then went to live abroad.

I dont understand how she can tell our daughter about me, let me meet her, then take her away.

The reason I have decided to leave it is for my daughters sake. I could get them brought over here my solicitor says. But what good would that do my daughter with her mother saying you have to leave all this because of your real dad? I have no doubt she would fill her head with rubbish if they had to come back, so yet again I lose.

FBaby

Callum, my suggestion that you could be violent was hypothetical, on the basis that we don't know you and possibly don't know the full story, but based on what you say (and my instinct), the rest of what I wrote is how I fell about your situation. I feel for you, really do, your ex has taken the selfish route, deciding that it will be better for your daughter to have the man SHE has decided suited her better as a father for her daughter. It is despicable and so unfair to you.

Because indeed, you have the right to fight and pay for it, but because of the slowness of the process, you have a child who indeed grows up and builds her life without the person who should be part of her life. I totally understand your decision to let it go because what can you get from fighting more now? To travel to Spain every other week-end, for the chance to see your child in the company of strangers for a few hours? To be fair on the child, who is still too young to care to be able to understand and therefore make the decision to want to build a relationship with her biological father, it could only be expected that after all this time, she isn't interested....for now....

The system doesn't support fathers like you because of how slow they are. Ruling that the child should have visitation rights, if supervised to start with, should be immediate. What is there to discuss? The visit is supervised, so what damage can the nrp do during this time? But at least it gives him the chance to build some relationship with his child whilst he proves that he is not what he might be accused of and is capable of being a good father.

At least you can move on knowing you've done all you could and if your daughter one day decides to find out about you (which is most likely), you will be able to prove to her that you thought for her. A daughter is not just a daughter for 18 years, you can also build a very good strong and rewarding relationship with a child during their adulthood, so don't loose faith completely that one day you could have a chance to be her dad.

shoe*diva79

kevin137 wrote: »

And that is right he should contribute, however, the OP's case is very different, he had an order, she breached that order and as such, regardless of wether she had custody she has "abducted" the child/ren and removed them illegally from the country, and he should under these circumstances NOT have to pay...

Or is the law that specific that she can break it and he has to pay still...???

Very one sided when you have an attitude like that don't you think...?

I wasnt talking about the OP situation. I was highlighting something to FBaby which I had quoted.