CSA Please can anyone advise

DeeDee74

owdslackdraws wrote: »

Thanks for that, also googled it and had a bit of read also child tax credits , not sure though if both can be claimed at the same time.

Anyway, yes they are benefits, so people who work pay tax which is where the benefit's come from, so anyone who works and pays child support to a PWC who gets benefits in effect pays twice.

Why on earth should the PWC want to work full time

Good grief!, I wonder if tax can be claimed back on CSA payments, LOL

no of course no nrp should have to pay for there kids when there relationship with the PWC breaks down:p
tax just doesn't cover benefit payments you know, plus anyone who has kids and works can claim child tax credits, well under xx amount a year,

skibadee

At the end of the day BOTH parents are responsible for supporting a child/children ..... far too often I hear PWC's complaining that their payments have dropped or ceased ... especially when a child is no longer is a QC....I think PWC's need to realise the payments are to help financially support the child/children and one day they will no longer be entitled to this so adjustments will then have to be made.
I do think the system that was introduced allowing a PWC to keep all maintenance payments is wrong....only in the respect that these payments are not counted as income with regard to HB/CT etc.,
In some cases a NRP, after paying maintenance payment is left with a income, which if it was a net income would leave them in the bracket of being entitled to help re HB/CT etc.,
It is a difficult situation.....I think the system needs rethinking, maybe the maintenance payments to PWC should be counted as income ( as it is ) for the purpose of means tested benefits.
Yes a NRPP knows the situation when she/he enters into the relationship and the implications this could have financially.....but you never hear of a PWC's partner in worrying etc.,.....why...because unlike a NRPP's new partner a PWC's new partners income never comes into the equation.....yet the same should apply to them as a NRPP.
I do not condone the OP trying to find away to avoid her partner having to pay, but I can understand her frustration.
At the end of the day what is important is the relationship between NRP and child/children...and no NRPP or PWC's partner should try to jepordise that.

clearingout

owdslackdraws wrote: »

I have been a single mum, but I got off my backside and worked full time and provided for my son, his father and I maintained a good relationship for my sons sake and he contributed to his son’s upkeep.

No CSA ever involved thank goodness, and I never had any problems, so if I could work full time why can’t others.

The PWC in our case is just like the OP.s except ours cleans her sister’s house 1 day a week, probably cash in hand as her glass back stops her from working.

At no point have I said NRP should not support his children, but why should children of 2nd marriages go without, I would have done whatever I needed to to give my child the best I could any decent mother would!

Anyway, I believe the government is now tightening up on benefit claims, I am am hoping soon the glass back is discovered and she is told to get a job, and in 2 year’s when her child is 19 and most of her benefits stop where will she be then, 50 odd, never worked, no experience or qualifications, not a very bright future in my opinion:rotfl:

so....single mum who decides part-time working works for her and her child isn't 'decent' or isn't allowed to believe she is doing the best by her children?

We have debated the 'why can't single mums work full-time' question many times. Circumstances, job opportunities, what was done prior to having children, availability of childcare, money likely to be earned and number of children requiring childcare, family proximity and ability to help out, shift working etc. etc. can all impact on a single parent's ability to work full-time.

Unfortunately, many of us struggle to maintain good relationships with our NRP's. Sometimes that is our fault, sometimes it isn't. The suggestion that we are poorer parents as a result is insulting, and ignores the individuality of situations and again, the individual problems that people face.

I see it like this.

PWC sits on benefits. It's not good enough. She should work. She's a bad parent. Not setting a good example. Should be ashamed of herself. NRP shouldn't have to support the children because their PWC doesn't.

PWC works part time in minimum wage job. It's still not good enough. She should work full-time as a rocket scientist and have some pride. She's still a bad parent and isn't setting a good example. NRP shouldn't have to support the children because the PWC is heavily subsidised by the state so NRP is effectively paying twice.

PWC works full time. She's earning enough to support her children so NRP shouldn't have to pay and is free to do have more children and support them with a clear conscience. PWC is still a bad parent because she works full time, is career minded, isn't paying her children enough attention, puts them in childcare 5 days a week.

There is no suggestion that second families should have to go without. It is a balancing act, I agree. But I don't see how the PWC can ever win and that's my point. I think.

DeeDee74

totally agree ^^ Clearingout...

owdslackdraws

clearingout wrote: »

so....single mum who decides part-time working works for her and her child isn't 'decent' or isn't allowed to believe she is doing the best by her children?

We have debated the 'why can't single mums work full-time' question many times. Circumstances, job opportunities, what was done prior to having children, availability of childcare, money likely to be earned and number of children requiring childcare, family proximity and ability to help out, shift working etc. etc. can all impact on a single parent's ability to work full-time.

Unfortunately, many of us struggle to maintain good relationships with our NRP's. Sometimes that is our fault, sometimes it isn't. The suggestion that we are poorer parents as a result is insulting, and ignores the individuality of situations and again, the individual problems that people face.

I see it like this.

PWC sits on benefits. It's not good enough. She should work. She's a bad parent. Not setting a good example. Should be ashamed of herself. NRP shouldn't have to support the children because their PWC doesn't.

PWC works part time in minimum wage job. It's still not good enough. She should work full-time as a rocket scientist and have some pride. She's still a bad parent and isn't setting a good example. NRP shouldn't have to support the children because the PWC is heavily subsidised by the state so NRP is effectively paying twice.

PWC works full time. She's earning enough to support her children so NRP shouldn't have to pay and is free to do have more children and support them with a clear conscience. PWC is still a bad parent because she works full time, is career minded, isn't paying her children enough attention, puts them in childcare 5 days a week.

There is no suggestion that second families should have to go without. It is a balancing act, I agree. But I don't see how the PWC can ever win and that's my point. I think.

OK, I get your point and and can agree with some bits of it, but I repeat at NO point have I said a NRP should not pay, of course he shoud pay for his children as should the PWC.

Then I suppose it comes down to if a PWC CAN'T work or WON'T work, I am totaly against those who won't.

I have no objection to anyone who really needs help a hand UP, its the hand out's I object to.

In the case of our PWC she wants the hand out, and maybe I am wrong to assume that this one is the same.

clearingout

I want 'the handout'. I want the 'handout' because I want our children to have a half decent childhood which isn't clouded with their mother, who is with them most of the time, worrying about money. It doesn't stop me working. And the fact I'm working doesn't mean my ex is absolved of giving that 'handout'.

It's not really a 'handout', is it? It's an entitlement that children have when their parent's separate. It is a complex and difficult 'thing' to have to deal with but labelling it 'handout' insults all those PWC who work hard, either in paid work or at home with their children or doing a mix of both who just want to do the best by their children. I feel quite sure all those NRPs and their partners are happy to accept Child Benefit and Tax Credits but if anyone told them they were receiving 'handouts' just the same as the PWC there would be an uproar. And don't you think, if you too received child maintenance from your ex, you have also had handouts or is it different because you worked?

owdslackdraws

skibadee wrote: »

At the end of the day BOTH parents are responsible for supporting a child/children ..... far too often I hear PWC's complaining that their payments have dropped or ceased ... especially when a child is no longer is a QC....I think PWC's need to realise the payments are to help financially support the child/children and one day they will no longer be entitled to this so adjustments will then have to be made.
I do think the system that was introduced allowing a PWC to keep all maintenance payments is wrong....only in the respect that these payments are not counted as income with regard to HB/CT etc.,
In some cases a NRP, after paying maintenance payment is left with a income, which if it was a net income would leave them in the bracket of being entitled to help re HB/CT etc.,
It is a difficult situation.....I think the system needs rethinking, maybe the maintenance payments to PWC should be counted as income ( as it is ) for the purpose of means tested benefits.
Yes a NRPP knows the situation when she/he enters into the relationship and the implications this could have financially.....but you never hear of a PWC's partner in worrying etc.,.....why...because unlike a NRPP's new partner a PWC's new partners income never comes into the equation.....yet the same should apply to them as a NRPP.
I do not condone the OP trying to find away to avoid her partner having to pay, but I can understand her frustration.
At the end of the day what is important is the relationship between NRP and child/children...and no NRPP or PWC's partner should try to jepordise that.

WELL SAID!! I agree with every word

It is my opinion that if the CSA were only used for NRP's who point blank refused to pay then everyone would be a lot happier.


Also only my opinion but think back to when the CSA was started, a lot of PWC who could not work were getting benefits and money from NRP, then CSA says if your on benefits CSA has to be involved, and we will collect payments from NRP and keep most of it, PWC now has less money, some NRP's are unhappy because they think the PWC has been spiteful and set the CSA on them. Kids still want stuff and now neither parent has enough spare cash for extras.

Soon gets PWC and NRP at each others throats, loads of misunderstandings and bitterness on both sides and everyone suffers including the kids.

Soon the resentment grows and grows, CSA and Kids can sometimes be used as weapons, the hatred and damage is usually so bad that it can never be fixed.

And now the goverment is trying to back track on CSA, the first step was to allow PWC to keep all maintanance without it affecting benefits, the seconds is allowing private agreements, nice for new claimants, to late for those who have been forced into using the CSA for years and hate each other.

Of course NRP's should pay and I am all for tracking down the ones that won't, I just wish the CSA did not cause as much damage to peoples lives especially kids as it has done

Sorry to go on

owdslackdraws

clearingout wrote: »

I want 'the handout'. I want the 'handout' because I want our children to have a half decent childhood which isn't clouded with their mother, who is with them most of the time, worrying about money. It doesn't stop me working. And the fact I'm working doesn't mean my ex is absolved of giving that 'handout'.

It's not really a 'handout', is it? It's an entitlement that children have when their parent's separate. It is a complex and difficult 'thing' to have to deal with but labelling it 'handout' insults all those PWC who work hard, either in paid work or at home with their children or doing a mix of both who just want to do the best by their children. I feel quite sure all those NRPs and their partners are happy to accept Child Benefit and Tax Credits but if anyone told them they were receiving 'handouts' just the same as the PWC there would be an uproar. And don't you think, if you too received child maintenance from your ex, you have also had handouts or is it different because you worked?

I do wish People would stop trying to put words in my mouth!!

Please tell where I have said NRP's should not pay!

Please tell me where I have said CM is a hand out!

vicster994

DeeDee74 wrote: »

op if your that concerned about the life of the child why arent u fighting to have the child live with u?? you've done nothing but slag mother and child off, u won't a say in what goes on in the child's life you fight for it, u haven't, u won't cause it's all about the money, i cant see any concern for this child, she's an inconvience cause u have to pay 4 her.
Any worth while decent parent would be fighting to give her a better life when does your huspand see her?

Ok, Half term I had to get the Police to do a welfare check on daughter as no landline number given. daughter sending depressed texts saying about she has been having sex and mum putting on her on the pill. Ex wife takes mobile away from daughter. Not allowed out of the house all week. Speak to Social services not prepared to do anything until the school raise concerns.

Answered your question.

Find out tonite from grandmother that she goes to school without any food as mother says " I wont do a packed lunch as she never knows what she wants". So no dinner money given and she goes to school with no food. I would prefer our money to pay directly to the school for her dinners.. Not for this cash to be directly in the hands of this woman.

Still as someone has quoated on here "she is doing her best"....

clearingout

owdslackdraws wrote: »

In the case of our PWC she wants the hand out, and maybe I am wrong to assume that this one is the same.

I think you'll find you called it a 'handout' there....?