CSA threatening to visit my home/workplace

aupa

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

Do you know roughly how much net income you get? Could be worth putting some money aside so you're not hit for all the arrears at once. They will also likely ask you to set up payments for the default maintenance amount now, that is £30 per week if you are paying for one child.

I have been sent a letter saying I need to pay £30 + £5 in arrears. Arrears started from 9/1/12 so I shouldnt be that bad. I know what I earn so I have worked out what I should be paying, I have put it in a separate account so when they do come knocking I have it there to hand over.

They want me to pay the £35 weekly and said I agreed to send a cheque. I called to say I would setup a SO with the bank but they wouldnt accept that. They will only accept DD but I'm not going down that route again. Last time the CSA had a DD agreement with me they went in and took double one month and I never seen that money again. They deducted it for the following month but that didnt help me get through the month they made the mistake.

shegirl

aupa wrote: »

The reason some people do this is because the way some PWC treat the NRP. I had a one night stand with a random girl when I was 18. I'm now 31 and have paid for my daughter and tried to be as big a part of my daughters life as possible. Its nearly impossible though as the PWC holds all the cards and if she wants to stop access for me then she can do so with no repercussion. We were never married so if I want access I need to go throguh the PWC. I have already been down the court road but I dont have a spare 5k> to throw away in court fee's when the PWC will get legal aid. Also if I get a court order to see my daughter and the PWC doesnt stick to the rules and I take further legal action (costing more money) do I want to be the persoan who sent mummy to jail or fined??? Thats just going to work against me.

Now I have just called my daughter to pick her up later today and the PWC has been filling her head full of nonsense about me and now she doesnt want me to pick her up. Now you tell me, who is the one playing games???

Rant over!!

Yes,that's not nice.But that doesn't mean you have to play games aswell by stringing it out as long as you can,does it.

It's no wonder people go on on here about maintenance being about the parents -it's because some just play games to get at the other parent.

Don't stoop to it.It's about your daughter not her mother.

shell_542

They CAN accept a standing order, they just don't WANT to.

Try and search on here or any other forums (preferably a recent post) that gives the CSA bank details for standing order and set up the £35 a month via that. They tend to give up the fight about DDs then.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

The reason that they don't generally accept standing orders is because it's not what they class as a preferred method of payment, the preferred MoPs are direct to PWC, direct debit, or DEO. If you're not co-operating with them by sending payslips (I know you've said you don't keep your payslips), then they're less likely to stick their neck out and try to get a non-preferred method of payment signed off by their managers.

nicky3

shegirl is right, you so keen to teach the pwc a lesson that you are not considering your daughter. You know what you earn, you know what you are due to pay so just pay it instead of making a simple case complex and a waste of CSA resources, not to mention a deliberate wind up of the pwc. No 13 y/o needs to listen to c**p and if pwc is the type to share the c**p with her, do the decent thing and save your daughter the grief, pay your maintence and get back to the job of keeping a relationship with your child instead of picking a fight with her mum.

IsItJustMe_2

Hello,

Just to let you know, I think you are perfectly justified in your actions, if the PWC had given any consideration to you or your daughter there would be no need for you to play her at her own game, the 'naughty nrp brigade' should be questionning the actions of the PWC and her use of the non contact/CSA card before they start jumping all over you!

Anyway, just to let you know they do accept SO, i will send you the details, we are still waiting on a madate coming through for a dmd decison (we are appealing) that was meant to be sent in December, I believe it is now April and yet here we are still waiting for it, and would be perfectly justified in not paying a thing until they do, however I have done the work on their behalf and set up the SO myself.

I sent them letter informing them of the SO and asked them to comfirm the details a month in advance of the SO starting. If it is something you wish to do, i suggest you do it that way by recorded delivery so you have 'proof' of your co-operation.

anyway, hope it works out for you and you get to see your daughter again soon.

shegirl

IsItJustMe wrote: »

Hello,

Just to let you know, I think you are perfectly justified in your actions, if the PWC had given any consideration to you or your daughter there would be no need for you to play her at her own game, the 'naughty nrp brigade' should be questionning the actions of the PWC and her use of the non contact/CSA card before they start jumping all over you!

Anyway, just to let you know they do accept SO, i will send you the details, we are still waiting on a madate coming through for a dmd decison (we are appealing) that was meant to be sent in December, I believe it is now April and yet here we are still waiting for it, and would be perfectly justified in not paying a thing until they do, however I have done the work on their behalf and set up the SO myself.

I sent them letter informing them of the SO and asked them to comfirm the details a month in advance of the SO starting. If it is something you wish to do, i suggest you do it that way by recorded delivery so you have 'proof' of your co-operation.

anyway, hope it works out for you and you get to see your daughter again soon.

There is no excuse for ANYONE to play games.The op,by playing games aswell is just as bad.

It is NOT about parents playing bloody games with each other.Some people seriously need to grow up!

IsItJustMe_2

If PWC decides that they are going to stop contact with the NRP for a non valid reason, they are saying they are taking on FULL emotional and FINANCIAL responsibility for said child/ren

They should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it! NRP's do not lose their parenting ability once they leave the adult relationship and therefore if their right is denied for no justified reason apart from a bitter and spiteful pwc's action, they should no longer be expected to pay any financial contributions for the upkeep of the child/children.

of corse if NRP is the one that has walked away etc, then they should be made to pay, but never in a case when a NRP is being denied the most precious thing in their life, as many of the NRP's on here will testify too!

shegirl

IsItJustMe wrote: »

If PWC decides that they are going to stop contact with the NRP for a non valid reason, they are saying they are taking on FULL emotional and FINANCIAL responsibility for said child/ren

They should not be allowed to have their cake and eat it! NRP's do not lose their parenting ability once they leave the adult relationship and therefore if their right is denied for no justified reason apart from a bitter and spiteful pwc's action, they should no longer be expected to pay any financial contributions for the upkeep of the child/children.

of corse if NRP is the one that has walked away etc, then they should be made to pay, but never in a case when a NRP is being denied the most precious thing in their life, as many of the NRP's on here will testify too!

No they aren't.

Contact and finances are wholly seperate.Financial support is also legally required.

Yes,it's not nice if one parent prevents the other from having contact,but that doesn't mean you play games to shirk your responsility as long as you can to get at that parent!

IsItJustMe_2

ahhh the old maintenance and contact are seperate chestnut... they are not when the nrp want's contact and is being denied access, even when they use their own money to fight through the courts and the pwc still ignores the court orders..... you Should not be allowed to have it both ways... nrp's are not cash cows because you think that punishing them by removing their children from them is the way your child deserves to be treated, in my eyes it is the PWC in that case that is 'Shirking' their parental responsibility, both not only as a parent but as a decent human being.

If the PWC allowed access on non conditional basis, maybe NRP's would be more inclined to make payemens!