CSA threatening to visit my home/workplace

shegirl

IsItJustMe wrote: »

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 hildren 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, bot 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!

Not always,some nrps don't bother with either or don't bother with one and try to get out of the other.

Either way,playing games with the parents is not right,under any circumstance.A parent stopping contact is shirking their responsibility as is a parent not paying or dragging it out.

clearingout

IsItJustMe wrote: »

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!

my ex had access on a non-conditional basis as you put it for an 18 month period (he had them 3 nights a week). He didn't pay any maintenance. He then decided he couldn't be bothered seeing them and still hasn't paid any maintenance. He has just this week decided he can be bothered with them and has seen the children several times, without any resistance on my part...still no maintenance. The CSA has taken out Charging Orders and are now at the point of taking him to court for an Order of Sale on his property...still no maintenance.

There is a need to accept that some people will not support their children. Doesn't matter whether or not they have contact, they just don't consider that the financial well being of their children is their responsibility. And for the record, my ex is a successful, self employed business man running a good number of businesses in a field which is relatively unaffected by the recession. His maintenance liability is very low, less than half of what it should be if he was declaring the same income he had when we were together. His lifestyle since separating has much improved (not that it was 'bad' when we were together). No, he's not funded by his new partner - she is funded by him as she takes a salary from the business but has a full time job elsewhere (evidenced from divorce proceedings).

aupa

nicky3 wrote: »

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.

I think you'll find the PWC is the one that is wasting the resources of the CSA. I HAVE Offered to pay her MORE than what she will be due via the CSA if she agrees to a personal agreement between us.
Now she has stopped access to my daughter so tell me, how am I the bad guy here?

The bottom line is she thinks if she goes to the CSA she will get more money from me and she doesnt care less if I see my daughter or not.

aupa

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.

Thanks for the info, much appreciated.

shegirl

aupa wrote: »

I think you'll find the PWC is the one that is wasting the resources of the CSA. I HAVE Offered to pay her MORE than what she will be due via the CSA if she agrees to a personal agreement between us.
Now she has stopped access to my daughter so tell me, how am I the bad guy here?

The bottom line is she thinks if she goes to the CSA she will get more money from me and she doesnt care less if I see my daughter or not.

Because you've said you are intentionally dragging matters out!There is no need for it,it makes you no better.Just get on with it.If it means less money then it is entirely her fault,but that doesn't mean you need to play games.

aupa

shegirl wrote: »

Because you've said you are intentionally dragging matters out!There is no need for it,it makes you no better.Just get on with it.If it means less money then it is entirely her fault,but that doesn't mean you need to play games.

I feel my reason for doing this is justified because the last time the CSA were involved they didn't handle the case very well (for both parties). I have offered her money each month paid direct to her bank account (I have never missed payments so she couldn't say she couldn't trust me paying). IMO this is the best answer all round, it saves CSA resources, it saves taxpayers money, we dont pay any admin fee's, PWC will receive full amount and so on.... but no, she wants to see the CSA involved because she thinks she will get more money. So yes I am playing games and I have admitted that earlier on in this thread. I will say again though, I think I have every right to play games as why should I sit back and just let her call the shots and stop me seeing my daughter at the same time???

shoe*diva79

aupa wrote: »

I feel my reason for doing this is justified because the last time the CSA were involved they didn't handle the case very well (for both parties). I have offered her money each month paid direct to her bank account (I have never missed payments so she couldn't say she couldn't trust me paying). IMO this is the best answer all round, it saves CSA resources, it saves taxpayers money, we dont pay any admin fee's, PWC will receive full amount and so on.... but no, she wants to see the CSA involved because she thinks she will get more money. So yes I am playing games and I have admitted that earlier on in this thread. I will say again though, I think I have every right to play games as why should I sit back and just let her call the shots and stop me seeing my daughter at the same time???

Maybe younshould stop playing games for the sake of your child.... Just a thought.

shegirl

aupa wrote: »

I feel my reason for doing this is justified because the last time the CSA were involved they didn't handle the case very well (for both parties). I have offered her money each month paid direct to her bank account (I have never missed payments so she couldn't say she couldn't trust me paying). IMO this is the best answer all round, it saves CSA resources, it saves taxpayers money, we dont pay any admin fee's, PWC will receive full amount and so on.... but no, she wants to see the CSA involved because she thinks she will get more money. So yes I am playing games and I have admitted that earlier on in this thread. I will say again though, I think I have every right to play games as why should I sit back and just let her call the shots and stop me seeing my daughter at the same time???

How the hell does anyone have the right to play games with the life of a child just to get at somebody else?Or for ANY reason?

Grow the hell up!So,yes she may have stopped contact,that's disgraceful,yes she may have contacted the CSA -that is her right and none of us know her reasoning.But that does not mean you play pathetic games with her,challenging to see who backs down first while your child goes without

aupa

shegirl wrote: »

How the hell does anyone have the right to play games with the life of a child just to get at somebody else?Or for ANY reason?

Grow the hell up!So,yes she may have stopped contact,that's disgraceful,yes she may have contacted the CSA -that is her right and none of us know her reasoning.But that does not mean you play pathetic games with her,challenging to see who backs down first while your child goes without

Aye ok then I'll just back down, pull my pants down, let the CSA ride me for all they can take and not see my child because her mum says so. I'll be the bigger person here.

shegirl

aupa wrote: »

Aye ok then I'll just back down, pull my pants down, let the CSA ride me for all they can take and not see my child because her mum says so. I'll be the bigger person here.

Seeing your daughter is an entirely seperate issue from paying for her -your legal responsibility.

You can seek legal advice and persue contact through the courts.

What is it that makes you so worried about the CSA?You keep stating that there will be less paid through them but then say they'll ride you for all you can take!It can't be both!!

Just get on with it because while you two are playing stupid games with each other your daughter is the one who is missing out.YOU can sort the maintenance with the CSA so she still gets her money and YOU can apply for contact.

Which is better?Doing the above or just leaving your daughter without the money for now,to get at her mother,and making matters with the mother worse which,given her stopping of contact,could make her worse and more likely to be peed off with you?

Be the better parent.Sort both,your daughter will be thankful for it and so will you.