Tribunal

CSA_Help

Just out of interest been round the houses with this one.

Can a tribunal make an estimated decision or does it need to be factual based on the evidence before it.

" in my opinion the appellant had a likely income"


Last tribunal tried that and it went to upper then flung back to CSA to sort out a catalogue of errors where it seem that new 1st tier is using the same approach.

alwayspuzzled

I can't see how the law allows it but the tribunal decision my ex is appealing was exactly this. He didn't attend, she claimed we went on numerous holiday every year, they calculated these holidays must have cost £6K and added that to his assessable income. There can have been no evidence provided because the holidays didn't happen.

Back dated to the appeal date and an instant £1600 arrears appear, plus an ongoing extra £16/week - nothing compared to your case I know but pretty harsh for a man who earns £12K a year.

CSA_Help

alwayspuzzled wrote: »

I can't see how the law allows it but the tribunal decision my ex is appealing was exactly this. He didn't attend, she claimed we went on numerous holiday every year, they calculated these holidays must have cost £6K and added that to his assessable income. There can have been no evidence provided because the holidays didn't happen.

Back dated to the appeal date and an instant £1600 arrears appear, plus an ongoing extra £16/week - nothing compared to your case I know but pretty harsh for a man who earns £12K a year.

The same dividend figures were used for a 2003 assesment and they have allowed the csa to use them for a 2002 assesment(1/2 way through tax year) same decision as a previous tribunal for a later end assessment where the upper tribunal states the way the 1st tier tribunal based their calculations was flawed. (previously i had 3 assessment brought down to 1 over a 2 year period) . I just don't understand judges who don't read or listen to what's in front of them.

Sidekick_2

alwayspuzzled wrote: »

I can't see how the law allows it but the tribunal decision my ex is appealing was exactly this. He didn't attend, she claimed we went on numerous holiday every year, they calculated these holidays must have cost £6K and added that to his assessable income. There can have been no evidence provided because the holidays didn't happen.

Back dated to the appeal date and an instant £1600 arrears appear, plus an ongoing extra £16/week - nothing compared to your case I know but pretty harsh for a man who earns £12K a year.

You must have had some nice holidays.:)

CSA_Help

After reading through the evidence and their submission it would quite easy for a tribunal to get confused. I summarised it in date order explained it and asked questions of how can they use the same income for 3 different assessments over a 2 year period yet they still don't get it. :mad:

At least it proves the CSA were lying when my change of circumstances happened yet they denied (.)'s

Blob

Just a suggestion, and they wont like it, but ask for the Law that they have used to come up with this figure, as then you have something that the tribunal can work on!

It might work, but be prepared to be called offensive or abusive for asking the question!

CSA_Help

Blob wrote: »

Just a suggestion, and they wont like it, but ask for the Law that they have used to come up with this figure, as then you have something that the tribunal can work on!

It might work, but be prepared to be called offensive or abusive for asking the question!

I have already quoted the law in my set aside request

kevin137

It is legislation not law

WYSPECIAL

No a tribunal can only deal in black and white facts. Thats why sometimes its best to not say anything.

CSA_Help

kevin137 wrote: »

It is legislation not law

Noted Kevin it was the legislation i quoted them

CSA_Help

WYSPECIAL wrote: »

No a tribunal can only deal in black and white facts. Thats why sometimes its best to not say anything.

Upper tribunal says 1st tier tribunal was flawed in the way they got their findings.

New tribunal done the same although they did acknowledge a change of circs that should have happened where the previous 1st tier knew nothing about as i was only appealing the middle section of the 3 assesments over a 2 year period if that makes sense.