variation orders, how much deducted for debt and child on DLA?

**Patty**

On the subject of the variation regarding DLA for a child in the NRP's household.......

Can i point out that whilst some people may be outraged at being able to obtain a reduction in maintenance......In fact, there is a premium for being in receipt of DLA for a child on tax credits....its quite a generous one ...and this IS taken into account when maintenance is calculated. i.e......my husbands ex actually profits from MY son (who lives with us) being severely disabled. Now......i think I'm the one who should be outraged actually......:cool:

Yes, you can apply for a variation but bear in mind in the form you have to disclose ALL DLA received, what your child's condition is, how much extra help they need with dressing, toileting etc etc.

We didn't go down that route ourselves as the form is then sent to the PWC for her to look at to see if she agrees :eek: before the variation is granted. Personally, i decided i wasn't willing to disclose that information to my husbands ex so we didn't go for the variation.

clearingout

**Patty** wrote: »

On the subject of the variation regarding DLA for a child in the NRP's household.......

Can i point out that whilst some people may be outraged at being able to obtain a reduction in maintenance......In fact, there is a premium for being in receipt of DLA for a child on tax credits....its quite a generous one ...and this IS taken into account when maintenance is calculated. i.e......my husbands ex actually profits from MY son (who lives with us) being severely disabled. Now......i think I'm the one who should be outraged actually......:cool:

Yes, you can apply for a variation but bear in mind in the form you have to disclose ALL DLA received, what your child's condition is, how much extra help they need with dressing, toileting etc etc.

We didn't go down that route ourselves as the form is then sent to the PWC for her to look at to see if she agrees :eek: before the variation is granted. Personally, i decided i wasn't willing to disclose that information to my husbands ex so we didn't go for the variation.

I'm not really outraged. Nothing surprises me anymore about any of this maintenance business whichever side of the fence you're standing on. I don't agree with the Tax Credits being included in calculations but by the same token, nor do I agree that non-biological children should be taken into account either. *shrugs*

**Patty**

clearingout wrote: »

I'm not really outraged. Nothing surprises me anymore about any of this maintenance business whichever side of the fence you're standing on. I don't agree with the Tax Credits being included in calculations but by the same token, nor do I agree that non-biological children should be taken into account either. *shrugs*

I guess that's where our situation is fairly good really. When everything is taken into account ( i mean the reductions for my children plus her share of our tax credits) it actually works out within about 10p (yes, i am sad...i did do the calculation :rotfl:) that the PWC in our case receives exactly what she should receive whether my children were there or not. Which is a bonus as it keeps everyone happy.

Bluemeanie_2

clearingout wrote: »

I'm not really outraged. Nothing surprises me anymore about any of this maintenance business whichever side of the fence you're standing on. I don't agree with the Tax Credits being included in calculations but by the same token, nor do I agree that non-biological children should be taken into account either. *shrugs*

For once, clearingout and I are in agreement (Lol!). Children who are not biologically related to the NRP should not be counted, but then neither should "their" tax credits.

One way the PWC's children lose out with maintenance would be in an example like mine. If I already had a child I would not need to use childcare (due to my Mother looking after the child while I was at work), and earn over the threshold for tax credits if you don't pay childcare. So when my now DH, moved in with me, he would have got a reduction in CSA for my child, but she would not have benefited from tax credits being used in the calculation. That doesn't seem fair. What is I had the maximum amount of kids the CSA recognise's and DH got a huge reduction and not tax credits taken into account?

But by the same token, I do not approve of any form of CS making the NRPP's income relevant (as it was on CSA1, as you basically making someone who had no choice in the children being created, financially responsible for them, when it should be the parents) and this effectively what it is doing to the PWC under CSA2. It is giving the NRP less financial responsibility for his own kids by virtue of children that ultimately are not his responsibility to financially support.

Last point on why it is not fair to use non-biological children of the NRP and their (or even his bio kids tax credits is). The PWC will already receive tax credits (if eligible) in their own household, so by them being used in the calculation, there are effectively partly getting tax credits twice for the same child, then coupled with the fact that CS is no longer used as "income" when calculating someone's entitlement to benefits they seem to gain on that too. Also if there is any sort of shared care, the NRP only get's a small discount on CSA. But the PWC gets to keep all the CB and TC.

I however do recognise that the examples I have stated do both have "winners" and "losers" in them. So it is all down to your individual circumstances whether or not you gain from the situations I have stated.

However my opinion would be, it is the two parents who are financially responsible for their kids. That is why I believe the way me and clearingout propose is the fairest. It only uses biological children for the calculation, doesn't bring anyone else into it.

Sorry to digress the thread.

Under the current system I hope you get it sorted out.

donny_osmonds_mad_fan

we would dearly love to put money aside for it...that is the problem, there is hardly anything to put aside hence why we have been having a mega sort +through of finances and trying to figure everything out. I knew they sent details to the pwc if you were asking for a variation for travel expenses (again something he could claim but does not) but didn't realise they would do it for something as personal as a disabled child.....she will most definately say no, so if she does that's it is it, it does not get agreed?

we may just sit it out then.....we are currenty in the middle of legal action for negligence against the hospital...maybe I should ask the question here that I asked elsewhere but did not get an answer for....my partner is in the position where he will most likely have to give up work soon to help care for our little one. Physically I am struggle having to carry him, plus he has sleep problems and everything else associated with cerebral palsy. I know we will be able to claim in this realm wrapped in the legal case....so what happens in situations like that where the csa is concerned? Would the csa enforce payment? We will carry on but we hope to manage it in a different way...the mother feeds him constant sausage and chips from the chippy, he is swollen and bloated and vastly over weight, not good for any child but he has had major open heart surgery as a small child for heart defects. MY partners parents look after him almost 50% of the time, there is of course no way csa money can be used by them currently and he worries the cost it costs them but we dont have spare cash to give them so for instance he would be able to pay them some money for the care they provide, healthy meals they feed him, clothes they have to buy for him as they dont get sent with him, they buy shoes for him and the like. We would also then pay for school dinners to ensure he is having a meal at lunchtime and money so the parents can make sure he has healthy food to eat at home, he is constantly upset at not having access to such food, likewise get his parents to pay for decent hair cuts he currently looks like he has been hacked at by a 3yr old with a pair of scissors...I have never seen him in these years with a non lopsided, non shaved with loads of missed bits...she makes him a target for bullies bless him.

I know people do not agree with actions like that but it would be nice if a portion of it could be used knowingly to directly benefit him but of course if it is then enforceable in some way even though he wont be working in the traditional sense it would not be so affordable. In an ideal world he would live with us, we have contacted social services a few times and the school is worried about him but of course at his age he would be asked his opinion and he wants to stay with mum purely because his friends are there....anyway.....off tangent sorry....how do the csa work when it comes for instance someone living off a trustfund for instance or as this could be for us in the future?

donny_osmonds_mad_fan

bluemeanie, which is exactly how she ends up with a larger disposable income yet these debt collectors only chase my partner as he is the male and therefore the highest wage earner (when they do not know nor never seen proof) I find it all rather sexist that she does not even get chased for it to have her finances looked into. Anyone who can have £100 of hair do on a regular basis...smoke near on 40 fags a day, have the whole weekend socialising, and have constant new clothes can surely afford a token payment towards a bit of the debt she helped make way way worse....this is a woman who laughed and said so what that she was getting charged £30 twice a month in her bank account to bounce the direct debit for the £199 interest only payment (that she got the benefit for) and that each time it bounced the mortgage company charged him £50 plus £60 for no payment being made so each month £160 was being added to the mortgage account...she thought this was hilarious knowing he would be chased for it....she added £7000 to the account in this way, it was clear when he left as his nan paid it to clear it....and as for what else she is capable of....£300 a week was dissapearing out of his nans account before she died (the ex used to be a carer and would go there to shower her) it was never gotten to the bottom of and a family fall out over this means we don't know how it is being sorted out currently or if the police are involved doubt it as her estate is settled now but this kind of thing surrounds her...likewise their marital home taken to the point of locks changed when she went out that my now partner knew nothing of the court action etc as she hid all letters, spent all money each month as at the time she sorted the finances....thankfully bailed out by the dad in this case to the tune of 10k....the family is all glad she now the ex lol...bloody liability they all say...so true!

Bluemeanie_2

It doesn't seem fair that debt is not accounted for. You say "marital" home. Couldn't the debt be dealt with/allocated to each party upon divorce?

donny_osmonds_mad_fan

we can't afford solicitors, the house is gone, my other half is doing a quickie divorce, we have struggled to save the money for that and are mighty glad that she has signed it (under duress from the rest of the family) so that we can move on with our lives and get married (will be just us and a witness as we can't afford anything else but we just want to be married) I hope that this will all be sorted out as it is the main problem (at least that we know about currently) but the issue with who was in court.....well that is the start, unfortunately we only got the letter friday afternoon so as of monday we shall start to attempt to un pick it all, when we get the proof from the court that says someone was in court claiming to be my partner we are going to the police for a start as it will hopefully generate a crime reference number which we can use to present to the court to at least get it heard again whereby we can at least or he can stand there with the proof and evidence we have to show what she was upto and even if we can get the first 7k earmarked for her to pay as she did have the benefit to pay it but she was also bouncing it and causing the extra charges etc will be something...if the rest can be split 50/50 would be fantastic but even if he is liable for whats left it will be nice knowing she has been made liable for the portion she spitefully made worse and made be there in the first place.

kingfisherblue

I can't understand something here. You say that the ex received benefits to pay the interest on the mortgage and spent that money elsewhere. I have been a single mum for seven years and I claim benefits as I care for my severely disabled child. My mortgage interest payments are paid directly to my mortgage provider and always have been. I receive an annual statement to show the payments, but no actual cash. I'm quite happy with it being this way, but I thought it was the same way for everyone, so why was the ex getting the cash into her bank?

clearingout

if your husband doesn't work,he doesn't work and there will be no income to assess him on so your CSA liability will be nil.

As for the 'trust fund' aspect, the CSA do assume income on capital over £60k but I guess that would have to be in your husband's name and in this case, I assume any compensation would be in your child's name?