Old employer didnt pay csa but took money

PreludeForTimeFeelers

The CSA won't pursue the employer, the debt is still the NRP's debt. The method of collection might have been via the employer, but in this case the employer owes the NRP, and the NRP owes the CSA.

kevin137

I don't think a judge would see it the same way...!

A DEO is a legal document that the CSA use to withdraw money from wages... They can't have there cake and eat it...!

As i said before, goto the police, and tell the CSA to go do one...!

CSA_Help

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

The CSA won't pursue the employer, the debt is still the NRP's debt. The method of collection might have been via the employer, but in this case the employer owes the NRP, and the NRP owes the CSA.

Im sorry PTF thats not true.

The legal document from the CSA is between them and the employer and not the employee.

They once managed to make a mess of my DEO as my payroll had alrerady been run. As soon as the payment cleared at the CSA i got a cheque the next day as i argued the toss with them that it was their mess and not my employers.

The OP has all the proof he needs if it goes in front of a judge.

iluvfreebies

legally the nrp remains liable for the debt - however if you call the agency and explain the situation they will try to get the money from the employer in the first instance. We are seeing this quite a lot companys going bust etc with the recession and in that instance the nrp has to register as a creditor for the company - as others have said it might be worth speaking to cab or seeking legal advice on what best to do if the employer doesnt make the payment when asked to do so by the agency.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

CSA_Help wrote: »

Im sorry PTF thats not true.

The legal document from the CSA is between them and the employer and not the employee.

They once managed to make a mess of my DEO as my payroll had alrerady been run. As soon as the payment cleared at the CSA i got a cheque the next day as i argued the toss with them that it was their mess and not my employers.

The OP has all the proof he needs if it goes in front of a judge.

The debt is legally the NRP's debt.

CSA_Help

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

The debt is legally the NRP's debt.

Yes agreed , however the OP has the proof that he was under the impression the debt was getting paid by his ex employer.

Marisco

This is ridiculous!! Surely if the NRP is getting money deducted every month (and can prove it!) and the employer is not passing it on, then the fault is with the employer? How the hell can the CSA say it's the NRP's debt? And if the NRP is pursued for it, what is to stop any "dodgy" employer doing this? There must be some sort of law that covers it? There is no way on god's earth I would pay it back, the employer stole the money, end of!

DUTR

Marisco wrote: »

This is ridiculous!! Surely if the NRP is getting money deducted every month (and can prove it!) and the employer is not passing it on, then the fault is with the employer? How the hell can the CSA say it's the NRP's debt? And if the NRP is pursued for it, what is to stop any "dodgy" employer doing this? There must be some sort of law that covers it? There is no way on god's earth I would pay it back, the employer stole the money, end of!

Preludefor freetimefeeders is correct!
The debt belongs to the NRP, there maybe mitigating circumstances, however CS contributions have not been received end of.
If you lost your purse on the way to the supermarket would you expect the store to give you the groceries? Or would you simply have to find the monies again.

Marisco

DUTR wrote: »

Preludefor freetimefeeders is correct!
The debt belongs to the NRP, there maybe mitigating circumstances, however CS contributions have not been received end of.
If you lost your purse on the way to the supermarket would you expect the store to give you the groceries? Or would you simply have to find the monies again.

Are you serious? You expect the NRP to pay this again, because he had the misfortune to be employed by a thieving employer? If I lost my purse then it would be my own fault! How is this the NRP's fault? This is purely down to the employers, that is who the CSA should be chasing!

Why didn't the CSA write to the employee and the employer straight after the first payment was not forthcoming? If what the op says is true, then the fault lies with the employer and to a lesser extent the CSA, but it's certainly not the fault of the employee, so why should he pay again?

kevin137

I still believe this to be a legal opinion.

That being the case, the OP would in fact have a legal challenge for the DEO not to be imposed again.

You cannot have your cake and eat it. The legislation is designed to remove the option for the NRP to be able to breach the payment order. If he can prove that he abided by the order, and the CSA chose to chase him again for the same debt, then i would say he has a very very strong case in Europe for actually getting the DEO as it is removed from any future employer...

If that happens, then the DEO becomes useless in EVERY case...!

The legislation they use for a DEO makes it very very hard to appel against. This is one of those cases that could change the face of the CSA and how they are legislated...