CSA - Income, stuggling to pay bills etc...

Murphy_Gooner

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Why should a new partner pay in lieu of the natural parent? Yes, a single parent and children come as a package, but thats not a 'get out of jail free card' so to speak for the NRP to get away with not being financially responsible for his/her children. For example, if a NRP decided to start a new family despite being on a low income and providing very little financial assistance to previous children, you think they cold just say 'its okay, PWC new partner will pick up the slack'

Having more children if you cannot afford them works on both sides. A parent passing away would be a rare case and not really relevant to the OP at this time.

Yes, £15 is more then some get. Same there are so many dead beat 'dads' around with no morals eh? If you think £15 a week is an acceptable amount to provide a safe and secure environment for your child then I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree. I have been in the position to receive less then that for may years before getting a more acceptable assessment to help meet the cost of raising my child.

Your last statement, your right. However, I am talking about what money can buy, and can only assume you are talking about abuse, which the OP does not suggest is happening. A child wearing a decent standard of clothing, not underweight, living in a heated home etc shows me that money is being spent. £60 a month does not cover clothing, heating, food etc. it doesn't even cover 50% of the cost and where does the rest of the money come from? Thats right, the PWC. Or the state in the form of benefits.

So you expect NRP to provide heating & food cost's for a child which isn't in his full-time care?
Please don't make me laugh. You clearly don't know what CSA is meant to be used for.
I suppose you would have him pay towards his ex's rent or mortgage as well?

Child Support should be used to help go towards the likes of clothing and any other things the child may need.
Like i said what do you think PWC gets child benefit and tax credits for?
And who is too say the PWC isn't working?

Just sounds too me that you have had a possible dead beat dad for you're children who has never paid a penny and therefore pretty much tar ever NRP with the same brush.
Get over yourself, he is trying to support the best he can. So whether it £15 or £1500, He is still trying to make an effort

tattycath

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Why should a new partner pay in lieu of the natural parent? Yes, a single parent and children come as a package, but thats not a 'get out of jail free card' so to speak for the NRP to get away with not being financially responsible for his/her children. For example, if a NRP decided to start a new family despite being on a low income and providing very little financial assistance to previous children, you think they cold just say 'its okay, PWC new partner will pick up the slack'

Having more children if you cannot afford them works on both sides. A parent passing away would be a rare case and not really relevant to the OP at this time.

Yes, £15 is more then some get. Same there are so many dead beat 'dads' around with no morals eh? If you think £15 a week is an acceptable amount to provide a safe and secure environment for your child then I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree. I have been in the position to receive less then that for may years before getting a more acceptable assessment to help meet the cost of raising my child.
I'm not saying it's ideal, however if that is the minimum percentage as stated by CSA-they obviously think low amounts are acceptable

Your last statement, your right. However, I am talking about what money can buy, and can only assume you are talking about abuse, which the OP does not suggest is happening. A child wearing a decent standard of clothing, not underweight, living in a heated home etc shows me that money is being spent. £60 a month does not cover clothing, heating, food etc. it doesn't even cover 50% of the cost and where does the rest of the money come from? Thats right, the PWC. Or the state in the form of benefits.

I'm not saying new partner should pick up the slack, however, the OP already said he was earning more money but lost his job and new job was lower wage-as can happen in all families

tattycath

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

If he was to earn £100 a week extra then £15 (roughly at 15%) would be payable, meaning £85 a week extra into his household. If his wife was to work and support her children then that money would not be counted for CM purposes.

It would not directly be counted but if CSA thought she could contribute more towards bills thus freeing up more of NRPs income, more CS would be payable.

shoe*diva79

Murphy_Gooner wrote: »

So you expect NRP to provide heating & food cost's for a child which isn't in his full-time care?
Please don't make me laugh. You clearly don't know what CSA is meant to be used for.
I suppose you would have him pay towards his ex's rent or mortgage as well?

Child Support should be used to help go towards the likes of clothing and any other things the child may need.
Like i said what do you think PWC gets child benefit and tax credits for?
And who is too say the PWC isn't working?

Just sounds too me that you have had a possible dead beat dad for you're children who has never paid a penny and therefore pretty much tar ever NRP with the same brush.
Get over yourself, he is trying to support the best he can. So whether it £15 or £1500, He is still trying to make an effort

Actually yes, CM is to provide a contribution towards everything for a child. Clothing, heating, food, a roof over their head. If a PWC had no children they could rent a 1 bed flat for example, but not with a child, there are additional costs in everything! Why should only a PWC pay for food, heat etc?

Luckily the NRP in my case pays a decent amount of CM so no, I'm not bitter or anything. My children are growing up in a house suitable for their needs, have food in their bellies, decent clothes on their backs etc - funded from both parents. Having been a NRPP I can see from both sides of the fence.

shoe*diva79

tattycath wrote: »

It would not directly be counted but if CSA thought she could contribute more towards bills thus freeing up more of NRPs income, more CS would be payable.

Tis is incorrect if the case is on CSA 2 system.

shoe*diva79

Murphy_Gooner wrote: »

So you expect NRP to provide heating & food cost's for a child which isn't in his full-time care?
Please don't make me laugh. You clearly don't know what CSA is meant to be used for.
I suppose you would have him pay towards his ex's rent or mortgage as well?

Child Support should be used to help go towards the likes of clothing and any other things the child may need.
Like i said what do you think PWC gets child benefit and tax credits for?
And who is too say the PWC isn't working?

Just sounds too me that you have had a possible dead beat dad for you're children who has never paid a penny and therefore pretty much tar ever NRP with the same brush.
Get over yourself, he is trying to support the best he can. So whether it £15 or £1500, He is still trying to make an effort

CM is to cover a childs everyday living costs. Srely keeping a roof over their head is a everyday living cost?!

shoe*diva79

tattycath wrote: »

I'm not saying new partner should pick up the slack, however, the OP already said he was earning more money but lost his job and new job was lower wage-as can happen in all families

Exactly. His job is a lower wage and the CSA have assessed on that. £50 a week, altho from what the OP has stated this looks to be reduced to around £35 a week. £35 out of a £220 salary and tax credits etc is a very small price to pay, yet a lot more helpful to the PWC in ensuring the child in question has all their basic needs catered for.

OP, if the reason you are struggling is because of debt you have then pop over to the debt board and post a SOA to see where savings can be made.

In real terms if the OP has £320 a week income then £35 a week really is a small price to pay and I think fair.

Murphy_Gooner

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Actually yes, CM is to provide a contribution towards everything for a child. Clothing, heating, food, a roof over their head. If a PWC had no children they could rent a 1 bed flat for example, but not with a child, there are additional costs in everything! Why should only a PWC pay for food, heat etc?

Luckily the NRP in my case pays a decent amount of CM so no, I'm not bitter or anything. My children are growing up in a house suitable for their needs, have food in their bellies, decent clothes on their backs etc - funded from both parents. Having been a NRPP I can see from both sides of the fence.

Wow....how fortunate for you that you are able to get a decent amount of CM
But in this case, this NRP was paying an amount which he can afford. An amount which is leaving to be able to carry on providing for his kids which is looks after and the child which is living with PWC. And most importantly, be able to still afford too see his child.

Question is what is more important like i asked before which you haven't answered. Would you have him paying an amount where by he can still afford too see his child and keep that relationship and bond or pay a large amount which leaves him not being able to afford the travel and leaving his kids that he cares for, living in situation where they struggle to put food on their own table?

Common sense should of prevailed here and the PWC should have spoken with the NRP, rather then looking at the £££'s and tried to come to some agreement.
After all they are parents and adults.
He could of said "look ive lost my job, ive got a new one but on lower income. Can i pay a bit less whilst i try to look for something better"

Or the situation will be the NRP going onto benefits and then the PWC will only be getting £5 per week because he has been backed into a corner and caught up in a system.

Im all for CSA when the NRP has no intention of making any contribution. But when you have someone like OP. The parents should be resolving it.

kevin137

I think you need to understand that not ALL op's are honest it is very easy to post up what they want you to hear. And the same can be said of pwc as well before you jump on me for having a go about nrp's not speaking the truth....

However, the truth of it is, £15 a week while money, is NOT enough from some one who is working and has a responsibility. I haven't read the whole thread and i'm not going to, the same old story keeps coming up.

He had a responsibility for this child before he moved on and had more, if you cannot afford children do not have them. It sucks when for a pwc you can move in with a new partner and have her children taken into account as well...

So my opinion, is if he had paid a decent amount by private agreement, then it would not of got this far.

There is common sense and common sense, and as for the NRP going onto benefits, how will that benefit him...? He would be financially worse of, and 16-19 years is a long time to sit on benefit with NOTHING...!!!

I struggled when the CSA where involved, i worked 2 sometimes 3 jobs, i worked long shifts and i went without... And all of this was to make sure i supported my child...! Life is what you make it, if you want to spend it complaining, then you will get nowhere, if you want to enjoy it, then get on and make it better...!!!

Murphy_Gooner

kevin137 wrote: »

I think you need to understand that not ALL op's are honest it is very easy to post up what they want you to hear. And the same can be said of pwc as well before you jump on me for having a go about nrp's not speaking the truth....

However, the truth of it is, £15 a week while money, is NOT enough from some one who is working and has a responsibility. I haven't read the whole thread and i'm not going to, the same old story keeps coming up.

He had a responsibility for this child before he moved on and had more, if you cannot afford children do not have them. It sucks when for a pwc you can move in with a new partner and have her children taken into account as well...

So my opinion, is if he had paid a decent amount by private agreement, then it would not of got this far.

There is common sense and common sense, and as for the NRP going onto benefits, how will that benefit him...? He would be financially worse of, and 16-19 years is a long time to sit on benefit with NOTHING...!!!

I struggled when the CSA where involved, i worked 2 sometimes 3 jobs, i worked long shifts and i went without... And all of this was to make sure i supported my child...! Life is what you make it, if you want to spend it complaining, then you will get nowhere, if you want to enjoy it, then get on and make it better...!!!

Yeah he may possibly be lying. But im not on here giving lie detector tests.
He obviously didn't know that he was going to lose his job or have the PWC kick up a stink and go to the CSA rather then trying to resolve it privately.
Who said he moved on? You are just making assumptions that he packed his bags and left. For all you know the PWC may have had an affair.

What im trying to explain is that if the situation arises that he is going to be financially better off claiming full benefits paying £5 per week as opposed to working...what do you think he will choose to do?

You worked 2-3 jobs, so well done. But did you notify CSA of all the income you got from all those jobs you worked? Because they would only take that aswell considering its based on a percentage of you're income.