csa grrrrrr

clearingout

Cally_Smart wrote: »

I an nrpp It just makes me that angry that the pwc's income from her job(minimum hours to qualify )CTC,WTC,gets CB ,council tax reduction (I think )prescriptions,opticians,dental care, +Child maintenance gives her an income of several hundred pounds MORE than my husbands(who's got a full time job!) BEFORE we have paid her.Oh ,we cant get CTC,WTC because it is assessed on what you earn BEFORE having to pay the CM. We have the usual bills,higher rent (because we cant have a mortgage until he gets share from the home)services,etc Our son is not getting the same consideration from the csa as the pwc's children ! Where is the justice in that ?

you work yourself, of course, and contribute financially towards your child's upbringing?

Cally_Smart

Yes,have to spend all day cooking with what we have left to make ends meet & put a meal on the table! Who's going to look after our son .Cant afford child care for him with whats left ..Child minder is £4.50 per hour .No car, have to walk a mile each way day to school twice a day(got a daughter from prev rel who gets min CM from her dad as he's on benefit !) & I would be on minimum wage if I could get a job.

365days

My view for what it's worth.

If the NRP has children before child that CSA are involved with is born then a percentage of their income should be protected.

If a baby is born, or someone elses child comes to live in the family, then no percentage should be protected. Before you go on to have another child, or take on someone elses you need to look after your own eldest first and foremost.

Discussions like this always get emotive as everyone's circumstances are so different.

365days

Cally_Smart wrote: »

I an nrpp It just makes me that angry that the pwc's income from her job(minimum hours to qualify )CTC,WTC,gets CB ,council tax reduction (I think )prescriptions,opticians,dental care, +Child maintenance gives her an income of several hundred pounds MORE than my husbands(who's got a full time job!) BEFORE we have paid her.Oh ,we cant get CTC,WTC because it is assessed on what you earn BEFORE having to pay the CM. We have the usual bills,higher rent (because we cant have a mortgage until he gets share from the home)services,etc Our son is not getting the same consideration from the csa as the pwc's children ! Where is the justice in that ?

Because your son came after the pwc child. I guess some of your partners income is protected for both your son and your daughter?? Where would the justice be if everytime a new child was born to nrp that the 'old' one's money got reduced?? How would you fell if your daughters father had to stop paying you just because he had a 'new' child.?

FBaby

Cally_Smart wrote: »

Yes,have to spend all day cooking with what we have left to make ends meet & put a meal on the table! Who's going to look after our son .Cant afford child care for him with whats left ..Child minder is £4.50 per hour .No car, have to walk a mile each way day to school twice a day(got a daughter from prev rel who gets min CM from her dad as he's on benefit !) & I would be on minimum wage if I could get a job.

Does your OH provides more than 50% of what his child really cost? Because if he doesn't, then the fact you guys are struggling are not the fault of what he has to contribute towards his son but the choices you have made than means you are in this situation.

I totally agree that benefits are way too generous as whole to single parents, the fact they don't have to declare maintenance outrageous, but that she might not deserve what she receives doesn't mean you partner should have to contribute less towards his son. The fact that you are chosing not to work because it wouldn't be financially beneficial for you to do so has nothing to do with what your partner has to pay to contribute towards his first child.

shegirl

Marisco wrote: »

Then in that case half the "child" related benefits should go to the NRP, or the maintenance be included as income for means tested benefits. The way it is at the min is the PWC gets all the benefits and all the maintenance, but the NRP gets sod all, yet is expected to be the gift that "keeps on giving"!! He might have a family of his own to keep, why should they keep suffering, as they will get all their benefits counted as income for CSA purposes?

If the NRP has to claim low income benefit, which is means tested, then the income is not counted minus the CSA payments, but before CSA is taken into account, making it sound like he has more than he has. What I mean is, say he earns nett £250 pw, and he has to pay £50 to CSA, then for benefit purposes he's counted as having £250, which is clearly not fair, especially as maintenance is not counted for benefit purposes for the PWC. It should either count for both or none!

The non resident child of the nrp is also the nrps family.

The nrps child related benefits are counted because a reduction is made for any children in their NEW family.Fair's fair.

Maintenance should NEVER be disregarded when working out an NRPs income.Where is the responsibility of taking it then giving it back in another form? Why not go breed with everyone,it'll never make any difference-no responsibility.

clearingout

Cally_Smart wrote: »

Yes,have to spend all day cooking with what we have left to make ends meet & put a meal on the table! Who's going to look after our son .Cant afford child care for him with whats left ..Child minder is £4.50 per hour .No car, have to walk a mile each way day to school twice a day(got a daughter from prev rel who gets min CM from her dad as he's on benefit !) & I would be on minimum wage if I could get a job.

Your husband has a financial responsibility towards both his children - and his 'other' child has two working parents, not one. As a result, this child is living in a household with more money coming in. You and your husband chose to have a child and should have taken into account the cost of caring for his 'other' child when deciding if it was something you could afford to do. Presumably you also looked at the cost of childcare vs. minimum wage work etc. so you could make an informed decision about how you would manage whilst your child was young.

You realise that any PWC who comes on here and says they are struggling to make ends meet gets called a 'benefit scrounger' and is told to get off their backside and work for a living? Amazing how different it is for new partners, isn't it?

FBaby

just picked up your post 365days. The counter-argument is that every one is entitled to move on and have more children. That's fair enough, but that doesn't mean that maintenance should be much reduced as a result when the contribution is already minimal. The decision to have a baby should take into consideration the limitation of the current situation, however much they wish they were not there.

It's easy to ignore what one doesn't want to see, and then moan because it still there...

shegirl

clearingout wrote: »

Your husband has a financial responsibility towards both his children - and his 'other' child has two working parents, not one. As a result, this child is living in a household with more money coming in. You and your husband chose to have a child and should have taken into account the cost of caring for his 'other' child when deciding if it was something you could afford to do. Presumably you also looked at the cost of childcare vs. minimum wage work etc. so you could make an informed decision about how you would manage whilst your child was young.

You realise that any PWC who comes on here and says they are struggling to make ends meet gets called a 'benefit scrounger' and is told to get off their backside and work for a living? Amazing how different it is for new partners, isn't it?

It is isn't it.And they always make it about the PWC too.Nevermind the child

**Patty**

shegirl wrote: »

The non resident child of the nrp is also the nrps family.

The nrps child related benefits are counted because a reduction is reduced for any children in their NEW family.Fair's fair.

Maintenance should NEVER be disregarded when working out an NRPs income.Where is the responsibility of taking it then giving it back in another form? Why not go breed with everyone,it'll never make any difference-no responsibility.

But what's NOT fair is when the only child tax credits received are the premiums due to a child receiving DLA....a child which belongs to the NRP's Partner.......And the CSA include those in the NRPs calculation.

IMO.....those should be excluded. Normal tax credits, fair enough because of the reduction.....but not those.:)