Limitations Act - Confused

JoTee107

I've just read a reply from Kellogs (thankyou) to my previous post about a debt to CSA and I've been browsing through some of the other threads and I'm now a bit confused.

My Husband has just been informed that he must pay an old debt to CSA (from 1993 to 1997) - one of the classic cases of him paying ex in cash and us having no proof. The first and last time we were informed of this debt was in 1998 at which time he had become a student so although they informed him of debt he was sent an assessment saying he didn't have to pay his ex any maintenance due to his being a student and no more was mentioned about the debt. (We bury heads in sand regarding debt.)

My husband eventually left college and went back to work and went back to paying ex direct (yes I know, stupid) although this time by cheque (in retrospect obviously should have done this through CSA but scared of reminding them of debt.)

In 2002 he went back to college again - ex went mad at loss of money (can't have been declaring it) and re-contacted CSA - of course, because he was at college they said no change would occur in payments (i.e. nil to pay as that was the last assessment we'd had) and that was the end of contact with them.

Husband goes back to employment in 2003 - by this time ex is working so he pays her direct by standing order and now this month we recieve letter saying that we owe £4,000 from the original debt they told us about in 1998.

Two questions:

Does the limiitations act effect how much the CSA can actually ask for as it has been 9 years since it was last mentioned?

Could any other demands for payment from CSA turn up from back in the muddley past even although the two commumnications from them both happened to be when he was a student and where both asking for nil money?

okra

Question one - Legally, yes, it does. There's more about stature barred debts here, but basically, if the debt hasn't been acknowledged in over six years, then it can be asked for but not legally recovered. There are certain criteria to fulfill, as in the link. http://www.payplan.com/debt-library/joint-and-several-liability-the-limitation-act-1980.php.

I would have thought that it wouldn't be a problem paying maintenance by cheque. We've been advised by the CSA that this was an acceptable method of payment in the past, because it can be proven. You could request back copies of bank statements in order to prove you've paid his ex.

As for the second question, I'm not sure. I'm a PWC rather than a NRP, so I'm not sure whether he would have had an obligation to let them know if his circumstances changed or not. If he had that obligation and didn't tell them, I suspect they could 'create' more arrears. If not, then I guess he's just liable for what he's paying now the arrears you know about. I suspect someone who knows more about the CSA from 'the other side' so to speak, could give you a better answer than me.

kelloggs36

There is no obligation to notify the CSA of any changes in circumstances UNLESS they have specifically asked you.

It doesn't matter if the NRP can prove that he paid the PWC or not unless she agrees that the money he paid her was specifically for child maintenance in respect of a specific period. So, whilst he had a nil assessment, if he paid her, then nice for her, but he didn't have to, so it would make no difference to the arrears period. If the PWC signed an agreement to the contrary and said that the money she received was in respect of arrears of maintence, then they would accept it and take it off what is owed.