Will I get my money?

kevin137

And in Norway they DO make you sell your car before being eligible if it is worth more than X amount...!

They also stop your benefit if you refuse back to work training or for tardiness in not attending...!!!

But then they have a different attitude as it is frowned upon by society to be sitting reaping the rewards for doing nothing in return, and the benefit system here is so much more than the UK...!!! But it is not abused in the same way...!

labyrinth84

kevin137 wrote: »

And no one would ever have a surplus.. It cannot work that way...!

There would be a way surely...I doubt anyone would leave the gas on all day just to reduce their CM payments!

It would make things fairer....as a mother, I know that children do not cost what PWC lead people to believe...

shoe*diva79

kevin137 wrote: »

So do you think it is right that you can be unemployed, and still run a £6000 car...??? I could not even insure that car on unemployment let alone put petrol in it, or tax it...!!! SO if you have a car with that value, you have NO right to claim benefit... So yes it is an asset that should be considered...!!!

Or are people in the UK that dumb that people can live in luxury sponging when working people have to use such things as public transport as they cannot afford a car...!!!

Im quite offended at that! I have a car worth around £5k. It costs £30 a year to tax. insurance is £300 a year. Insurance and tax are paid until June. Since August i find myself relying on benefits and CM whilst i finished my studies and am now job hunting like a crazy person (and have a interview next week :T)

Are you saying because of my change in circumstances I should sell my car, thus then having issues getting kids to childcare whilst i attend interview's, then buying something cheaper so more unreliable, more expensive to tax and insure etc?

galangm8

DUTR wrote: »

In a sense you are being rude, how can I not have a clue?
Yes in a sense I am bragging, as the earlier term used was absent parent , so paying the fee entitles on to be absent.
Indeed I do have conscience, and I do not make other peple's problem my problem, so hence why many should think twice before grabbing all they can (for spite?)
As you are not aware of my personal situation then you can only assume, as I do know my personal situation I can conclude you are wrong very wrong, I did meet with the Mum yesterday , let's just say that with her hindsight using the csa was a very bad idea in the long run.
If questions ever get asked I can easily answer them.

Paying the fee does not entitle you to be an 'absent parent'.

You are an absent parent because you want to be.

Why is it now a bad idea to use CSA, are you both mediating now, would be great if the meeting with 'mum' was also with your child.

Why do you not have contact with your child?

shoe*diva79

labyrinth84 wrote: »

Typed up a reply...just for it to disappear- frustrating.

It's like this...a PWC who watches every single penny the NRP/NRPP earns is going to go on about how other peoples kids should suffer to pay for theirs, how if the NRP isn't earning enough then he's a bad father and should earn more. How PWC is entitled to live comfortably without working because NRP/NRPP should pay. How PWC are entitled to not work because they have to look after kids after school.

A NRP/NRPP is always going to say its unfair. Always going to feel anger when unemployed PWC is swanning about in a nice car, nice house, nice social life, nice holidays whilst NRP/NRPP are brassic through having to fund hard-done-to PWC.


I think it would be fairer if a bigger percentage was taken for Child Maintenance, but on disposable income.

NRP/NRPP should have to state their living costs (rent/mortgage/council tax/ energy bills only) then a percentage calculated on the surplus.

But you can change your current circumstances to have a nicer house, nicer car, nicer social life, nicer holiday.... Your just choosing not to.

But thats just YOUR situation.

UsetheFORCE

Why don't the state upon the break up of the family take its children into its care and then find parents for them that don't need to claim benefits, it can then charge both biological parents for the privilege of doing so.

Bottom line is it takes two to make a baby and BOTH parents should work and contribute towards the cost of raising their children...

DUTR

kevin137 wrote: »

So do you think it is right that you can be unemployed, and still run a £6000 car...??? I could not even insure that car on unemployment let alone put petrol in it, or tax it...!!! SO if you have a car with that value, you have NO right to claim benefit... So yes it is an asset that should be considered...!!!

Or are people in the UK that dumb that people can live in luxury sponging when working people have to use such things as public transport as they cannot afford a car...!!!

At 1st sight it would seem that way, but as mentioned either here or in another thread, the car could have been purchased before becoming unemployed, my current car I had from brand new, paid for it outright, my next car I will do the same, the previous three cars were bought outright. If I was unfortunate to be out of work tomorrow, should I have to sell my car and home? maybe as the media have hinted some are saying benfits should not come as cash but vouchers, which doesn't seem a bad idea.

kevin137

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

Im quite offended at that! I have a car worth around £5k. It costs £30 a year to tax. insurance is £300 a year. Insurance and tax are paid until June. Since August i find myself relying on benefits and CM whilst i finished my studies and am now job hunting like a crazy person (and have a interview next week :T)

Are you saying because of my change in circumstances I should sell my car, thus then having issues getting kids to childcare whilst i attend interview's, then buying something cheaper so more unreliable, more expensive to tax and insure etc?

If that is what it takes then yes...! Why should you have the right to claim and have a car... There are many who don't have that luxury...! Who do work...!!! And they all survive with no car...!!!

Drive past an unemployment office and see the people turning up in there cars...! Makes you sick...! I think it really should be the 1st thing to go...!!! And if on credit you should have NO choice but for it to go full stop...!!! Will stop you getting further in to debt, and reduce the risk of the honest people who do insure there cars as they can afford it etc...

DUTR

UsetheFORCE wrote: »

Why don't the state upon the break up of the family take its children into its care and then find parents for them that don't need to claim benefits, it can then charge both biological parents for the privilege of doing so.

Bottom line is it takes two to make a baby and BOTH parents should work and contribute towards the cost of raising their children...

I mentioned similar in another post, but then we know children are not a commodity (unless you are in the 11 o clock coffee club :rotfl:)

UsetheFORCE

DUTR wrote: »

I mentioned similar in another post, but then we know children are not a commodity (unless you are in the 11 o clock coffee club :rotfl:)

My ex believes our son is her possession, does she not remember signing him away when she registered his birth?

Our son is actually a child of the state, the state can and will decide what is best for our son.

I am having to go to court now to get access sorted out, mind you I believe she is committing benefit fraud so a dossier of evidence to support that is on the desks of the local council, all because she wanted to interfere in contact.

Happy to take the money but doesn't want me involved in my son's life, I would happily tomorrow have him to live with me.