CSA Are they committing fraud??

wayne0

FBaby wrote: »

What will you do when your SSP runs out? Will you be back at work despite your serious health issues?

The fact is that you lost a job making your situation precarious, you then moved away, came back with your wife, knowing she couldn't work, and had a child to support. What do you do? Decide to have two children in a short time. Surely the responsible thing to do would have been to sort out your career (not just finding any job) and wait until your wife had an opportunity to gain employment too just in case, insuring you could support the child you already have BEFORE deciding to have two in a row.

YOu keep going on about your poor children who have to do with little and blaming everyone else for it. You made the decision to have them at an unstable time, that's the reason why they might not be getting all you wish they got. Yet despite the fact neither your wife not yourself are currently working, you are able to feed, clothes and shelter them, so surely the system is not that horrible towards them?

well let me state FACTS:
I was living with my wife and daughter when i was working in a decent paid job... I was paying over £200/mo to Ex in CM. Wife got pregnant, and at the same time decent paid job was finished.... so,,, have an abortion? - Kill a baby?... the fact is,,, you dont see the point do you...

I could of at this point went and sat on benefits as my health hasnt been good... instead i went and found any job i could: working a few hours here and there getting paid £1 or £2 in JSA. - at the same time paying out for far more fuel to do the work, than the £5 disregard on earnings...

within a matter of weeks (about six) i got a job at McD's... and was working full time hours, in agony - having to take no end of pain releif to manage...

Now, the only reason i can actually afford to keep a roof over my kids now is because my wifes family is sending money to help us out...

so the fact remains: and *COULD* claim HB, but dont as it could affect my wifes status (and chances are we could end up having to pay it back).

so the fact I have worked all of my life, even whilst in college etc... i think i am entitled to claim some SSP whilst im unable to work.

and FBaby... you have your entitre timeline wrong...

EX sleeps around numerous times, and we split up,.. claimed baby wasnt mind...

i met somebody else at a friends house. and began seeing each other. I left country with partner, who was on tourist visa at the time - stating NRPF. - went and worked in Europe... after a few months i returned to the uk. and found another job... parter was admitted as i am now classed an EEA national and not simply british.

partner has first baby... and ex gets in touch... saying she was lying and that baby was mine... I get DNA test done, and pay maintenance...

when partner applies for EEA RC she gets refused as my work period was not sufficient to prove working in another country... therefore im still a BC. - wife is told she has to leave the country... we put in various appeals and new visa applications that get turned town. all of which WE PAID solicitors for... not legal aid... money I earned.

wifes right to work is removed from her by UKBA... she is basically told she has no right of abode...

Im working and paying taxes ETC.. Claiming bare minimum (child benefit).

company i work for looses big contract, and resizing happens... i loose my job...

really... so, explain how this is my making eh...

wife was allowed into the country on evidence provided... yet later on it wasnt satisfactory...

and FBaby... so explain, how is my income provided by tax payers money...

do you want to see my tax returns for the previous 12 years? - ive put in far more than 28 weeks of £85.



@Honey...

I clearly missed your point... so explain it...

You state all of my income is state given... go on... explain that then...


- and to answer the question...

Im actually looking at leaving the UK to go and live in Indonesia with my wife and two kids now... - after the !!!! thats kicked up these last weeks with Ex, and CSA... - and the debt thats "not been paid".. - despite my kids going without to be able to pay it!

HoneyNutLoop

You don't claim hb? Fine - I was sure I'd read it in a few of your posts, about you calling the hb office and them agreeing the hb paid in your area wasn't commensurate with rents, and in another you mentioning the hb rate for your situation is £150, but your rent is £144, etc, but clearly I am wrong. You are paying your £144 rent from £85.85 SSP and £74.63 CTC which leaves the 4 of you with £16.28 a week to live on plus child benefit? Is that now a correct understanding?

The point I was illustrating, mostly because you complain very strongly about the inclusion of CTC as income, is that I don't agree that just because money is state given it has any less value than money that is earned. A pound is still a pound whatever the source.

You still haven't explained how it would be fair for someone earning the same amount as someone who is largely (I haven't said wholly in my posts, I have said mostly) to pay more maintenance than someone who receives the same amount from welfare? Why, just because the money is state given, should it be ring fenced? Look at the scenarios again and explain to me, as you are an advocate for the opposite stance, how it's fair? Why does receiving CTC/HB mean someone should get to pay less when the value of the money involved is the same? That was the point. Not what you may or may not be claiming or your reasons for doing so.

wayne0

ok so Honey...

just because I have spoken to the people at the benefits office, one being the manager to clarify our position....
it doesnt mean that hb is paid...

and knowing how much is payable in an area is very simple: go onto the gov website... its all easy info to access...

- and yes, thats right. in addition to money that is given by parents in law atm.

why should money that is ENTIRELY given by the state:
ESA/JSA/Income Support ETC be ringfenced to £5 a week, despite those who work having to pay MORE CSA payments.... for getting less by way of benefits...

Why should certain examples of benefits be a nil assesment...?

is that state given money any less a £.


then look onto the PWC side...

Is a £ given by a NRP of less value than a £ given by the state etc?

Why should a NRP give a PWC money and then that money be "disregarded" for the purposes of benefits ETC.

is that REALLY fair.

and consider this:

A Claim for CTC / WTC is made as a couple... a couple who claims benefits/etc are BOTH in reciept of them (hence HB situation). So legally speaking... if money is paid to two people... How can the CSA deem that ALL of that money is paid to one person...

wayne0

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

, almost all of your money (as your wife isn't eligible for anything given her status) is state given,

explain to me what my wifes status has to do with money being state given...??? - if UKBA weren't the pricks they are, we wouldnt have to rely on any state funds...


and also, as i say.. if the legal max that CSA can take from benefits is £5... then surely the "system" should show that these are the figures which should be used for all family income (such as the CS1 system used).

out of interest Honey, FBaby, anyone else who has a problem with my finances:

How much CTC do you claim, How much WTC, how much CB, HB, CTB, ETC?

and ontop of that... How much CM do you recieve which is a TOTAL DISREGARD for benefits?...

not all NRP's situations are due to lack of wanting to earn more money... it is often due to their inability to be earn the extra money...

take a look at these figures:

somebody who works 35 hrs a week:
£240/wage before tax = £210 - £220.
£30 WTC, £74 CTC.
total: 340iish...

somebody who works 50 hrs a week:
50*6.20 = 310.
(WTC/CTC?) = obviously since its on previous years income... this year they may be 100 better off... but next year would they have to pay it back??? would they get any???

so to actually be better off then by being on benefits... somebody would need to work over 70 hrs a week... - explain how this is "fair" considering that the PWC isnt actually hard done by...
and gets the same amount of money given by way of benefits that a couple would be given...

HoneyNutLoop

wayne0 wrote: »

why should money that is ENTIRELY given by the state:
ESA/JSA/Income Support ETC be ringfenced to £5 a week, despite those who work having to pay MORE CSA payments.... for getting less by way of benefits...

Why should certain examples of benefits be a nil assesment...?

is that state given money any less a £.

I don't believe it should be £5 I think the same rates should apply to all sources of income (except non-means tested disability related payments like DLA). If someone can claim £200 a week in benefits they should be treated like someone who has £200 a week.

wayne0 wrote: »

then look onto the PWC side...

Is a £ given by a NRP of less value than a £ given by the state etc?

Why should a NRP give a PWC money and then that money be "disregarded" for the purposes of benefits ETC.

is that REALLY fair.

I don't agree with this either. I think back when there was a cap at the same level as the earned income cap was right.

wayne0 wrote: »

and consider this:

A Claim for CTC / WTC is made as a couple... a couple who claims benefits/etc are BOTH in reciept of them (hence HB situation). So legally speaking... if money is paid to two people... How can the CSA deem that ALL of that money is paid to one person...

I believe it should be based on who met the eligibility criteria - whose tax payment is bring credited. If one of the couple isn't working, how can you say the award is theirs - they don't meet the criteria for it to be paid. If both are contributing equally, then half and half approach, but then maybe half and half on the relevant child reductions too, in that situation.

You've misread the bit you keep quoting. The benefit income is yours, as opposed to being your wife's, as she is not eligible for benefits due to her status - see your argument above re: couples claiming.

I don't claim any WTC or CTC or HB or ESA etc.

Your final point about people working less because they get more claiming (which again wasn't the point btw - and I note still hasn't been responded to) - don't you think that is wrong? And with people actively choosing to work less, because they get more in welfare than they can earn, doesn't that just strengthen the argument I was making? That income should be treated the same whatever the source.

kevin137

wayne0 wrote: »

Im actually looking at leaving the UK to go and live in Indonesia with my wife and two kids now... - after the !!!! thats kicked up these last weeks with Ex, and CSA... - and the debt thats "not been paid".. - despite my kids going without to be able to pay it!

Do everyone a favour before you both become eligible for benefits and sit there for life claiming because you will get more money... And book all of you plane tickets while you can still afford it...!!!

Your EX and the CSA are not to blame for your troubles...! YOU ARE...!!!

FBaby

wayne0 wrote: »

out of interest Honey, FBaby, anyone else who has a problem with my finances:

How much CTC do you claim, How much WTC, how much CB, HB, CTB, ETC?

and ontop of that... How much CM do you recieve which is a TOTAL DISREGARD for benefits?...

No CTC, no WTC, no HB, no CTB, and now only partial CB. No CM received for my two children and I am £50 down a month as I pay for transport for them to visit their dad.

When I was single, all I ever received was tax credits, and that only paid childcare until they were both in school at which stage I only received the minimum £45 a month despite my childcare costs still about £350 a month. I have only received a few months of maintenance in over 10 years, of £200 a month at best.

Why do you think that you are legitimate to pay only £5 a week to your child just because his mother is entitled to more help in benefits than you do?

Your ex might have been easier claiming benefits rather than supporting herself and your son, but that doesn't mean that it exempt you from supporting your own child.

You come up with excuses after excuses. Maybe there are justified, but does that mean that you shouldn't have to hold on to your responsibilities because you've faced events that you didn't foresee?

How are you going to support your family in Indonesia when currently you are too poorly with your back to do any work?