A house I rent out at a loss? CSA enquiries.

Rouge_Diablo

Crellow4 wrote: »

Sorry, I typed too many zeros! The threshold for assets is £65k so the example of a £100k payout would potentially qualify as an asset for the purposes of a variation. Providing you can provide evidence that the equity in the house is less than £65k there shouldn't be a problem - unless of course you have additional assets which could be aggregated with the equity in the house?

Thanks for that clarification. I should be under £65, if forced to sell it. I accept all you say, but for the benefit of others, I do know that Pension Lump Sums from final salaries are nor restricted like that. I worked in a final salary pension, and it was a regularly asked question 'Can my ex get any of my lump sum'. That was always confirmed to be NOT the case. And some of those Lump Sums were near £200k. Mine was just over £100k. I can only presume there is a difference in their status. Pension lump sum okay, Equity in house, not so?

I hope not to be forced to sell, but I'm still looking for answers to my first round of questions. Someone appeared to say that the rental income I receive, is NOT income, as long as I am not producing a profit...which I'm not?

Crellow4

If you receive a lump sum on retirement it CAN be brought into the calculation by way of a variation. The CSA will not force you to sell your property, they will simply look at the market value minus any mortgage. If the value exceeds £65k when added to any other assets then a variation would be awarded. Your ex may not be able to claim a lump sum against your pension fund but it can certainly be included in a variation.

Rouge_Diablo

Crellow4 wrote: »

If you receive a lump sum on retirement it CAN be brought into the calculation by way of a variation. The CSA will not force you to sell your property, they will simply look at the market value minus any mortgage. If the value exceeds £65k when added to any other assets then a variation would be awarded. Your ex may not be able to claim a lump sum against your pension fund but it can certainly be included in a variation.

You have helped me with your contributions, and I'm brand new to this forum, and therefore don't really want to have an argument within my first ten posts!

But at the risk of identifying myself a little more, I worked for the Emergency Services. Know staff in the other two, as well as all the colleagues in my particular one. I also know Teachers and NHS Staff. All their Unions, and CSA advisors say the same. The CSA cannot touch your lump sum in the final pension deal. If that wasn't the case, so many more would not take the maximum lump sum. In my old organisation, and the others aren't far behind, the take up for the maximum pay out is around 95%.

I spoke to a CSA staff member who actually said that although they couldn't at the moment, they were looking into ways of trying to get at it. So although I accept everything else you say, and thank you for the advice, I'm still maintaining that point for anyone else reading it who might want that information.

HoneyNutLoop

I'm sorry, but Crellow is correct. Under CSA2 and variations, there is no exemption of pension lump sums from the assets ground.
Link to regulations:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/o-9321.pdf
Reg 18 is the one in question.

Marisco

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

I'm sorry, but Crellow is correct. Under CSA2 and variations, there is no exemption of pension lump sums from the assets ground.
Link to regulations:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/o-9321.pdf
Reg 18 is the one in question.

But if he has been paying for 15 years, he must be on CSA 1, are the rules the same for that? My ex was in final salary in the Fire Service, and I know he'd have been given all sorts of financial advice before retiring, and I'm sure this would have come up numerous times. Any financial advisor worth his/her salt, would not advise anyone to take the max lump sum, if the CSA could get their mitts on it!!

Rouge_Diablo

I was moved to CSA2, without my consent, and as much as you may read those complex regulations as saying they can, for whatever reason, they don't. That is a fact. I know dozens and dozens of fathers, who checked it out, then did it, and their lump sums were not touched.

If it could be, do you not think it would? The CSA show no mercy and definitely would try, angry PWC's would demand it, and yet it doesn't happen!

Crellow4

Any Variation application, or for that matter, Departure under CS1, are driven by the PWC. He or she is free to apply for assets to be brought into account for the support if the children - the legislation does not exclude pension lump sums. Not all PWC's will be aware of the availability of Variation or Departure legislation which could explain why they do not apply for the lump sum to be assessed.
Incidentally, the value of the pension 'pot' cannot be assessed but the actual lump sum paid CAN be. I'm sorry if you don't like this.

Rouge_Diablo

Crellow4 wrote: »

Any Variation application, or for that matter, Departure under CS1, are driven by the PWC. He or she is free to apply for assets to be brought into account for the support if the children - the legislation does not exclude pension lump sums. Not all PWC's will be aware of the availability of Variation or Departure legislation which could explain why they do not apply for the lump sum to be assessed.
Incidentally, the value of the pension 'pot' cannot be assessed but the actual lump sum paid CAN be. I'm sorry if you don't like this.

It's not that I don't like it, it is just that for some reason the CSA do not move on it. I actually know of a few fathers who ex's are in the same job at the same time (Which as you can imagine, is not unusual at all). The ex's are aggressive in trying to use the CSA to extract as much money as possible as part of their personal acrimony after the split up (as well as getting what they are entitled to). They could not invoke the CSA to act.

But I think we have done this point to death.

Anyone out there know the answers to the original questions?

HoneyNutLoop

The regulations I attached are the full extent of the process the CSA must follow when processing a variation application.

They receive it in and see if it passes preliminary consideration (regs 2-9 refer). They then send copies of what the PWC has alleged on her form, together with any supporting evidence to you for your comments. This is called contest. (Reg 9 refers).

They will then decide whether or not to award the variation based on whet you and the PWC has provided. They do not conduct any investigation to either support or refute what either of you has said. Reg 18, as I mentioned before, outlines how they determine an award for assets.

They must then decide if it is just and equitable to award the variation in full, reg 21, and then they will change the weekly calculation to take account of any award, reg 25.



Marisco, I do not believe there is an equivalent assets ground under departures under CS1, although I'm not 100% sure. As I understand under CS1, under the regular formula, they look at the rental income from properties less the linked mortgage and a couple of other expenses, and they look at interest actually earned on any savings but not the capital.

This could account for the discrepancy in stance here about treatment of lump sum pension payments, because afaik under CS1 there was no way of taking into account any lump sum capital (not just pensions).

Fclamp1

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

I'm sorry, but Crellow is correct. Under CSA2 and variations, there is no exemption of pension lump sums from the assets ground.
Link to regulations:
(Cannot repost link - am a newby)
Reg 18 is the one in question.

Have these regulations Child Support (Variations) Regulations 2000 superceded Child Support Departure Direction and Consequencial Amendments Regulations 1996 or do the others still apply? I know variations are what departures are called on CSA 2 but these latest regs are dated 2000 before CSA 2 was in force.