Nice try but the answer is no..!

krashovrload

++

Just had a new assessment letter through the post. They've notified me about what I'll be paying in maintenance after my most recent change of circumstances.

They then go on to tell me that I'll be paying a phased amount from now until 2018..

However I've already had 5 years of phasing from 2007 to 2012 to get me from CSA1 to CSA2..

Somehow they've managed to pull across figures from 2007 into the calculations..

I phoned them earlier and politely told the adviser that I will not be paying the figures shown in the letter.!

The adviser did say that the case worker made a note on my case that something funny had occurred and it was being passed to 'the techies'.

I guess it's a case of wait and see.

++

skje12

Talking to the csa are like talking to a brick wall!!

Did the mother ask for an assesment done on you for them to reassess you??

Im not sure how many times the PWC can order a reassessment though

J4mesg

so they phase the payments in? CSA have asked me for new pay details etc, im expectn my payment to go up.

although my daughter is now 16, do you know how much the care element is weekly that will drop off the assessment?

skje12

can you tell me what phase the payments in means please? lol i havent got a clue

is your daughter still in full time education??

krashovrload

++

When I was being 'migrated' from CSA1 (1993) to CSA2 (2003) my payments were reduced gradually over a 5 years period.

Let us say - I was assessed under CSA2 rules to pay £25 (at the time) but I was paying £57 at the time under CSA1.

I was informed that I would pay £52 (year 1), £47 (year 2), £42(year 3), £37 (year 4) and £32 (year 5). After that it would drop to £25 ongoing - assuming wages stayed the same.

This is what the CSA called phasing and it was to allow the PWC to get used to the changes in the maintenance levels.

++

krashovrload

skje12 wrote: »

Talking to the csa are like talking to a brick wall!!

Did the mother ask for an assesment done on you for them to reassess you??

Im not sure how many times the PWC can order a reassessment though

++

No - it was me notifying them of the change in circumstances. I had come off benefits and started working.

++

365days

krashovrload wrote: »

++

When I was being 'migrated' from CSA1 (1993) to CSA2 (2003) my payments were reduced gradually over a 5 years period.

Let us say - I was assessed under CSA2 rules to pay £25 (at the time) but I was paying £57 at the time under CSA1.

I was informed that I would pay £52 (year 1), £47 (year 2), £42(year 3), £37 (year 4) and £32 (year 5). After that it would drop to £25 ongoing - assuming wages stayed the same.

This is what the CSA called phasing and it was to allow the PWC to get used to the changes in the maintenance levels.

++

That is bonkers!! Does it work the other way round, if your assesment went up by £35 a week does that get phased in too.

Imagine going to the benfit office and saying 'I've lost my job. I was earning £500 a week and I know jsa is £50 a week'
'Don't worry love we'll phase it slowly in for you over 5 years'

World's gone mad.

krashovrload

++

No - it's my understanding that phasing only worked one way. If my assessment was increased - it would be applied straight away...

Fortunately I managed to remain employed for the duration of the phasing period and on a roughly equivalent wage.

I did ask an adviser once about what would happen if I ended up unemployed - I cannot remember what they said. Although at that time (if I remember rightly) PWCs in receipt of benefit were only getting £10 above normal benefit rates (regardless of what maintenance was paid) and so it probably wouldn't have impacted on them all that much..

Which is why CSA 1 (imho) didn't really 'help families out of poverty' as the politicians were keen to say. It just seemed to reduce my income for working to a level akin to somebody unemployed and left the PWC somewhere likewise - so I still don't see how that helped anyone.??

++

lazer

krashovrload wrote: »

++

No - it's my understanding that phasing only worked one way. If my assessment was increased - it would be applied straight away...

Fortunately I managed to remain employed for the duration of the phasing period and on a roughly equivalent wage.

I did ask an adviser once about what would happen if I ended up unemployed - I cannot remember what they said. Although at that time (if I remember rightly) PWCs in receipt of benefit were only getting £10 above normal benefit rates (regardless of what maintenance was paid) and so it probably wouldn't have impacted on them all that much..

Which is why CSA 1 (imho) didn't really 'help families out of poverty' as the politicians were keen to say. It just seemed to reduce my income for working to a level akin to somebody unemployed and left the PWC somewhere likewise - so I still don't see how that helped anyone.??

++

It helped the taxpayers, as the parents money was being used to pay the benefits as opposed to general taxation

krashovrload

lazer wrote: »

It helped the taxpayers, as the parents money was being used to pay the benefits as opposed to general taxation

++

I've never been able to balance 'reducing the tax burden' aim with 'lifting families out of poverty' aim...

Is it just me..? But if you were using maintenance payments to cover benefit payments (plus £10 as it was a one point) then you weren't changing anything for the PWC or the children they were looking after if the PWC was having the manage on benefits..

++

lazer

krashovrload wrote: »

++

I've never been able to balance 'reducing the tax burden' aim with 'lifting families out of poverty' aim...

Is it just me..? But if you were using maintenance payments to cover benefit payments (plus £10 as it was a one point) then you weren't changing anything for the PWC or the children they were looking after if the PWC was having the manage on benefits..

++

No what it was doing was making the situation fair in comparison to 2 parent families.

If the parents are together and only one working - the working parent is expected to contribute to the children - and only if the working parents income is not high enough is it topped up with benefits.

I disagree with Child support being disregarded for means tested benefits - as if the parents are capable of supporting the child without the help of benefits they should.

The other flaw in the system is that for the PWC the child support received is disregarded for benefits but the child support paid is counted as income for the NRP despite the fact they do not have the funds to spend.