Assets worth more than 65K

RQMS

Hi, My sister has won a claim against her ex, he has more than 65K in cash sitting in a bank account, can anyone confirm whether or not the CSA include the first 65K in their assessment calculation?

I have trawled the net and found conflicting answers.

Thank you

kevin137

I believe it is OVER the 65k, but the CSA are a law unto themselves, and don't for 1 second think that things will not change...!!!

I know if that was me and i had the cash in the bank and a mortgage, then i would be paying some of the mortgage to reduce my liability, and there are many other ways of doing this as well, like buying a boat, another car etc the lists of ways to manipulate this go on for ever, so please expect to get a knock back even though it is not right, it is likely it will happen...

shoe*diva79

kevin137 wrote: »

I believe it is OVER the 65k, but the CSA are a law unto themselves, and don't for 1 second think that things will not change...!!!

I know if that was me and i had the cash in the bank and a mortgage, then i would be paying some of the mortgage to reduce my liability, and there are many other ways of doing this as well, like buying a boat, another car etc the lists of ways to manipulate this go on for ever, so please expect to get a knock back even though it is not right, it is likely it will happen...

You do make me laugh Kevin, in one breathe your saying 'if it were you' and the next breathe about it 'not being right'

OP, I dont know the answer to your question but I hope the NRP does the decent thing and supports their child.

HoneyNutLoop

Yes, the first 65k is included in the calculation, but if the NRP had 64k then there would be no award. 65k equates to a notional income of £100/wk (as 8% interest is applied to the total figure and this is then divided by 52 weeks to give the additional income amount) so just keeps the threshold for the ground in line with the other additional income grounds.

It is the special expense grounds for NRP's where only the amount above the threshold is considered for the variation award. I have no idea why there is this discrepancy though.

kevin137

shoe*diva79 wrote: »

You do make me laugh Kevin, in one breathe your saying 'if it were you' and the next breathe about it 'not being right'

OP, I dont know the answer to your question but I hope the NRP does the decent thing and supports their child.

I am just saying, that there rules are there for a reason, if as an example i had £80,000 in the bank but a mortgage then i would pay £20,000 of the mortgage and you wouldn't get any of it...!

It is not right, but then there are many reasons why i might have that money in my bank account that have NO reason for it to be assessed, like an inheritance, why should that be classed as an equity that is nothing to do with an ex...???

It is ok to get your pound of flesh, but there are limits... And lets be honest, there are very few people nowadays that have more than £65,000 in cash in the bank, and if you have, then more fool you...

RQMS

HoneyNutLoop wrote: »

Yes, the first 65k is included in the calculation, but if the NRP had 64k then there would be no award. 65k equates to a notional income of £100/wk (as 8% interest is applied to the total figure and this is then divided by 52 weeks to give the additional income amount) so just keeps the threshold for the ground in line with the other additional income grounds.

It is the special expense grounds for NRP's where only the amount above the threshold is considered for the variation award. I have no idea why there is this discrepancy though.

Hi Thanks for your answer, I' am a bit confused by some of it. The NRP has 195,000 cash in bank, in your opinion what do you think the assessment would be? Can you show your calculation please?

Thanks

kevin137

£195,000 would be an income of interest at £300, so the income assessable would be that at the percentage due for children at 15% for 1 20% for 2 or 25% for 3 or more.

Meaning an additional £45, £60 or £75 a week.

But as i have already said, do NOT assume that this is what you will get, as this can be moved, spent or paid into mortgage, and it cannot be called diversion of income...!

You should also be aware that there are probably some instances whereby this can also be discounted from an assessment. Although i am not sure exactly what they would be, there are bound to be some...

nicky3

Honeynutloop is right, the first £65k is included. The £195k is multiplied by 8% which is classed as annual income, which is divided by 52 weeks to give the £300 per week that kevin calculated. He is right that the money can be spent in a variety of ways to reduce it.