Child Benifit CSA

fzx5v0

Hi
My child started full time work on the 10th but child benifit is not stopping to the 17th a week later due to this the CSA will not start to close the case.

Can someone advise why there is a week grace and if there is anything i can do about it?

thanks

Mojisola

Is it worth worrying about one week?

fzx5v0

it is just annoying when they can not give you an explanation for it

zzzLazyDaisy

It is probably something to do with CB being paid three weeks in arrears.

kevin137

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

It is probably something to do with CB being paid three weeks in arrears.

But that wuold still not answer why it is due until the 17th...

I understand things paid in arrears, the CSA is paid in arrears so can still be due even after the date, but the child is no longer eligible from the 10th...

So it should STOP the 9th...!!! And then any arrears due should be paid...

And you all wonder why the government is so in debt and cutting services etc, because they cannot even get basic maths correct...!!!

DUTR

kevin137 wrote: »

But that wuold still not answer why it is due until the 17th...

I understand things paid in arrears, the CSA is paid in arrears so can still be due even after the date, but the child is no longer eligible from the 10th...

So it should STOP the 9th...!!! And then any arrears due should be paid...

And you all wonder why the government is so in debt and cutting services etc, because they cannot even get basic maths correct...!!!

To how I see it, that would be correct, as the CSA is paid at least 1 week in arrears.

nicky3

do not pay the extra week. CSA use child benefit inappropriately on a regular basis and quote legislation which does not exist because it is easier for the than following the correct rules. I have printed off postings on here which demonstrate this and included them with my case to the Parliamentary Ombudsman which is being considered at the moment.

cakeforbrains

I can understand your desire for accuracy/an explanation, but it would be really petty to deny your child one week's maintenance. In reality children still tend to cost their parents money when they leave FT education. I'm sure the PWC will still be forking out.

Cally_Smart

Maybe they would like to be the one that decides if they give it to the child not have some Agency( who get a lot of things wrong!) telling them to!

nicky3

It may be only one week, but in my case it was a year before the CSA stopped stacking up arrears on me for a kid that was in my full time care, so it is the principle here. The poster is NOT liable for child support, be it a week, a year or a lifetime. Please don't pay, and if CSA insist that you must, please let me know as I am happy to quote any such cases to the Parliamentary Ombudsman to demonstrate that the CSA just wheel out a pack of lies about child benefit to bully and extort

Marker_2

nicky3 wrote: »

The poster is NOT liable for child support, be it a week, a year or a lifetime.

So who is liable for supporting the child?