child leaving college and csa

CSAworkerx

kevin137 wrote: »

WRONG... There is NO legislation that uses CB as the qualifier... Show me the legislation that does this...???

you litreally cannot read, so i have to make everything a battle or can you just re-read instead of jumping the gun everytime i comment.

as i stated.... "Your problem is the PWC will have told us she is enrolling into a new course, or allready has done so,"
this means, the pwc will have been asked on the phone if the QC is currently attending, or has enrolled into a new course, she will say she has, as if she says no we will cancel the claim
"and if chb is in payment that is enough evidence for us to class her as a QC"
This means, with both pieces of evidence, ( the chb check, and the pwc telling us shes attenting/enrolled into a course ) we will class her as a qualifiying child. As the PWC has a right to be belived, and it is not our job to question whether she is lieing to both us and CHB, we expect if its in payment, they are paying it becuase she is still classed as a child, this means its now up to the other party to prove she is not a qualifying child in the eyes of CHB, if this is done we also will not class her as one, as CHB has stopped for a reason.

im not going to disect a simple comment everytime people mis-read or mis-enterprate a comment, or just dont understand the process.

kevin137

And you are not listening, the CSA use the CB as the qualifier, yet this is open to abuse and is NOT proof that a child is in fact qualifying for CSA...

So when you say that the CSA use CB as a qualifier, is this a legal requirement...??? And if not, then how can the CSA use it as a qualifier...??? As it is not a legal qualifier that means that the CSA use an unlawful method for making decisions about payments owed...

And if you cannot see the logic in that, then you really do belong at the CSA... Haha

CSAworkerx

kevin137 wrote: »

And you are not listening, the CSA use the CB as the qualifier, yet this is open to abuse and is NOT proof that a child is in fact qualifying for CSA...

So when you say that the CSA use CB as a qualifier, is this a legal requirement...??? And if not, then how can the CSA use it as a qualifier...??? As it is not a legal qualifier that means that the CSA use an unlawful method for making decisions about payments owed...

And if you cannot see the logic in that, then you really do belong at the CSA... Haha

No we dont. chb must be in payment to recive maintenance, but its not a "qualifyer" its a very good sign, but it doesnt mean we have to pay maintenance becuase of it, i didnt really read the bit about unlawful, the csa is determined by child support law, who do you think writes that? the clue is in the title.

kevin137

CSAworkerx wrote: »

No we dont. chb must be in payment to recive maintenance, but its not a "qualifyer" its a very good sign, but it doesnt mean we have to pay maintenance becuase of it, i didnt really read the bit about unlawful, the csa is determined by child support law, who do you think writes that? the clue is in the title.

So even though the CSA do NOT have legislation to use CB as a qualifier, they routinely do, is that what you are saying...???

A "good indication" is NOT legislation, and as such is not enough for a child to qualify....!!! SO payment should not be due unless proof is obtained... And CB is not proof a child is in education, what it is is a lazy mans way of saying you still owe because we don't have the means or the time to do our job properly...!!!

CSAworkerx

kevin137 wrote: »

So even though the CSA do NOT have legislation to use CB as a qualifier, they routinely do, is that what you are saying...???

A "good indication" is NOT legislation, and as such is not enough for a child to qualify....!!! SO payment should not be due unless proof is obtained... And CB is not proof a child is in education, what it is is a lazy mans way of saying you still owe because we don't have the means or the time to do our job properly...!!!

Im sorry, i didnt realise you had acsess to our system, you seem to know so much, like how we often use CB as a "qualifier" even though that would result in disciplinary action as we did not investigate the nrps doubt that the child is a qualifying child.

Ive told you in this certain scenario, the pwc saying the QC + CB classes as evidence, due to the right to be belived.

What benefit are you getting spouting off "facts" you have no idea what you are talking about, and im not going to be responding to anymore of your comments, ive tried and tried to tell you how things are done, and you simple refuse to belive it, there has to be a sinister motive? No, its just the rules we work by, ive offerd a solution to this case, inform CHB of a doubt, they will then ask the PWC for evidence the QC is attenting or enrolled onto a course, and if she cannot provide it Cb stops, so does the maintenance.

13Kent

Unfortunately the CSA is sometimes a law unto itself, and whether it is the law that they use CB to decide on maintenance or not rightly or wrongly it is how they make those decisions as we found out when we were in the same position having a child dropping out of college and moving out of the PWC's home it would have been impossible to prove the child had moved out and even if we did the child could have moved back in straight away and our case would have been dropped. As far as CSA were concerned the PWC was in receipt of CB and therefore maintenance was payable.

CSAworkerx

13Kent wrote: »

Unfortunately the CSA is sometimes a law unto itself, and whether it is the law that they use CB to decide on maintenance or not rightly or wrongly it is how they make those decisions as we found out when we were in the same position having a child dropping out of college and moving out of the PWC's home it would have been impossible to prove the child had moved out and even if we did the child could have moved back in straight away and our case would have been dropped. As far as CSA were concerned the PWC was in receipt of CB and therefore maintenance was payable.

Did you raise this doubt to the child benefit agency ?

kevin137

CSAworkerx wrote: »

Did you raise this doubt to the child benefit agency ?

As someone who has appeared recently, and not had the benefit of getting to know the users of the forum and there problems, this is the kind of attitude that hurts the CSA...

Are you actually serious with that question...???

I suggest you actually read some of the posts and threads this user has posted in, to see how many times this has been reported to the CSA before you come along with such comments, then maybe you will understand just why this forum exists...!!!

As i have said before, there are already staff past and present from the DWP and CSA on here, and they read and know the members who post here with problems, there help is generally sound advice and not something that just comes out of a text book you are expected to read from...

Maybe some good advice for you would be to sit back, read the forum regularly, do NOT post, and take maybe 3 months to understand how and why this place exists...

And the whole process works because there is no script from the CSA, it is users and others who actually have some common sense who reply normally...!

Not saying you would not be a help in the future, but jumping in as you are is only going to upset people, cause confusion to many, and give the CSA an even worse name as you are so blatant about what you are here to do...

There is far more experience on here about what happens than you give the collective forum credit for, and you are condescending with some of your replies at best...

Just so you know...

Many will not speak there mind, i WILL, so if i upset you, so be it, but i do believe this is sound advice if you really do want to help...!!!

his_wife

thank you all, crellow,we will do that tomorrow,
csa worker, we have informed both csa and child benefit, that she is committing fraud, however , u can not enroll onto another course AFTER your 19th birthday and qualify for child benefit,,, which to be fair, i would expect both child benefit and child support to be aware of this legislation!!

Child benefit have appeared, to of done nothing about her committing fraud,,, so basically, if anyone wants to commit fraud this is the route to take!!

his_wife

csaworkerx,,, i have proof that the qualifying child is not in college, i have a letter stating the date she was kicked off the course!! i also have a letter stating her mum tried to appeal this!

The child support spout the ,,, if you get child benefit u must pay card,,,

child benefit will not entertain us one iota, even though we have proof, have emailed proof to mp, and child support, so basically the child support agency support people committing fraud!