Should NRP Outgoings be Taken into Account?

CSAworkerx

Apologies for not reading the whole thread, but from someone who works in the CSA, the better question would be should the PWC's incommings be taken into account.

cakeforbrains

CSAworkerx wrote: »

Apologies for not reading the whole thread, but from someone who works in the CSA, the better question would be should the PWC's incommings be taken into account.

Really? Do you think that they should?

CSAworkerx

cakeforbrains wrote: »

Really? Do you think that they should?

in certain cases yes, if i see an nrp working 50 hours a week and picking up say 1200 a month, and a pwc who is working 20 hours a week and picking up 4000 a month, this should be taken into account, It isnt but should be, the same goes for pwc's new partners, the problem being data protection and it would create a massive crapstorm.

DACC

Hi CSA worker,

Just for arguments sake, do you think it's fair to run two systems at once with different %?

13Kent

I agree, we are on CSA 1 our PWC has 'nil income' because she gets WTC. She has a good job as does her partner, the family have had holidays to Disney Florida, and completely renovated the house with new furniture, new kitchen, bathroom, carpets etc. We have had caravan holidays in the UK - never more than a week, and when the PWC had a new baby she had a nursery with matching everything - my baby had hand me downs and second hand mismatched stuff - it broke my heart that having worked for 14 years in a good job we couldn't afford to do up a nursery for our precious first baby. (Having said that what the baby missed out on in material things it got in love and attention).

The pwc also got the house as part of the divorce settlement leaving my husband with a struggle to get back on the mortgage ladder with £600 going out to the CSA which mortgage companies consider to be an ongoing debt.

I find it upsetting that my income is counted but her income is 'nil', her husband's income is not considered either, and I believe she would have to earn a significant amount before her income would be included in any assessment.

CSAworkerx

DACC wrote: »

Hi CSA worker,

Just for arguments sake, do you think it's fair to run two systems at once with different %?

that depends, CSA1/2 are so much diffrent, and the fact that cases are still on CSA1 is a joke, but no, i dont think that 2 systems is the answer, the cases should have come to CSA2 a long time ago, and now with the 2012 scehme comming in, that will be another nightmare to handle.

DACC

CSAworkerx wrote: »

that depends, CSA1/2 are so much diffrent, and the fact that cases are still on CSA1 is a joke, but no, i dont think that 2 systems is the answer, the cases should have come to CSA2 a long time ago, and now with the 2012 scehme comming in, that will be another nightmare to handle.

Thanks CSAX, appreciate the answer and the tough job you guys have to do.

Could you answer me another question if you have time, I just want it confirmed by someone in the business so to speak.

My partner earns more than me and she's due to give birth shortly. On CSA 1 will I have to pay more because they will take her earnings into account if we get married? Is there a deduction for us having a child? Thanks again.

CSAworkerx

DACC wrote: »

Thanks CSAX, appreciate the answer and the tough job you guys have to do.

Could you answer me another question if you have time, I just want it confirmed by someone in the business so to speak.

My partner earns more than me and she's due to give birth shortly. On CSA 1 will I have to pay more because they will take her earnings into account if we get married? Is there a deduction for us having a child? Thanks again.

My knowlage of CSA1 is limited, i know they look at ure partners income on that system, but not entirely sure about ure question, ill see if i can get it answerd next time im at work.

As for a deducation for the new child, yes, 15% of ure net income will be put aside and the assessment done for the rest, for exmaple if you earn 1000/month, once the new child is born, that will drop to 850 and be assessed.

cakeforbrains

CSAworkerx wrote: »

in certain cases yes, if i see an nrp working 50 hours a week and picking up say 1200 a month, and a pwc who is working 20 hours a week and picking up 4000 a month, this should be taken into account, It isnt but should be, the same goes for pwc's new partners, the problem being data protection and it would create a massive crapstorm.

I disagree.

The reason why person A would earn less than person B are the same reasons why any two people have different levels of income: talent, life chances, education, experience etc. We don't penalise person B because person A earns less.

When two people make a baby both those people should take on some ongoing responsibility for the financial needs of that child. Whether the parents stay together or not they should both end up spending a portion of their income on the child. This should be the case whether they earn £1200 per month or £4000 per month. "I'm poor" doesn't cut it with me; you made a child so pay for it.

I am a PWC and my husband earns over twice as much as the NRP. He happily spends all his money on the two children I share with the NRP, but that shouldn't mean that the NRP gets to negate his responsibility. Why should my husband subsidise the NRP just because he's worked hard to get himself a much better job. Or indeed, just because he happens to be more intelligent, or whatever. He didn't make the babies, the NRP and I did. He did choose to 'take on' the children, and he takes financial responsibility for that choice by paying for our family home and lifestyle. If I wasn't with my new husband I'd have a much more limited lifestyle, but that doesn't mean that the NRP shouldn't pay his bit.

All that said, I don't know where I stand on the issue of PWCs who take a chunk of maintenance and also get to claim lots of benefits. I can see arguments for and against that situation and I'm on the fence.

jarhead66

hello CSAX if you google https://www.computerweekly.co "staff enter false data to get around CSA controls" this might be part of the answer as to why some of us are still on CSA1, as some of us older members of the CSA will tell you in the early days the staff at the CSA had no respect for us N.R.P's so this article will most likely strike a cord with some people, you will get some people on here who will state that some people have nil assessment on CSA1 but you never see them on here the only way that you get nil assessment is if your housing costs are taken into account and you are left with the job seekers amount, if this was the case then i am sure that the staff at the CSA would advise the P.W.C. to close the case for 13 weeks and go onto CSA2
I did email the CSA about how i could get onto CSA2 and was told that i had to meet a criteria, which was basically bang some more kids out, leave the new mother let her put a claim in then i could go on CSA2, then the letter proceeded to call me a looser and my ex a winner!! very strange.
I am sure that some people will dispute the article, well if so why didn't the CSA sue the magazine, no doubt the staff who where putting in the wrong data are most likely managers now with the CSA rant over!!