Hints and tips from a caseworker at the CSA.

CSAworkerx

paulineb wrote: »

I know someone who refused point blank to pay for his kids, to the point where he went off sick at the end of the financial year (hes very wealthy and owns his own business), hes now paying £500 a month I believe which is much less than hes supposed to be and his ex partner was told by the CSA that they did eventually get him to pay part of what he owed but they refused to tell her how

Shes also been reduced to tears on several occasions on the telephone due to the way her case has been handled to date

Also I believe theres a time limit in which people can pay arrears, one year or two? Not sure myself tbh

But I think theres something massively wrong when someone who is a millionaire can opt out of paying for his kids by feigning illness and almost a year on, shes getting a small percentage of what she should be owed

No system is perfect, of course not, but some people are very badly let down by red tape

She also cant claim benefits as they have property, but she has no access to any of them.

the first line tells the story, we have 1 system to deal with 100,000's of people and cases, its not fair and i dont ever think it will be, but its all we have to use, if he goes off sick i have to trust the doctor signing him off, i cant check if hes ill or not, i also feel its wrong for someone with massive wealth to not want to pay for his children, but thats a moral issue, not a csa issue, i cannot help that.

its the same as when company directors earning megabucks quit and sign on JSA for the sake of not paying maintenance, its an a$$hole thing to do, but my hands are tied, he will pay £5 and theres nothing i can do about that.

Crellow4

You really are doing more harm than good. Have you looked at the legislation at all? The CSA is legally required to complete a supersession if the income changes by 5% or more - this is not an arbitrary decision! Nor os the implementation of a DEO - there must be at least one missed payment before this method of collection can be used.
I suggest you print your posts off, show them to your line manager and see just how long it takes for disciplinary action to be instigated.

Marisco

CSAworkerx wrote: »

and we cannot just be straight forward with our advice, there is so much sugar coating its unreal.

Why not? I would far rather be told how it is (so long as it's done politely) than flaff around with sugar coating.

CSAworkerx

Crellow4 wrote: »

You really are doing more harm than good. Have you looked at the legislation at all? The CSA is legally required to complete a supersession if the income changes by 5% or more - this is not an arbitrary decision! Nor os the implementation of a DEO - there must be at least one missed payment before this method of collection can be used.
I suggest you print your posts off, show them to your line manager and see just how long it takes for disciplinary action to be instigated.

If the income increses/decreses by 5% or more becuase of an expense, or bonus, or overtime, or for any other reason ( there are MANY ) the assessment does not have to be re-done, if that bonus or O/T is irregular, we dont touch it, same with expenses, nrp will phone in and say hes now working 20 more mile away and is paying extra fuel therefore his income is lower as it shows this as an expense on his wage and is take out, somtimes alot more than 5%, we still dont re-asses them.

A Deo can be put in place when an nrp has failed to provide information or when they state they are not going to pay, How can a first payment be "missed" when there isnt a valid method of payment?

If anyone is doing harm its ureself providing miss information of somthing you obviosly dont know, please refrain from that its not helping.

you keep mentioning my line manager, who do you think teaches caseworkers how to do there job after the intial training period? and who said i wasnt a line manager anyways? You seem to think im the one bad guy amoung the good, if only you knew....

CSAworkerx

Marisco wrote: »

Why not? I would far rather be told how it is (so long as it's done politely) than flaff around with sugar coating.

Because people like to complain about service when they dont get there way, if i was to tell an nrp for exmaple

"send in ure slips, if you have bonuses or o/t im going to asses based on this, any other expenses will not be counted for, and if you dont send them to me im going straight to your employers and setting up an enforced DEO for 40% of your wages"

How many do you think would send me that information? however... if i put it like this

"Please send in your wage information, i will go through it thoroughly and disreguard anything i feel is not regular such as bonuses and commission, If you have expenses we can also not include them in certain circumstances, Im going to give you time to send these in, If you do not im unfortuneatly going to have to go down other routes i dont like doing"

Bingo, im getting the slips. Its complete sugar coating and its rife, mainly becuase if we dont act like saints the first thing nrps and pwcs do is file complaints, dont get me wrong there never upheld ( maybe 5% ) but that goes onto ure record and will be discussed in one to one meetings, Also, to stop all the aggro we get if we say it as it is, if you take my first exmaple, that will send non-compliant nrps off the handle and your going to sit there for 20 mins taking abuse. Yet its basically what happens in every case.

on this forum, i dont have to be a saint, i can just "say it as it is"

Crellow4

I think it's laughable to even contemplate that you are a line manager. If the NRP fails to supply information then a DMD will be calculated, or an assessment using estimated earnings - there will the be an enforceable liability which can be collected by DEO providing a payment has been missed. Don't make assumptions about my experience or qualification to comment on complex CSA issues - you have no idea! The reason I keep mentioning your line manger is that you are acting in direct contravention of your terms of employment and can face disciplinary action. On second thoughts, why should I worry - the CSA would be a much better place without staff like you!

CSAworkerx

Crellow4 wrote: »

I think it's laughable to even contemplate that you are a line manager. If the NRP fails to supply information then a DMD will be calculated, or an assessment using estimated earnings - there will the be an enforceable liability which can be collected by DEO providing a payment has been missed. Don't make assumptions about my experience or qualification to comment on complex CSA issues - you have no idea! The reason I keep mentioning your line manger is that you are acting in direct contravention of your terms of employment and can face disciplinary action. On second thoughts, why should I worry - the CSA would be a much better place without staff like you!

Im not going to argue with somone who can throw around accronyms but have litreally no idea how there put in place and why.

We only DMD if the nrp has no fixed abode thus unable to accept correspondence and not be informed through the process, We dont DMD becuase an nrp wont give us info, we can get all that from his employers, and we dont need him to tell us where hes working, aslong as he pays tax i know where he works, So thats point one out of the way

You dont seem to realise maintenance is an enforced liability from day one, it doesnt just become that, yes we give people chances to do it there way, but its a priority debt, in the end, they have absolutly no choice in the matter, not "when a payment is missed"

My terms of employment does not include a gag order, aslong as i dont breach data protection i can say anything i feel like, last time i checked, im not giving out NINOS or names, im commenting on the process onto which i work with, this isnt nazi germany, and im entiteled to an opinion.

you ask me to not make assumtions, yet you find it laughable i could be a line manager, kind of ironic.

kevin137

Have you ever been a aprty to a case where legal action (outside of your complaints procedure) has ever been initiated against the CSA...???

I am just wondering how much trouble someone like you could cause at the CSA...

I know exactly how awful the CSA and there STAFF are...!!! I obtained an injunction against the CSA for using an expired DEO...

CSAworkerx

kevin137 wrote: »

Have you ever been a aprty to a case where legal action (outside of your complaints procedure) has ever been initiated against the CSA...???

I am just wondering how much trouble someone like you could cause at the CSA...

I know exactly how awful the CSA and there STAFF are...!!! I obtained an injunction against the CSA for using an expired DEO...

If someone wants to take the british goverment to court, no, i dont get involed in that, a caseworker does not get held responsible for mistakes, we may get disciplined for making them, but legally speaking, you cannt take tom !!!!!! or harry to court becuase he made a mistake, you can take the agency if you like, good luck on that score.

you had a bad experience, so that makes every person + the agency awful, Thats somthing a 5 year old would say. Ofcourse the bad stuff gets the press, and i dont mind ure attitude towards us i really dont, but im the one who gets the satisfaction of actually making diffrences to familys and childrens lives, im the one who feels fantastic when i have a pwc crying her eyes out becuase ive managed to get her £1000's after years with nothing, im the one who helps the nrp who genuinely wants to pay for his kids but wants it done in a legal fashion.

You carrying on hating if that makes you happy.

kevin137

The people who make the difference to the kids are the parents, and the action i took was in regard to a recorded conversation held with the CSA saying they do not need to issue a new order even if it is expired as they are above the law...

What did it mean to the child in question, well it meant that the CSA could not contact me and as such not request money, this was ok in my eyes as the money THEY OWED me was cancelled out, as per the time the injunction stood, the court ordered the matter settled by way of the debt cancelled by the time elapsed in any amount due, yet the CSA went away and unlawfully applied for an LO against me using out of date and incorrect info...

And you think i don't like the CSA...??? Really...??? I wonder how you come to that conclusion...

And yes i do have a wonderful relationship with my son, who i see regularly, while NOT having the constraints of the CSA as i left the UK...