If you could change one thing.

CSAworkerx

We often get asked by senior managers if there is anything we would change in both legislation and general casework, i thought it would be an idea to ask you, the pwcs and nrps, what you would change if you could.

Ive always maintained that a pwc's income ( not her new partner ect ) should be taken into account if over a certain threshold, this isnt to mean that an nrp would simply "get out" of paying maintenance, but i do get annoyed when i see pwcs earning 75-100k + claiming CM from an nrp on minimum wage, this is not "sideing" with nrps, its simply stating a personal point of view.

Ill mention a change for pwcs aswell, so thats one for both, on the pwc side i feel an nrps salary should be looked into once a year in compliant cases, some cases go 5-10+ years without being re-assessed, and when they eventually fall into my hands, the nrp who was earning 14k a year now earns 60.

i am genuinely intrested in what clients would change if they could.

Witch_Hazel

CSAworkerx wrote: »

i am genuinely intrested in what clients would change if they could.

Getting rid of the csa would be a good start.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

CSAworkerx wrote: »

We often get asked by senior managers if there is anything we would change in both legislation and general casework, i thought it would be an idea to ask you, the pwcs and nrps, what you would change if you could.

Ive always maintained that a pwc's income ( not her new partner ect ) should be taken into account if over a certain threshold, this isnt to mean that an nrp would simply "get out" of paying maintenance, but i do get annoyed when i see pwcs earning 75-100k + claiming CM from an nrp on minimum wage, this is not "sideing" with nrps, its simply stating a personal point of view.

Ill mention a change for pwcs aswell, so thats one for both, on the pwc side i feel an nrps salary should be looked into once a year in compliant cases, some cases go 5-10+ years without being re-assessed, and when they eventually fall into my hands, the nrp who was earning 14k a year now earns 60.

i am genuinely intrested in what clients would change if they could.

On the 2012 scheme all cases are reassessed every year.

medsec_222

Hi caseworker - I am sure there are numerous things that parents will consider unfair regarding the CSA. I can only speak from my son's case as it is the only case I have accurate knowledge off. He is a hands on father and has shared the care of his children from within weeks of separation. The first thing which landed him in a financial nightmare was the fact that his ex. led him to believe he was sharing the care of his children, both of them taking care of their children when they were residing with them, and also sharing common expenses, school uniforms etc. During this time, I did the child minding for both of them, at no cost to either of them, until the eldest boy started secondary school. At that point his ex. wife contacted the CSA after three years and reactivated her case, which she had not pursued for three years. That is how my son came to be in arrears, even though he had a shared residence order. The CSA called my son an absent parent when they contacted him.

So my point is - if the parent with care has not pursued her case with the CSA for a number of years and then decides she wishes the CSA to act for her, it should be from that point and not backdated if the PWC has not been in contact with the CSA at any stage during that time.

Secondly, sometimes the occasional day's overtime here and there could do a lot to make life a bit easier for lone fathers with shared care, especially when the bills start to pile up and the children need new clothes. Any father with the care of children has the right to earn enough to cover his bills without his ex. wanting more, especially if the father is low paid.

Thirdly, annual income could be taken into consideration. My son's ex. has a very well paid full time professional career. Her partner also works full time, so at least can share the cost of the bills, she gets child benefit, working tax family credit and child tax credits. My son on the other hand, has a much lower paid job, still takes care of his children and has to do it on three quarters of his weekly wage. Overtime would help him out now and then, but it is too stressful to contemplate more arrears.

Sorry this is from a personal perspective, but this is how it works in practice, for one family.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

medsec_222 wrote: »

So my point is - if the parent with care has not pursued her case with the CSA for a number of years and then decides she wishes the CSA to act for her, it should be from that point and not backdated if the PWC has not been in contact with the CSA at any stage during that time.
.

On pre-2012 cases it *would* go from the date the PWC got back in touch with the CSA. If the case has been set to maintenance direct, with the Nrp paying the PWC directly, then the CSA only have financial jurisdiction from the point where the PWC contacts them to change the service type back. They can't take into account any under- or over-payments from the period in between.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

It will be slightly different on the 2012 scheme when either party can request Direct Pay, where if the arrangement breaks down there is less risk involved as CSA can then collect any missed payments too.

medsec_222

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

On pre-2012 cases it *would* go from the date the PWC got back in touch with the CSA. If the case has been set to maintenance direct, with the Nrp paying the PWC directly, then the CSA only have financial jurisdiction from the point where the PWC contacts them to change the service type back. They can't take into account any under- or over-payments from the period in between.

What happened in my son's case was that the CSA contacted him in May 2009 - at that point my son was already sharing the care of his children and they were with him overnight for over 50% of the time. He informed the CSA of this and he never heard another word from them untl August 2011 when they wrote to him and asked him if things were the same. I think that is when his ex. made contact with the CSA once more. He informed them at that point that there was a court ordered shared residence order in place (not 50%) and that he belived he was sharing care amicably with his ex. He heard nothing more until February 2012 when he was informed that he was an absent father and there were arrears of over £7000. They asked for proof of the court order, which my son gave them, and they reduced the bill to just under £6000. I am not sure how this would affect my son in the light of your comments. I don't think there is anything to be done now other than for him to pay off the arrears. He has been told by NACSA that the date the claim was first registered is the date they use to collect the arrears.

Cally_Smart

Medsec 222.They treated my husband exactly the same : ( totally unfair.Found over £8000 arrears (got £1400 off through the tribunal)when we paid her direct the whole time What can we do -there seems nobody can help- we have had to pay it all again.We're going to keep all the paperwork -I'm sure this will be deemed as illegal in the future.A lot of nrp's have found they haven't been given a fair hearing.The CSA can back date when it suits them but wont when it doesn't !It's a win/win for the pwc!

CSAworkerx

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

On the 2012 scheme all cases are reassessed every year.

Wow, i didnt know this, We dont hear much about the 2012 scheme, but im glad they have changed this, as the 1993/2003 scheme failed in this aspect, thanks for the info

CSAworkerx

medsec_222 wrote: »

Hi caseworker - I am sure there are numerous things that parents will consider unfair regarding the CSA. I can only speak from my son's case as it is the only case I have accurate knowledge off. He is a hands on father and has shared the care of his children from within weeks of separation. The first thing which landed him in a financial nightmare was the fact that his ex. led him to believe he was sharing the care of his children, both of them taking care of their children when they were residing with them, and also sharing common expenses, school uniforms etc. During this time, I did the child minding for both of them, at no cost to either of them, until the eldest boy started secondary school. At that point his ex. wife contacted the CSA after three years and reactivated her case, which she had not pursued for three years. That is how my son came to be in arrears, even though he had a shared residence order. The CSA called my son an absent parent when they contacted him.

So my point is - if the parent with care has not pursued her case with the CSA for a number of years and then decides she wishes the CSA to act for her, it should be from that point and not backdated if the PWC has not been in contact with the CSA at any stage during that time.

Secondly, sometimes the occasional day's overtime here and there could do a lot to make life a bit easier for lone fathers with shared care, especially when the bills start to pile up and the children need new clothes. Any father with the care of children has the right to earn enough to cover his bills without his ex. wanting more, especially if the father is low paid.

Thirdly, annual income could be taken into consideration. My son's ex. has a very well paid full time professional career. Her partner also works full time, so at least can share the cost of the bills, she gets child benefit, working tax family credit and child tax credits. My son on the other hand, has a much lower paid job, still takes care of his children and has to do it on three quarters of his weekly wage. Overtime would help him out now and then, but it is too stressful to contemplate more arrears.

Sorry this is from a personal perspective, but this is how it works in practice, for one family.

Dont be sorry for speaking from a personal perspective, The case is important for you, and i fully appreciate that.

So, What i gather is the case remained open for those 3 years, and was maintenance direct. Thats the only way the case could remain open that time without constant letters to your son, If this was the case, Was he paying voluntary to the PWC? If he was, how was he paying?

If he couldnt prove he was paying, then unfortunatly with the system as it is, he will be forced to pay arrears for those 3 years, whitch is ridiculous.

Now let me help you in reguards to overtime, This is what you do. Firstly if your son gets paid weekly tell him to stop doing overtime for 5 weeks, if monthly, tell him not to do any overtime that month, Now 3 days before hes due to get paid, Get him to phone us and inform us he wants a re-assessment based on the fact hes now not doing overtime, and will have 5 weekly/a monthly payslip to support this, the caseworker will ask him to provide evidence, As soon as he gets the payslip ring in again, Earnings can be taken verbally over the time, but they may ask to see the actual slip/slips, Not a problem, send them to us. After 2-3 days phone us on DAILY, basis, until you get conformation your son has been re-assessed with no overtime.

Now, he can do overtime as much as he likes for the next month, The only way he will be re-assessed again for overtime is if the PWC provides evidence that he has done so, and that is not an easy thing to do, This will lower his assessment.

Also, if it is the case he has been charged for 3 years arrears, I hope you mentioned your son had nearly equal shared care, this will drastically lower his arrears bill, Let me know.

jarhead66

Hello just another question, how long have the CSA being asking the P.W.C. to provide proof that the N.R.P. is working more overtime, which as you stated is a very hard thing to do, All that I ask for is that about 10 year ago my Ex was asking for a reassessment every 3-4 weeks and i was told by the CSA at the time that she could do it as often as she likes, I do know that when i have had dealing with the CSA they have asked me if my wages have increased which they have not as i am public sector and had a pay freeze for the last three years.

Thanks