If you could change one thing.

CSAworkerx

kaz62 wrote: »

Hi Jarhead 66 and the very helpful csaworker. I have just registered as I was scanning your posts here. I have read your post which says the age is now 20 and not 19 for csa to stop?? We are gutted. I have been with my partner 12 years. He pays on the CSA1 (I think you called it) where my wages are taken into consideration. I have worked my way up in Social Services, done a degree in Social Work only to find that means we ended up paying almost double to his ex. It is very difficult as we encourage his children 16 and 18 to do what they want and do their best with college etc but that when they leave we will be nearly £500 better off a month. We assumed we would only pay for one after December as his one child is 19 and at college. The other has just started college. I am in tears as others who were assessed 6 months later than us pay half what we do. Also, ex has left second husband who she has child with but will only accept cash payments for maintenance from him as otherwise apparently they would all go to the 'new rules' for assessment.
Sorry to rant but really thought life would be easier after xmas
Thanks if you take time to read all this.

Sorry to hear that, 20 is now the age a QC will naturally cease to become a child on our systems, its still 16 if not in full time education, i will ask, What is the 19 year old doing to support himself, If he is working more than at college, he wont class as a QC I wont go into to much detail as your on CSA1, somthing i know very little about.

shoe*diva79

medsec_222 wrote: »

Glad you find part of my post amusing shoe*diva.

I have not seen my ex. dil salary slip nor would I expect to see it. She works in a profession where salaries are public information, the benefits I refer to are also freely available for public scrutiny. My grandchildren reside with my son for nearly half a week and he also pays child maintenance to his ex. My son would not expect or want any other man to contribute to the support of his children. You are quick to point out my assumption, but you have made an assumption of your own:

(not that its his job to cover the cost of raising your grandchildren, but if living with your sons ex then he probably does without quibble)

You know this do you? Or are you just guessing?

I don't need to guess, if he does indeed live with your ex DIL, then he will be paying towards the rent/mortgage and other bills which is directly supporting your grandchildren.

You have no idea how much your DIL earns. A average salary may be available on the internet, but for her to be claiming benefits would means a joint claim with her partner, so obviously, you will now tell me you know his salary as well and that yes, they do in fact claim benefits.

With the cut off being £25k following government cuts, your telling me that your DIL has a profession, well paid job paying circa £12.5k per year (maybe less) and her partner also earns less then this to qualify?

It is terrible whats happened to your son, paying direct and then having to pay again, its women that lie like that which give PWC a bad name. But really, you wont know diddly squat about the financial incomings to your ex DIL home.

FBaby

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

On this matter though, why would anyone pay someone else regular amount of money and not keep any evidence of that? Surely it is common practice to do so, especially when you know you could be challenged on this at anytime. In any case, surely it is not that hard to prove. Either you make a transfer (traceable), or write a cheque (traceable), or, if anyone is silly enough to pay cash without a receipt, still one should be able to show evidence that the same amount of money is taken out every month at the same time for the same amount and can prove it is not for car, rent payments etc...

I can't help wonder in these cases how many just gave some different amount of cash there and then rather than regularly and this is why it is a struggle to prove it was for maintenance.

CSAworkerx

FBaby wrote: »

On this matter though, why would anyone pay someone else regular amount of money and not keep any evidence of that? Surely it is common practice to do so, especially when you know you could be challenged on this at anytime. In any case, surely it is not that hard to prove. Either you make a transfer (traceable), or write a cheque (traceable), or, if anyone is silly enough to pay cash without a receipt, still one should be able to show evidence that the same amount of money is taken out every month at the same time for the same amount and can prove it is not for car, rent payments etc...

I can't wonder in these cases how many just gave some different amount of cash there and then rather than regularly and this is why it is a struggle to prove it was for maintenance.

ive mentioned, in that case id have seen regular bank transfers to the pwcs account and assumed it was for CM, but how do you know there not for a loan repayment? Or any other 50+ reasons someoen might give someone else money, the fact is we need pwcs to achnowlage the payment was in leui of CM.

FBaby

CSAworkerx wrote: »

ive mentioned, in that case id have seen regular bank transfers to the pwcs account and assumed it was for CM, but how do you know there not for a loan repayment? Or any other 50+ reasons someoen might give someone else money, the fact is we need pwcs to achnowlage the payment was in leui of CM.

There are not 50+ reasons you would give you ex a monthly regular significant amount of money months on months. It would be either for share of mortgage (and even then, that could be paid directly to lender) in which case, the pwc could prove that it is half of the monthly total mortgage, or for a loan, same thing the pwc could show evidence of a joint loan and what is being paid towards it monthly. If it is a bank transfer, surely it is not hard to write on the description what it is for, ie. loan, mortgage or maintenance?

Cally_Smart

In our case all debts were settled on the house,pwc even received a substantial lump sum after the divorce when the former marital home was sold(this could be proven IF we were GIVEN THE CHANCE by the CSA). There was nothing else that the monthly direct debit could be for.She asked for uniforms,coats,shoes as extras which were provided when requested for all 4 children either in cash direct to her or buying them ourselves when we had the children (every weekend -as it was then)

kaz62

Hi CSAworkerx .sorry, his daughter at college will be 19 at Xmas. She has worked weekends for years as mum does not appear to use the money provided for the children's needs. The children are not demanding of named brands etc. She even told them she could not afford school lunches when in school. Their mum works full time then goes and spends weekend with her current partner (which the children don't mind at all). If we didn't live in such a rural area they would have both moved in with us when old enough to give their opinions.
I haven't worked out how to use 'quote' yet but in answer to keeping children in education not being a method of working the system- Daughter approaching 19 wanted to go to Uni but mum encouraged to go college before Uni telling her she would not cope. Also 16 year old wanted to join RAF but again mum has pushed into college and he already hates it. Those are the reasons we don't feel she takes 'child's best interests' into account. We could have saved fortune in having them with us and we get on well but their social, employment and education choices would have been very limited due to where we live.
My partner nor I have ever minded supporting them, I had 3 of my own at home when we met so a busy yet happy household. The fact they do not appear to benefit from maintenance money which then leaves my partner and I short to do anything with them is frustrating, thankfully they are aware of the situation and we are creative in how we spend quality time with them.

kaz62

I fully agree Cally Smart, also the child gets EMA as long as they do attend which our PWC ensures gets used for some of the child's needs which should be met from maintenance being paid. As you say, if support and encouragement to complete assignments and succeed in the time spent at college with clear goals at the end of it were part of the plan we wouldn't mind.

CSAworkerx

Unfortuneatly i get asked the same question at least 5 times a week, "how do you know what he/she is spending the money on" and again unfortunatly i have to give the same response "we cannot know that, we simply provide it and hope it goes to the welfare of the children"

Whether i agree with that doesnt matter, but it is what it is unfortunatly.

Cally_Smart

We had the children every weekend for years while the pwc could go off with her latest boyfriend.When we outlived our usefulness( yes ,that is what it feels like !) -when the qc's got to be teenagers she left the children in their own home when she wasn't there.Of course they loved the freedom & were always getting into trouble,police,drinking & apparently they didn't want to come anymore because we couldn't afford to do anything with them (there were 4 qc's then & I had child of my own who lived with us!) Don't forget we had a lot bigger food bill at the weekends & I had a lot more work looking after them .Obviously I did it because I wanted to or I could have said every other weekend ,like most people do - share weekend time with the children She never wanted to !.Her view was -I've had them all week now it's your turn ! I think when payment was made for many years ,regular amount ,same day every month & the pwc took it with out a word it was obviously Child Maintenance & we should have been allowed to insist it was looked into! Here we are 10 years after I met my husband -his children alienated from us and their youngest sibling.Our payments to pwc not counted - case should be know coming to a close but left with thousands of 'arrears' for CM we paid her direct ,our health suffering & our evenings full spending time on forums like this trying to help the situation & other people in similar ones. We know we did the right thing but we are being punished financially for it still.