If you could change one thing.

Cally_Smart

Definitely Marisco,after 18 months of being compliant & paying just what we are asked to by the CSA,pwc making up arrears when we paid her direct ,after a year of paying because pwc claims Ch/ben & qc's haven't even BEEN to college we've had enough! We've cancelled the dd for this month...lets see what hits the fan now!!

kaz62

And most of the initial expenses had to be met while I was waiting for his Child tax credits to start up again. So its not much fun for parents on a budget lifestyle having kids in college. I'm finding it quite stressful.[/QUOTE]

Hi, I'm still working out how to reply so sorry if this is not correct. I fully appreciate you're situation, I was a single mum of three for most of my childrens teenage years. No maintenance as ex was self employed and caused far more stress than anything CSA would have been able to recover. Its really hard to manage and I appreciate the stress it causes you. Our PWC is very different, although I appreciate as teenagers, my partners children need to appreciate work is an important factor in life, we are disgusted with the time they work when should be studying to buy themselves basics when she goes off for weekends and has a new car on regular basis. My partner works for the government so his payments go direct from wage before he gets it. That is a huge issue we feel as he is an easy target to get money from when he always paid anyway and would always do so. The ones who are self employed or say they are not working are the ones I feel CSA should have more power over as they frequently pay nothing and although the arrears buils up, as you say it is not there when you need it.
For us in Wales, I'm almost sure EMA is available for students 16-18 provided PWC is earning below a certain amount or 19year olds if they haven't already had 2years EMA.
thanks
Karen

Csa_Survivor

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.
.

An automatic link from Child Benefit office to the CSA informing them when Child Benefit is no longer paid, please don't tell me in this day and age it cant be done. Sorry, its just not good enough to suggest ringing in every now an again to ask CSA to do a Child Benefit check, that is nonsense. For example, assuming you tell yourself you will check every 2 months and lets say you ring in on Jan 1 and CSA say that yes you have to carry on paying because Child Benefit is still being paid to PWC.
The next time you ring in this example would be March 1, and we all know what happens then if CSA inform you that Child Benefit actually ended on Jan 2, you end up chasing up constantly for your refund of 2 months money which you should not have to be doing, no excuses, no one should have to do that, end of!
The only way to minimise the chances of having to chase a refund, wasting CSA time, my time and more to the point, aggravating a PWC because they are asked to pay it back, would be to ring in every single week.
Is that what CSA really want, their switchboards jammed with people ringing in every single week asking for Child Benefit checks, I don't think so!
It is more than obvious that government is quite happy for the NRP to pay as long as long as possible past their liability date so they can pull in as much money as possible, then they give CSA a range of excuses to delay paying it back, if at all, hoping that people who are owed money will go away and not keep asking for it back.

PreludeForTimeFeelers

The 2012 scheme has an interface direct to child benefit.

Csa_Survivor

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

The 2012 scheme has an interface direct to child benefit.

Thanks for that reply PreludeForTimeFeelers, reassuring for new cases I suppose but absolutely none for the likes of me that have been ripped off for years on CSA1, paying a hell of a lot more than those on the scheme from 2003. Its bad enough earning exactly the same as the person next to you yet paying a lot more in child support, without the absolute nonsense that you are effectively expected to chase up your own end date for paying, absolute immoral scandal!

Cally_Smart

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

The 2012 scheme has an interface direct to child benefit.

about time too...this is happening to too many nrp's.We went on paying all last year being compliant hoping that to keep on telling them was the best policy while they investigated....No,they will only accept the last day of this August, the end of THIS academic year !! Who said honesty is the best policy?

Brewstersmum

so what happens if the PWC and the NRP share care of the children? I have mine 3 nights one week and 4 nights the next. I gave my ex the CB claim when we split so he could claim HB and TC as he wasn't working and I was. I didn't realise at that time I actually made him PWC.......and I do regret it

PreludeForTimeFeelers

An interface with child benefit won't really make a difference if a PWC is claiming when they shouldn't, though.
Re:chasing your own end-date, it's surely the same as the CSA not being able to backdate an assessment where the Nrp has had a payrise and not told them? Both types of clients have to be proactive. The difference is that they'll revise the case closure in line with the child benefit ending, they can't do that with payrises...does this mean they're biased against PWCs?

Csa_Survivor

PreludeForTimeFeelers wrote: »

The difference is that they'll revise the case closure in line with the child benefit ending

So are you now admitting I should be reimbursed by the CSA for the fact I have overpaid by 2 years because the PWC was NOT getting Child Benefit between Sept 2011 and Sept 2013, but I assume was still receiving my money. If not, then revising the case closure in line with Child Benefit ending means absolutely nothing to me or everyone else chasing up refunds when they just shouldn't have to. Please don't say that it is down to the PWC to be contacted to pay it back in the first instance because that is just a massive cop out as far as we are all concerned. The CSA is not in its infancy anymore, its been ruining peoples lives and making ex's already rocky relationships even worse for 20 years now, there is absolutely no excuse for not having the basics in place, especially when a case should end for goodness sake, absolutely none at all, if it wasn't so damaging it would be laughable!
I chose to have no communication with my ex anymore a long time ago, luckily I still have contact with my child, the point I am making is things have settled down, what do you think is going to be the reaction when she is asked to pay back 2 years money (IF SHE IS !). Personally I don't even think she has done it on purpose and probably just thought she was still entitled! Once again, as I say, the CSA has been going 20 years, the safeguards should be in place somewhere to make sure this is not allowed to happen!
I know where you are coming from with your comments about not backdating CSA payments if NRP's have had pay rises, that can be deemed as not fair either, but all this is confirming with everyone is that PWC'S are treated just as badly as NRP'S.
I have been reading a lot of these forums for a long while now and you get the impression from many answers here and there, that anyone with any connection to the CSA really struggle to justify a lot of the CSA actions! Its as if they have to be loyal to their employer, which makes sense, but deep down agree with a lot of the contributors on here and try to justify certain issues by saying words to the effect of "Don't feel like we are just treating you badly, I think you will find everyone is treated just as badly!"

PreludeForTimeFeelers

If you've had a letter stating your liability to pay ended in Sept 2011 then yes, you should be refunded any payments since then - I've not said anything to the contrary.