Can you be a nrp yet live with kids?

cooperbob

In the whole system of things does the CSA regard the pwc's ex spouse as the nrp automatically?

N71

I don't really understand the question, but........

The CSA will send forms to the NRP who the PWC names on the application for child maintenance.

If the NRP beleives they're not the NRP, they will tell the CSA.

The CSA will then make a decision. If there is doubt, DNA can be offered. If tests prove positive, the NRP will have to pay for the tests. If not, they won't, and that should be the end of it. They'll go back to the PWC for futher info on who else the NRP may be.

If the NRP & PWC were married at the time of conception, or the NRP is named on the birth certificate, a presumption of parentage can be made.

cooperbob

There is no doubt as to who the parents of the children are.
The parents are divorced.
The parents are both living in the same house looking after the same children.
both are PWC ?

N71

If both are at the same address, with the children, then neither is non-resident (NRP)!

I've seen one recently where one applied as PWC, but as NRP was living in same household, sharing bills & childcare, there was no valid application therefore it was closed.

On the other hand, a while ago I saw one where although they lived at the same address, they'd split the house into two 'flats', with the mum living downstairs with the children, and the dad upstairs!! This was a valid case as they split bills, and the children went upstairs to stay with dad every other weekend. Both parents agreed that this was the case, so it was a quite straightforward case. If only all splits were so amicable!

kelloggs36

Yes that's right - in the case where they live in the same house the CSA won't be involved as there is no NRP.

Lil2002

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Yes that's right - in the case where they live in the same house the CSA won't be involved as there is no NRP.

Sorry, this is incorrect. Cases are looked at individually, and if it can be seen that both parties are living separately (e.g. separate bills, no shared tax credits), the case will go ahead.

Also, if the PWC is on income support, and the Benefit agency are confident that they are no longer living together as a couple, the case will be passed to the CSA.

Sensemaya

...and who is in receipt of the child benefit?

As for the comment of presumed parentage, the CSA messed up with me big style there. Because of pathetic comments made by my NRP ( 2nd one ) and where P/P should have applied, sometimes they don't do P/P.

I was supposed to be having a man round when he was at work. My eldest child supposedly told the NRP this. Weird, because my eldest would have been at school and wouldn't have known anyway.

The NRP also cited my brother ( to cause family ruptions , no doubt, which did not succeed btw) and having said the same.

When my bro wrote a letter to the CSA sticking up for me and denying the fact he ever said this !!!! and bull story, obviously dreamed up by said NRP, the CSA wrote back and replied he would have to write in if he wanted to act as my representative?

Oh...and this story was substantiated by the NRP's family too! Talk about a bunch of voyeurs.

I still haven't sussed that one out yet. But the PO decided I should receive compo and an advance payment.

kelloggs36

Lil2002 wrote: »

Sorry, this is incorrect. Cases are looked at individually, and if it can be seen that both parties are living separately (e.g. separate bills, no shared tax credits), the case will go ahead.

Also, if the PWC is on income support, and the Benefit agency are confident that they are no longer living together as a couple, the case will be passed to the CSA.

Well last year there was a case in my office where the PWC was claiming income support but the CSA could not do an assessment because the other parent still lived in the same house - that was the rule.

horza

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Well last year there was a case in my office where the PWC was claiming income support but the CSA could not do an assessment because the other parent still lived in the same house - that was the rule.

If the PWC was claiming Income Support then she would have been classed as a single parent irrespective if the NRP living in the property. I have seen a significant number of cases whereby the NRP and PWC share the house equally apart from sleeping in seperate rooms. The BA decide they are not LTAHW and the CSA is therefore obliged to pursue the NRP for maintenance. Shared care decisions on these cases are even harder than normal. I also have seen cases where the decision has been made to close the case. But in reality if you actually look at Online Business Procedures this cannot be justified. Sometimes the caseworker just closes the case and especially now MAGU has been disbanded there is less cause to be concerned about checking.

H

kelloggs36

Well, in all cases I have seen the decision has been that there is no non resident parent if they are in fact resident and it is on that basis that the decision has been made.

TheWaltons_3

All Benefits Agencies are finding that there are many people who have split up, yet continue living in the same household... albeit against their wishes.. but for the sake of the children, finding it difficult for someone to find property and afford rent/CSA or Mortgages etc

Personally, if I were living either with my husband or without him.. and we had split up.. I wouldn't pursue Maintenance at all, providing we shared care completely and went halves on all necessary stuff for children.

I work, however, but I know this wouldn't be the case if I were on benefits.