CSA assesments? is this right? or fair?

kelloggs36

real1314 wrote: »

So you're saying that the way he should look at it is that (financially) the kids are not his responsibility beyond the maintenance? He should think, well if they haven't got it, it's not my problem? Why should I care?

Like that's going to happen.

Still it's good that he gives money so she can provide them with holidays (er, can they go on their own?), treats (who'll take them bowling or to F&Bs?), new clothes (aw, thanks for the new top) etc. He can provide them with....

ok, so material stuff isn't everything but if the system says that NRPs should use maintenance as absolving them of responsibility, well, the state of the nation shows that it's been a great success.

But, more importantly, if we agree that a high earning NRP should provide more, especially when the PWC has a lower income....I wouldn't agree with that - it should be as it is, a flat % regardless of who earns what


Then why shouldn't a higher earning PWC provide more when the NRP has lower earnings? the other person's income isn't to top up the other's shortfalls in lifestyles, it is maintenance for a child. The fairest way is to establish the income of the NRP and set a flat % - so if they earn little they pay little but if they earn more they pay more. For the PWC who has the child for the majority of the time they already pay their portion.

The kids shoudl really have an even level of provision across the full week, they should not be in a position where a NRP can provide a higher lifestyle, nor vice-versa. Why not let either party move on and better themselves where the opportunity arises? Children would benefit if they lived with them or not by way of either living with them and enjoying the higher lifestyle or by the higher maintenance through the flat rate % linked to the earnings.

Oh, and that stuff about "just get a better job". Yes, well that's pretty facile too. He's applying for Chief Exec of BP tomorrow.

It can't be a simple solution which is why we have the situation we have now somebody will feel aggrieved regardless of whatever system is in place.

dorks

I've been reading this thread with much interest. Perhaps somebody can confirm, but I assume the whole point of a CSA thread on a site entitled "Money Saving Expert" is to help out whomever asks a question from a money saving perspective.

Therefore, if a woman comes on and says something like, "my git of a husband walked out - how can I start off the CSA machine", then people - presumably mostly women - can help her out with her money situation and hacked off men with chips on their shoulders over their CSA situation should keep quiet.

Likewise, if there is a question like the original post on here, then people - presumably mostly men - can help them out with their money situation and hacked off women with chips on their shoulders should really keep quiet.

I'm sure there are plenty of places elsewhere on the Net where people can vent their spleens and give their opinions about the CSA. Wouldnt it make more sense to keep this to a board where we answer the question posted?

....and before one of the smartarses notices and points it out, yes I also got drawn into the silly attacks earlier on this board which is half the reason I'm saying this. None of it really helps the poor original poster.

==========

real1314 - not sure if you know, but I PM'd you any advice I could offer as I couldnt be bothered with the backlash from the anti-men people on this board. Apologies if any of it is not relevant in this case.

kelloggs36

There is nothing wrong with healthy debate too! In some cases money saving in terms of child support COULD be interpreted as 'how can I avoid' which is morally wrong. People on here post their experiences which could indeed help the original posters as it gives ideas on what to do within the law of course, to help ease their situation.

It would be boring board if debate and discussion were banned.

daisy_doughnut_2

Likewise, if there is a question like the original post on here, then people - presumably mostly men - can help them out with their money situation and hacked off women with chips on their shoulders should really keep quiet.

but most of the woman that answer are on both sides as in some recieve CSA or are fighting for it and they also have partners that pay as a NRP
and as kellogs pointed out it could be seen as a "how to avoid" thread plus how do you know which of us are men or woman most dont give that away

poppyscorner

Hi to all posters in this thread,

I have read this thread with great interest and have held off posting my view until now.

Real I think that you need to take a deep breath and calm down I havent read one thing that I disagree with I am a step mother and wife to a husband who has an ex wife and a daughter he left the marital home and signed it and all its contents over to his ex wife because he wanted his daughter to have a secure home he paid his wife £300 per month to cover mortgage and maintainance for 12 months from a monthly income of £700 he never liked it but without the money the alternative for his ex wife was for her and their daughter to be homeless she walked away with the lot he doesnt resent it at all she sold the house and moved to renting and he was free of the mortgage but he still has a responsibility to his daughter and he has continued with the maintainance they live not too far from us her mum has a new partner and a new daughter with him my husband gets on amicably with her and her new partner we have two children together the CSA if they got involved would award her £10 pw she doesn't get that.
I have two kids myself and know for a fact that it costs more than £10 pw to raise them he is self employed and for some reason lots of men think this is a great way to get out of paying maintainance but not him he gives his ex regular money and when we go through 'dry spells' where he has not much work on and has very little money I would give him my own money to hand over rather than see them without of course she wouldn't go without because her mother would never let that happen.
He has never tried to shirk his responsibilities and he or I couldn't tell you how much his ex wife has going into her house it is none of our business and we aren't interested.
My husband sees his daughter on a weekend and he also picks her up from school through the week some nights. As she lives so close to us she has started to drop in for periods of time and she regularly comes for her tea ex wifes maintainance has never been affected by whether she stays here or not.

One thing with the CSA that is wrong is that it assumes the NRP doesn't pay for anything extra like clothing xmas birthdays etc.
We enjoy taking my stepdaughter out and in fact took her last night for uniform to M & S and went out for dinner she is treat no differently to my natural children and we celebrate her birthday and xmas here too she always has 2 birthday parties something she loves and she says she is special she would never have this under CSA system.

Our voluntary arrangement is working just fine for our families I am not saying it is all easy harsh words have been spoken in the past and ex wife has said some really unforgivable things to me and my hubby but I won't hold a grudge I never rose to it she can please herself what she does and how she spends her money but she will never be able to say that my hubby had no contribution to their daughter everyone is winning at the moment.

From what I have read the women on here who have had to go through CSA to get some financial support from their exes need a medal all that hassle and worry about money and they still allow their exes to have their time with their children that takes a really big person and they would have my support.
I hate when all men are portrayed as losers who have kids here there and everywhere and run out with no intention to contribute to their upbringing we all know it happens all too often but not all men are the same just as not all women use their kids as tools in a war with their ex but it does happen too.
The CSA would never be able to tell one from the other and we cannot expect them too that is why they have their assesment process as it is deemed to be fair.

For what it is worth that is my opinion I can see both sides and come down somewhere in the middle as for your friend he needs to stop dwelling on who has got what he cannot change that what he can change is the way his kids feel about it all that is far more valuable than any amount of money sorry if it sounds harsh it isnt meant to be its just that he has been assessed at that amount he needs to pay it he can't do a thing about it.

Poppy x