child support payments

tinker58

Hi my stepdaughter is 16 and leaves school this year he has been told that he will have to pay csa until she is twenty, whether she goes onto further education or not, surely this is not right

RAS

Who has told him this?

antrobus

tinker58 wrote: »

Hi my stepdaughter is 16 and leaves school this year he has been told that he will have to pay csa until she is twenty, whether she goes onto further education or not, surely this is not right

A CSA assessment does not normally show a cessation date as it should be reviewed at regular intervals by the CSA, usually every two years. Payments will normally end when a child reaches age 16, unless they must continue

• to age 19 to allow the child to complete full time education (but not advanced education for a degree or similar qualification) or
• to age 18 if the child is registered for work or youth training but has not yet started youth training or found work which will last for more than 12 weeks after he/she reaches age 16.

If the child receives Income Support in his own right he ceases to be a 'child' for the purposes of the CSA.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/remanual/re1198.htm

pleasedelete

tinker58 wrote: »

Hi my stepdaughter is 16 and leaves school this year he has been told that he will have to pay csa until she is twenty, whether she goes onto further education or not, surely this is not right

A child is for life- the school leaving age is no longer 16 in reality as 16 year olds must be in employment, training or education. If they are in full time employment then they are not a dependant- if they are not then they remain dependant.

Being a parent and the accompanying responsibility is a long term commitment. Who else should support this child if their father won't? The state? The mother alone? Why isn't it right?

Many parents want to support their children even if they have started work and indeed many do through subsidising living costs.

13Kent

But some nrp's would like the choice to support the child directly rather than via the pwc, especially when that 'child' gets to the age of 18 which is the legal age of an adult.

rozmister

13Kent wrote: »

But some nrp's would like the choice to support the child directly rather than via the pwc, especially when that 'child' gets to the age of 18 which is the legal age of an adult.

If the child still lives with their parent then the bills don't change or reduce when they get older. They're still using electric/gas/water/food/etc so it's only fair the parent the child mainly resides with receives some contribution towards their household's budget.

13Kent

Agreed, but there are some unscrupulous PWC's around who are successfully exploiting the system to extract every penny they can from the NRP.

In our case the PWC actively enouraged the dependent child not to get a job, applied for an extention to Child Benefit, and the child left school and did nothing for the best part of a year, and the PWC continued to get her regular CSA payments. The child was not allowed to enrol on a desired college course as that particular course would have been counted as advanced education and the PWC would no longer have got her CSA payments. Eventually the child signed up with connexions and after a few months was offered a placement and recieved a wage, but because that type of apprenticeship was considered to be non- advanced education (a day in college a week) CSA was still payable - a winning situation for the PWC - not sure it was the best option for the child, who was not encouaged to develop a 'work ethic' and once working and although earning a wage that was pocket money and the child not expected to contribute to the household bills as Dad was still paying.

We would have happily supported the child directly if the child had been allowed to do the desired college course, and the child could have contributed part of that money towards the househould bills, but the PWC wanted control of the money.

(Also once earning a wage the child then moved out of the PWC's home, but as far as the CSA were concerned we couldn't prove this and the PWC continued to get CB and CSA payments for a child that was no longer living with her.)

Hopefully that explains our desire to support the child directly and not via the PWC.

DUTR

rozmister wrote: »

If the child still lives with their parent then the bills don't change or reduce when they get older. They're still using electric/gas/water/food/etc so it's only fair the parent the child mainly resides with receives some contribution towards their household's budget.

Yes perhaps so, but realistically one day it will stop and then what?
If the child is working and still resides with the pwc, then they should be encouraged to contribute themselves, even then though they will wish to leave the nest so even that source of income will cease.

jacklink

rozmister wrote: »

If the child still lives with their parent then the bills don't change or reduce when they get older. They're still using electric/gas/water/food/etc so it's only fair the parent the child mainly resides with receives some contribution towards their household's budget.

yes and this is why they need to get a job, to provide toward the household. they are no longer children