First Tier Tribunal anyone?

Ettenna

I have put in an appeal to the first tier tribunal. Basically the ex didn't do company accounts for 4 years and could not submit them to the CSA when I put in my claim in May 2012. I told them he was a company director and took dividends at that time. In November 2013 when he finally submitted them in just before we went to court for the divorce finances we were both told that his liability was c£9500. They then re-assessed him from that date and his liability went down to £2500. When the assessment letter came through I immediately appealed it. The appeal letters have come through today. Reading what the response maker says, it appears that the decision maker had made a mistake in not backdating the liability back to May 2012.

I think my question is, has anyone been to a first tier tribunal? What should I expect?

Ettenna

Nobody know

LittleJohn

You may find these people have the answers you need:

http://www.nacsa.co.uk/

jacklink

great to maintain child parent relationships, good luck

Ettenna

I've got the tribunal in October. It's booked for 1530 so I am hoping it will be over and done with quickly!

Ettenna

Tribunal in less than an hour!! I'll let you know what happens.

quidsy

good luck today

shoe*diva79

How did it go?

24skins

Hope you got the result you wanted.

Ettenna

It went fantastically well! We were only in there half an hour. The judge was great. He had looked at the paperwork (obviously) and had seen that the CSA basically said that a mistake had been made in the calculations because the relevant dates were wrong. It started with the lady from the CSA saying her piece (nothing new apart from a changing the date the dividends should have been taken from May 2012 not November 2013 when he finally put his accounts in. And changing the date that my eldest was no longer a qualifying child from December to November.) Then to me, who just said that I had been shocked when told that his dividends weren't being taken into accout until November 2013 and therefore his debts had decreased from 9.5k to 2.5k in a flash. And that this was the amount that we had both been told and that figure that we took to our ancillary relief hearing.

Then it was his turn and he said he didn't see why dividends should be taken into account prior to him submitting accounts and he tried to say that his children were suffering because of this. I managed to keep my mouth zipped because he has still got the same amount of money despite paying me every month. As a part of the financial settlement he remortgaged the marital home. This mean that his payments reduced by £400/month and that is the amount that he is currently paying me (child maintenance and debt repayment). I refrained from saying that a) maybe he shouldn't be thinking of spending thousands of pounds of a holiday next year and b) maybe he should think about stopping breeding more children!!

Overall the outcome was successful and I am now just waiting for this to come through in writing and for the CSA to recalculate. It may end up that a charge is put on his house or the money is taken straight from his bank account. The worse case scenario is that he is made bankrupt by the Inland Revenue (for something else) but I cannot see that in the immediate future.

Ettenna

Had to request an administrative correction due to them getting a date wrong! Was written as 3/1 instead of 3/11 as the elder child ceasing being a qualifying child - I hadn't even started a claim in the January. I was called by someone from the CSA who said they could only recalculate based on the actual information on the tribunal order. Fair enough so I wrote them a letter to get it changed.

Got a letter today, which has no elder child on (because of the error) and also the amount due per week has been halved because they have c**ked up by saying the youngest stays with ex-h 50% of the time whereas it should have been the elder one!! Aaaggghhhh. Got to call them tomorrow to get it sorted out. Nowhere on the order does it actually say that either of them stays with him 50% but it does on the original calculations. And also none of the dates tally up with the dates on the tribunal order!