Help and Advice would be much appreciated - CSA and Bailiffs

medsec_222

This is typical how the CSA treat many non-resident parents. Cases like this are never publicised, they prefer to promote non-resident fathers as 'absent fathers' and 'non-compliers. They go for easy targets, fathers who are already supporting their children, have been through the Family Courts to ensure that they have shared care or at least good contact, and who are on PAYE. Fathers who are self-employed who refuse to maintain their children are left alone - after all, there's no money in it for them, and certainly no bonuses to be had. Some women will tell the CSA just about anything in the sure knowledge that proof will not be required. In my own case, we looked after our two grandchildren on an almost daily basis for eleven years, from when they were five months old. We provided everything for the children at our own cost and were happy to do so. My ex. dil told the CSA she had no idea what we were talking about and at we had never looked after our grandchildren.

skibadee

Sounds strange that baliffs have visited.....I thought CSA usually went for DEO first?....(sorry I can't remember if you said your partner was employed or self employed ).....or if not a DEO a court hearing? But if letters were being sent to wrong address maybe that's why baliffs attended??
You need to ask the CSA for all your paperwork (data) I think you have to pay for it now, I'm sure someone will know how much and where to write to for it.
You didn't have to pay when we got ours a few years ago, when it arrived there were hundreds of pages to go through!!

We got great advice and support from here
http://afairercsaforall.myfanforum.org/index.php

iammumtoone

i don't understand how they worked out how much he has to pay. If as you say he is self employed how do they know what he earns. I say this as someone who wanted to take my ex to the CSA but was professionally advised not to as he is self employed, I was told the CSA couldn't touch self employed people, its one way fathers get out of paying CSA they become self employed!

DUTR

iammumtoone wrote: »

i don't understand how they worked out how much he has to pay. If as you say he is self employed how do they know what he earns. I say this as someone who wanted to take my ex to the CSA but was professionally advised not to as he is self employed, I was told the CSA couldn't touch self employed people, its one way fathers get out of paying CSA they become self employed!

Oh come on!, it's none resident parents, I know of at least 2 cases in the real world where the none resident parent is female, and do all they can to not contribute. Apart from that I agree with the rest of the content.
PS some of us contributing NRPs are better off with the contribution via the CSA and not self employed.

iammumtoone

DUTR wrote: »

Oh come on!, it's none resident parents, I know of at least 2 cases in the real world where the none resident parent is female, and do all they can to not contribute. Apart from that I agree with the rest of the content.
PS some of us contributing NRPs are better off with the contribution via the CSA and not self employed.

yes you are quite right, I apologise.

I was thinking of my ex (a father) who pays me a token of what he should and gets away with it as he is self employed (however I do realise I am better off than some, at least he does pay something).

Cally_Smart

What people don't realise is that if the pwc was on income support( prior to April 2010 I think it was)they was an automatic requirement for the nrp to be contacted.It was designed to claim the money back fro the Secretary of State. My husband filled in the maintenance inquiry form and started paying the pwc direct. My husband was having children every weekend,paying for everything he was asked for the 4 children & the pwc was taking the dd's.She obviously should have told them this .She told my husband she had stopped the CSA case we thought the dd were all the proof you would need.How wrong it turned out to be.We've live in the same house during the whole case & heard nothing for many years.What makes us most angry is that they believe her when we consider we are honest trustworthy people who always did the best for the children. Our friends cant believe how badly we've been treated by a Government agency-they even said they had no responsibility if the pwc was claiming CB fraudulently.If CB was being claimed we still had to keep paying.............