Shared care and the CSA

The_Daddy_2

Hi all,

I am divorced and share the care of my daughter.

I have always paid half the csots of everything, including private school.

This was fine for a few years, but my ex has suddenly gone to CSA (I believe changes in her life have made her look for additional income).

I was amazed to find out that I am expected to pay her 9% of my net income, despite the fact that we share the care (and therefore the costs) of our child.

She earns more than me, but the way the legislation works means that I have to pay her money, as well as her receiving the Child Benefit.

In summary for shared care and costs - she gets helped out with about 325GBP pcm, whilst I get a negative of approx 250GBP pcm.

I think that this is a real shame, as one of the 'good dads' trying to do my bit to give my child a balanced upbringing I get punished financially for no greater reason than I am the Dad and she is the Mum.

I feel that this legislation is probably stopping some Dads getting involved in their Childs upbringing, and was wondering if anyone was aware of any attempts to get this obviously incorrect legislation adjusted?

An obvious adjustment would be to take both parents income into account, and apply the formula both ways and then apply the difference.

An even easier alternative would be to adjust the formula so that shared care equals zero %, at the moment the formula starts at 15% for one child and gets reduced by 1/7 for each day the Dad has the child, so at shared care (3.5 days) it only gets reduced by half - 3.5/7 - when it should logically equal zero.



I am amazed that we have such unfairness in practice in a government run department.

rach28

hi i would try and claim maintance for the 3.5 days you have your child and see what they say

hobo28

The thing is, there is no totally fair way which will suit everyone. I bet if your ex was here, she'd be citing the extra "costs" which she incurs and you don't. For those where the resident parent earns less, they would also probably see the current formula as fair. You don't because the situation doesn't suit you. Fair depends on your perspective really.

You could also easily argue that its unfair that in shared care cases that the person with CB gets to claim tax credits whilst the other gets nothing.

I would suggest the following. Your ex goes to CSA to get more cash. Yes, you now have the revised figure. However, your liabilities technically stop there. So the school fees, school trips etc you currently pay for. That can stop. Your ex cannot have her cake and eat it.

rach28 wrote:

hi i would try and claim maintance for the 3.5 days you have your child and see what they say

Doesn't work like that. CSA aren't interested.

LameDuck

CSA sucks - I am a single dad with 3 kids (16,13,11), I have joint responsibility, but they reside with me - the oldest 2 haven't had anything to do with their mum for 5 & 3 years - I pay for their upbringing, they are all talented at various sports so it costs a fortune. The CSA awarded me £21.36 per month in total for all 3. I suppose I should have known what the outcome was going to be I am only a father after all!!!!

hobo28

LameDuck wrote: »

CSA sucks - I am a single dad with 3 kids (16,13,11), I have joint responsibility, but they reside with me - the oldest 2 haven't had anything to do with their mum for 5 & 3 years - I pay for their upbringing, they are all talented at various sports so it costs a fortune. The CSA awarded me £21.36 per month in total for all 3. I suppose I should have known what the outcome was going to be I am only a father after all!!!!

No mate, don't take it personally. The CSA don't discriminate. They're equally useless for all sexes.

The_Daddy_2

hobo28 wrote: »

The thing is, there is no totally fair way which will suit everyone.

That's the annoying thing, the Australian system seems to cope with this quite well.

They apply a % calc like us, but they do this on the Mum and the Dad and apply the difference.

Take these examples

Shared care, Mum and Dad earn 50k each
UK system - mum gets £260 approx pcm from Dad and £75 pcm approx child benefit. Dad gets minus £260
AUS system - they work out 12% of gross income minus 12% of Mums net income, and that is the benefit that should be paid to the Mum = zero

Another one, Mum and Dad, Mum earns 200k, Dad earns 50k
UK system - mum gets £260 approx pcm from Dad and £75 pcm approx child benefit. Dad gets minus £260
AUS system - they work out 12% of gross income minus 12% of Mums net income, and that is the benefit that should be paid to the Mum = minus £780 pcm (she pays the Dad)

Using that compartive formula works the same as today for stay away Dads or Mums on low incomes, it just corrects payments when shared care is applied when the Mums don't need the extra money - summary - it is fairer.

hobo28

It does sound fairer in those situations but I'm sure there'll be lots of aussies who can probably give us examples of where its not. That said, the Aus model is supposed to be one of the best in the world. A model for the rest of us to aspire to.

The_Daddy_2

Agree completely - that being the case I am amazed that this situation doesn't get more coverage - is anyone aware of any one trying to raise the profile of this ridiculous situation?

It seems amazing to me in todays society that a system is in place that discourages Dads from taking responsibility for their kids. Thing of all of the knock on effects...

Rikki

Could the extra money you now have to find and pay through the CSA be her contribution to the school fees.
You can't be expected to pay her more and continue with other expenses too.

enemes

Hi The_Daddy

There is no common sense in that world of the CSA. I can't quite get my head around why if the care is shared and she earns more than you, you are paying the difference.

You say her circumstances have changed ... maybe she is no longer earning more than you. Perhaps the CSA have taken it upon themselves to award her back payments, who knows!

I've always asserted in this forum, that it is best to go down the CSA route from the start. I don't know how many times I have heard people mention that their "amicable agreement" comes back to hit them where it hurts (I'm a man too!)

Good Luck, and it will be interesting to find out how they really came to that 9% figure.

The_Daddy_2

enemes wrote: »

Hi The_Daddy

There is no common sense in that world of the CSA. I can't quite get my head around why if the care is shared and she earns more than you, you are paying the difference.

You say her circumstances have changed ... maybe she is no longer earning more than you. Perhaps the CSA have taken it upon themselves to award her back payments, who knows!

I've always asserted in this forum, that it is best to go down the CSA route from the start. I don't know how many times I have heard people mention that their "amicable agreement" comes back to hit them where it hurts (I'm a man too!)

Good Luck, and it will be interesting to find out how they really came to that 9% figure.

Thanks for your response.

She still earns more than me, the only variance between us is she receives the Child Benefit - in the CSA eyes that makes her the Parent With Care (PWC) - they have no concept (or does the system / calculations) of shared care, or two PWCs.

Therefore if she is the PWC I am the NRP (Non Resident Parent) that means I have to pay her money, even though I already pay for my child 50%, I still have to pay again, and get no Child Support.

Completely illogical, and completely unfair, but true.

The system is broken, unfortunately it seems that it is only broken for minority cases where the Dad is doing 45-50% of the care, so we are such a small minority that we get ignored.

I suspect that the government are well aware of all of this, but considering how much they wasted on the CSA computer system they are probably avoiding recoding it unless they have to.

Its a shame, as changing the system to encourage shared parenting could have a long lasting positive impact on our society as a whole.