Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Looking through latest paperwork, to be added to the 411 pages already received. The CSA have done a credit check on my son through Experian. Cannot see why they need to do this?

[PlanB]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Received the submissions from csa to tribunal. Assets of more than £65000. Variation refused! Lifestyle that is inconsistent with the income he has declared to the child support agency. Variation refused! Diversion of income. The application was refused as there was no evidence of diversion in the decision under appeal!
This woman has changed her "evidence" so many times that it is unbelievable, she has applied under every circumstance for a variation.

Is this a victory for your son? Are you saying the CSA has refused Mum 3's application to vary because they don't accept her evidence?

In which case what is there left for the Tribunal to decide next month?

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

The only thing that I can think of is, did they do the initial assessment in accordance with the regulations? In my opinion, no. They should have used his share of the partnership profits and not hmrc figures. Case law on this.

[PlanB]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Am I right in thinking you son's Tribunal hearing is any day now?

I hope you've got all your ammunition ready

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Still waiting for a date for second hearing, wish they would hurry up so that we can just resolve it!

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

This is dragging on. Still no date for 2nd Tribunal hearing. Accountant charged me £860 for preparing figures. Advised that I cannot claim this as a business expense.

[Sapphire]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

That's the trouble with family law, the only winners are the legal teams who make a fortune.

[PlanB]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Accountant charged me £860 for preparing figures. Advised that I cannot claim this as a business expense.

Here's a radical suggestion. Why not deduct that money from your son's wages since he's the father of these kids? That should make him realize he has responsibilities.

I'm sorry you're having to deal with all this My 29 year old daughter still expects me to fix everything if that's any help.

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Called the Court in Cardiff just before Xmas, still no date for listing. But am still worrying and investigating what the CSA Tribunal can do. CSA have turned down all 3 of the applications for variation by parent no 3. I would still like to argue my case that they should have used the figures initially requested and supplied by my accountant (7 months figures for the "new" partnership). They have used "historical HRMC figures" my argument is that this is a new firm that has been formed.

Do we have an expert accountant on the forum? I need to understand the law on "Technical Dissolution of a Partnership" I have found an item that says "A technical dissolution takes place each time there is a change in the composition of the firm - ie., technically, the partnership is disolved each time one partner leaves (and is replaced by another), or a new partner joins. In such a case there will usually be no break in the business of the partnership with the "new" firm generally taking on the assets and liability of the "old"."

Is this actual accounting law?

[PlanB]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Do we have an expert accountant on the forum? . . . .

. . . . technically, the partnership is disolved each time one partner leaves (and is replaced by another), or a new partner joins. In such a case there will usually be no break in the business of the partnership with the "new" firm generally taking on the assets and liability of the "old"."

Is this actual accounting law?

I can't answer that question but SXGuy may be able to so send him a PM

All I can say is that my ex-husband spent several thousands of pounds on lawyers and accountants in an effort to avoid paying for his child and I can't help thinking that the money would have been better spent on his/our daughter.

Is anything being paid to the mother of your son's child while this legal saga unfolds?

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Paying £182.99 a month to mum number 3 and £200.00 a month to mum number 2. My son cannot afford to carry on at this rate. We really do need the court to make a decision. If the "technical dissolution" is law, CSA have got everything wrong in law, already know that they made a wrong decision by using HMRC figures when he was registered as a self employed partner, but CSA are a nightmare to deal with.

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Letter from HM Court asking if son wants his address disclosed to other parties 14 days to reply, then yesterday a text from mum number 2 saying she is really looking forward to giving evidence against him. Court had already sent her documents. Then letter from CSA saying that a second appeal against calculation of payments has been refused, but, now the csa have not asked mum number 1 to appear as mum number 3 has once again put in an appeal under the new scheme for a variation on the grounds of diversion of income the csa now want to link this new appeal to the existing case bringing in mum number 2. Getting very complicated. They have done calculations under the wrong schedule of the act. Have once again written to them. Obvious from the letters that mum number 3 is getting serious help with all this. We also have 2 women colluding against my son.

[Sapphire]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Ouchy. So lets get this right,

Does your son work for you or is he a director of your company ?

He has three children by three different mothers ?

Except that mother number 3 is only just getting on the maintenance bandwagon ?

Why do each one get a different amount of maintentance ?

You pay the maintenance from the business ?

The three mothers have now ganged up and are now working together to get more maintenance ?

Just a thought or an idea, why not put him technically out of work, so that he has to sign on, then non of them will get paid out. Personally I hate the idea, but sometimes you have to fight nasty.

[Enforcer]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Son is partner in the business. Already had an informal agreement with mum number 2. But she stopped my son from seeing child just before her birthday, could not even see at Christmas. May well alter her payments to what CSA say. Yes I pay maintenance from business account and charge to son's drawings. Mum number one withdrew her claim, child was not actually living with her. 2 mums ganging up in the mistaken belief that they will get more. No intention of him signing on, he is so depressed at present that it is an effort to get him to work, and then I worry about the jobs as he is not concentrating. He needs to be kept busy to try and take his mind off this.
Thank for your input.

[Sapphire]

Re: Child Support Agency 2003 scheme Child Maintenance new scheme for cases after 25th Nov 2013

Ok thats good, just wanted to do a summary to save keep going back and forth through the thread. So listing them in order....

Mum number 1 has withdrawn her claim because the child is living elsewhere then fab, that's no maintenance, but does he see the child, have visitation rights ?

Mum number 2 is being bloody minded and is making access awkward ?

Mum number 3 is just after money ?

If think your right, they deserve the basic allowance as directed by the CSA or whatever its called now.

Next question, how do you pay him from the company, ie: is it PAYE or dividends, or a mixture of both ?