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

The figure for mum 3 was worked out by taking what he earns,40% of net earnings between mum 2 @£200 balance of 40%to mum 3 on the basics that can cannot ask for more than this.

[Inca]

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

Well,,they didn't use the WRONG figures (in their minds)..they've chosen to stick to 'Mum 2' doesn't count..
Now,,where did the £196 figure come from for Mum 3?
Is it now being voluntarily paid by your son? Is he paying it religiiously?

Forgetting any arrears CSA (as was) may claim he owes....can you tell me exactly how much he's given Mum 3 (babys not very old so shouldn't be too hard to work out I hope ,sorry for all the questions)

It's going to be imperative that he goes to the Tribunal' with 'clean hands'...that is..having done his very very best to pay for Child 3,des[ite no DNA proof he is actually the Dad. Just 'being sure' he's the Dad isn't enough (unless of course the child has inherited some birth mark or other indisputable thing,,babys look like babys for at least 3 months)
I know I keep banging on about DNA but doing one will certainly give us more time to try and work our way round the new laws. AND if by any miracle,baby isn't his....then his life is going to get so much easier,,specially if you superglue his zipper up lol

[Enforcer]

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

Sorry, did post but not showing up. Son is 100% certain that he is the Father, no parental rights as he is not on birth certificate. Yes the CSA say he is now over £900.00 in arrears due to the fact that they used the wrong figures.

[Inca]

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

I know you've already answered this...but is he absolutely 100% undeniably the Father?????

If he is (and if it was me ,,I'd still push for a DNA test,,many a man has said 'yes I'm the Daddy only for DNA to prove they're not,,see Jeremy Kyle show lol).....he MUST get his name on that Birth Certificate,,,not doing it will only store up trouble later in life,,and it's unfair on the child,,everyone has a right to have their Dads name on it.

[Inca]

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

I honestly think the problem lies with the income your son has declared...29k down to 13k is a huge drop whilst still being in the same job,,plus he's keeping to a 'private' arrangement with Mum 2.
The Accountant may have inadvertantly shot your son in the foot by using him to keep the others out of the 40% Tax bracket..
The CSA (as was) were a nightmare for firing out letter after letter all saying the different stuff about the same bloody thing,,and eventually the computer said NO and shut cases down.

Is he in arrears to Mum 3?

[Enforcer]

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

See Piranha woman also disposable Dads. Never seen the child and name not on birth certificate, no rights at all other than to provide her with an income, new lifestyle choice for some women.

[Enforcer]

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

They did not give a reason, in the regulations they state that they can use any relevant earnings within the pre oils 24 months. Although in the submission to tribunal, they say twice, if the tribunal choose to accept the lower net income. This is the figure, 6 months latest accounts that they asked for and we paid our accountant to get this information for them. They chose not to use these figures.

[Inca]

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

What reason did they give for refusing to accept his income??

[Pixie]

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

I don't know anything about CSA tribunals but it seems like your son is being very reasonable. Hopefully the tribunal will see it that way also. £800 a month is ridiculous and downright greedy!

[Enforcer]

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

Mum 1 withdrew her case, child one was not actually living with her. Mum 2 £200 a month. Mum 3 £196 a month.

[Inca]

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

Is he,by any chance,paying Mum 3 the same amount as he's been paying Mum 2?..
Please remind me,,what does Mum 1 get and is that voluntary?

[Enforcer]

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

Thanks for the reply Plan B.
My son came to a Family based arrangement with Mother of child 2 many years ago, far more than the CSA would have awarded, this is paid monthly.

Latest Mother wanted £800 a month, as verified by her own submission to tribunal, a ridiculous sum, that's why the CSA are involved. However the CSA refused to take his Family based arrangement into account. They also refused to accept his income figures from the Partnership's chartered accountant. He continues to pay the new mother, the figures that we consider should be accepted by the tribunal.

[PlanB]

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

As in my son's case, the CSA decide an inaccurate maintenance payment, report it as a debt, then they can "abuse" their powers to enforce a debt that is "not real".

Amazing that they are allowed to get away with it!

The CSA cannot enforce a debt which is "not real". That's what Tribunals are for, to establish exactly who owes what and why. If he doesn't like the Tribunal's Decision then he can appeal it.

Try not to see this as a political battle, but a way to get children the money they deserve in order to live a happy life. Courts and Tribunals focus only on the welfare of children. The parents are less relevant.

The new system actually penalizes (financially) parents who don't come to an arrangement between themselves without the need for *the State* to intervene or referee. I welcome these reforms. Is there any chance your son could come to an amicable agreement with the mothers of his children to sidestep all this agro?

[Enforcer]

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

Tribunal in a few weeks time. Will post with results. Thanks Inca.

[Enforcer]

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

More on their arrears strategy.
Credit Reference Information.
4. In addition, the Child Support Act 2008 provides the powers to disclose information about the paying parent to credit reference agencies. This activity could directly impact on a clients credit score and is likely to be of interest to the self employed parent who often relies on credit to run their business.

I see this as a "veiled" threat to the self employed, pay us whatever we demand or we WILL trash your credit rating and put you out of business!

If they do report an "alleged" debt, that is still subject to a tribunal ruling, would the self employed have any redress against the CSA?