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

Letter today for son from Child Maintenance Appeals Team. Thankfully he is at the seaside with his child no 2. School Hols.
Child no 2 was not recognised by CSA as he had a "family arrangement" of £200 a month. But child no 3 was put onto the old CSA scheme. In order to get child no 2 recognised he had to register with CSA to get moved onto the new CMS scheme. We argued that child no 3 should have been put onto the new scheme and not the old.
CMS have now advised that child no 3 is under the new scheme and they want a payment of £316.75 a month for child no 3. No mention at all of child no 2.
I really cannot believe that this government agency should be in existence. This should be so simple to sort out, why can't they just do their job as laid out in law!
Just sheer incompetence.

[Enforcer]

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

All that directions want is financial, and asking csa to complete variation application within 28 days.

[PlanB]

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

Have written to CSA centre manager explaining the situation enclosing copies of regulations together with a copy of that letter and a covering letter to General Manager saying that it is his responsibility to sort this whole mess out. They got it wrong from the start!

Do you think that I need to write to the Judge as she did not elaborate on this matter???

I doubt the Judge will read the papers until she starts to prepare for your next hearing which you say won't be until October/November. Anything you put in a letter will sit on the Tribunal file unread for the time being. Also be careful not to look as if you're saying she got it wrong until you're more sure of your ground. Maybe wait for a response from the CSA Centre Manager before you do anything. If he agrees with you and changes the figures then you'll have no need to write to the Judge.

What did the Tribunal's Directions tell you to do next? Was there anything about you making further submissions to the Tribunal by a specific date?

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

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

I still reckon that Enforcer's son should be locked into a male chastity device, lest he knocks up yet another woman.

[Sapphire]

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

I think you may have hit of something, but I would hold fire till you hear from the others, in the meantime prepare your argument.

[Enforcer]

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

Questions that Judge asked CSA rep kept going through my head. Once I pointed out he did not earn the sum that was declared to HMRC and that accountant can move figures around within a partnership for tax purposes. Questions were, what is son's tax status? a self employed partner, can you repeat that, a self employed partner. On what basis did you calculate your assessment? On latest figures from HMRC. Is this correct, yes, are you absolutely certain, yes.
Following a lot of research I have discovered,
Department for Work and Pensions
Adjudication and constitutional issues division
The Law Relating to Child Support
Supplement 37 - September 2007
Page 30 Child Support (maintenance Assessments and Special Cases) Regulations 1992
(7) In the case of a self-employed earner whose employment is carried on in partnership or is that of a share fisherman within the meaning of the Social Security etc etc.
Basically what this is saying is that the CSA are NOT allowed to use HMRC figures in the case of a self employed partner.

Now this works both ways, in the first case Son earned far less than he was assessed on, in latest return to HMRC he earned far more than they will assess him on!

Have written to CSA centre manager explaining the situation enclosing copies of regulations together with a copy of that letter and a covering letter to General Manager saying that it is his responsibility to sort this whole mess out. They got it wrong from the start!

Do you think that I need to write to the Judge as she did not elaborate on this matter???

[Enforcer]

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

Already explained this. Declared income of £29,000 was nearly £7,000 more than he actually earned. Account rant moved income around to make best use of tax allowances. There is no other income.

[Sapphire]

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

Totally agree with Inca about the £60k possibly being 'pillow talk' lets face it most men will swear black is white if it means getting the knickers off a girl. What concerns me is that you say its £29k 'declared' income, is there in anyway possible there's any 'undeclared' income, because if there is I think you need too re-think fast, because you might find that Mum No.3 is a pretty canny lady and you could end up having a nice visit from the HMRC and them going through everything.

[Inca]

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

The very best thing your son can go into the Tribunal with is the truth..plain and simple.
Cutting corners,leaving out salient facts because they don't 'sound good' is only going to tie him up in knots and if the Tribunal get the slightest whiff of a lie,they'll be right on it,especially given what the Tribunal is about.

To be blunt..'feelings' have no place where this matter is concerned. He is 50% responsible for the child as is she..and as they cannot be amicable regarding the financial side of bringing their child up they have allowed strangers to make the decisions for them..and they must abide by those decisions whether they agree with them or not..Let's put it this way..one of them is not going to like the outcome,she won't if she gets less than she thinks she should,he won't if she gets more than he thinks she's entitled to but that's the risk you take when you allow a 'third party' to intervene.

It's quite possible the 60k was 'pillow talk'....maybe he 'boosted' his income to impress her,,we've all been guilty of saying stuff to impress a boy/girlfriend.....only he can answer that.
She certainly seems adamant that he isn't being honest about his finances so my best advice is :-
Follow the Directions absolutely.
Your son needs to do an absolutely 100% totally honest list of his assets and finances (and income) and let the Tribunal see that ,far from being a deadbeat Dad,he is committed to allowing the Tribunal/CMS set a fair figure for maintenance for his child which he will pay diligently.all he is asking for is the £50pw he pays Mum2 to be factored into the final figure as per the CMS's own rules.

[Enforcer]

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

Judge said next hearing will be October or November

[PlanB]

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

I think what your son needs now is a spin doctor. Someone who can help him to present himself to the Tribunal in the best possible light instead of being seen as some who criticizes and resents every penny paid to the mother of his child (because that's what she is).

From what you have said the Tribunal Judge was acting suspicious of his (and your family business') financial motives. Mum 3 is coming across as a poor depressed woman abandoned by him while pregnant so leaving her with a small baby to bring up on £35 per week, which we all know is impossible with the price of nappies these days. He needs to recover some of the moral high ground which she is dominating. He also needs to get one of those A4 notepads of his own!

Help him to change tact. Empower him to speak for himself instead of you representing him. You can still give a Witness Statement and be cross-examined on it. But wouldn't it be better if he told the Tribunal how he really feels? You don't want this to look like a family conspiracy against the Applicant because that will not only plant negative thoughts in the Judge's mind (and Tribunal Judges have a lot of discretion when deciding these cases) but also dash any hope of settling this amicably.

A court or Tribunal hearing is a theatrical performance. Credibility is vital. With Dad speaking on his behalf he may be perceived as someone who has something to hide even when he hasn't.

Do you have a date for the next hearing?

[Enforcer]

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

They were together for 13 months. Perhaps she does actually think that he is wealthy. In one of her letters she asks the csa to contact annex for his tax returns, she says that he regularly earned in excess of £60,000 pa. The £29,000 declared was the highest sum ever.

[Inca]

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

Hiya Enforcer..

How long were your son and Mum3 in a relationship?
I ask because it seems to be that she thinks your son is definitely being frugal with the truth about his finances/assets.
If they were together for a while then she obviously had an insight to his life,owning the caravan/income etc etc
I honestly don't think your wife's cheque is going to make one iota of difference,,it could be seen as an attempt to circumvent the caravan being included in your sons assets.
,Your Accountants figures to the HMRC are the ones that are being used to assess the correct amount your son will have to pay..it's as simple as that. You can't really argue the point otherwise you are saying that the tax returns submitted to HMRC are ,in fact,not correct. It's a Catch 22,damned if you tell the true figures,damned if you don't..

Mum3 is not going to 'roll over' on this one,I can tell you that by the way she is handling it..she's made sure her bases are covered.
The ultimate goal here is to have the £50 a week your son pays to Mum2 included in the calculations for Mum3..that's a given,CMS;s own rules state it must happen..Mum3 knows this hence her determination to prove your son is hiding assets to make the figure he has to pay her as little as possible and she will walk over hot coals to prove it.
The argument is the same on both sides..it's all about the money..she believes she is standing up and being counted for her child and,in effect,so do you except your child is a 35yr old grown man.
Then there is the arrears issue..I would be very surprised if she didn't get a judgement in her favour there,hence it's better to keep paying her in the interim so they don't get any higher
Personally..I'd follow the Directions given by the tribunal to the letter,,your son must be 100% truthful with his replies and see where that takes the decision.
Whatever the final figures are the simple bare facts remain..he will be paying for the next 16/18 years and I guarantee she will be watching like a hawk and will have him back and fore to court if she thinks his circumstances have changed and most definitely will when he is no longer paying for Child2.

Please don't think I'm 'on her side' as such,,I'm just trying to see both sides of the story....I raised my son on my own cos his Dad was as much use a chocolate fireguard,paid bugger all and now wonders why his son can't be bothered with him but that's MY history.

I hope your son is working as hard as you are to sort all this out..he's lucky to have a Dad willing to do what you have thus far.

[Enforcer]

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

Yes son was there, however I was there as his representative.

[Inca]

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

What the Mum3 has done is what all people should do when facing a court/tribunal.....she collected and collated her evidence.
Women are better than MI5 when they need to be.;lol

Of course it's all about the money,,what else is there? She wants what she believes is a fair bite of the cherry to help support her child,and come hell or high water she'll fight with every fibre of her being to get it.
I had a feeling they were going to base their calculations on the HMRC figures as a true recorded reflection of his salary

I noticed you say you spoke to the Judge,,,,did your son attend as well??