Csa

[READIT]

Question - If the non resident parent pays £180 per month for one child via CSA, why is the other parent is not made to pay the same amount so each parent pays equal? OK, the child lives with mum, but that was mums choice when she left! Why do us dads (sometimes mums) always get penalised.

 

So the mother leaves and takes the child, but we get charged for it, where is the justice in this?

 

Hardly surprising so many on benefits, they pay minimum csa, get jobseekers allowance, council tax paid, free medical/dental etc.

Whats the point in working? If you 1 child not living with you, one at home and earn £180 per week net, some £26 per week goes to CSA. If you then pay your council tax, medical/dental, and the reduction in other benefits because you are working it don't leave a lot left.

So lets say the child gets £360.00 per month, wish I could have that as an adult!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Another one joining the dole queue as it don't pay to work anymore!

I had a personal monthly arrangement which I had been paying, now the mum with get £5 per week from CSA, and since the child does not want anything to do with me, no contact then it's all they deserve.

 

MY ADVICE: Don't have children.

[TFL is HELL]

Or have lots of children. Once you're beyond 3 it doesn't cost you anymore!

 

The wonderful thing about the CSA is that it really hates men. I know a solicitor who had his kids exactly half the time in order to let his ex-wife work, & was still getting charged CSA maintenance. He refused to pay & spent a few weeks in jail. His kids are now all over 16 so he's now working abroad to avoid the arrears which on principle he won't ever pay.

 

It's potty like all these nasty assed bureaucracies.

[jadeybags]

Here's the reason the CSA are there to stick up for women, I don't think I know any mother that would put money ahead of their children & go live abroad. In fact contrary to popular belief, women don't kick up much fuss at all when it comes to money, & I think quite often men play on that! The CSA came into play because women were letting absent parents get away without paying for their children & just getting by on benefits. Which actually means every other tax payer pays for someone elses children.

Although I do see where the OP is coming from, that does seem unfair, if I have read it correctly. And when my sister split with her hubby & they each had custody of one child, neither paid the other CSA, they claimed it evened it out

[Ros1609]

So basically your saying that the parent with custody should pay the same amount of CSA as the non resident parent? On top of rent/mortgage, food, heating bills, clothes, shoes, school trips etc? So how does that one work then? I thought that the CSA were there to ensure that the absent parent (mum or dad) contributes to their child(rens) upbringing

 

My ex husband pays in the region of £250 per month for our two children. It doesn't even pay for their nursery bill, not even close!

[Lillibelle]

The wonderful thing about the CSA is that it really hates men..........I bet the dads who receive CSA payments as PWC are gonna love you for that one

 

 

 

MY ADVICE: Don't have children. Takes 2 to tango,,,,,and I hope your kids never see that

 

CSA was set up to sort the shirkers out,,be they male or female,,the absent parent has a duty to provide for their children,and if you can find a child that costs £80 a month to feed/clothe/entertain/taxi around,,then you are a miracle worker.

If the shirkers didn't try being a smartass and not support their offspring then the CSA would have nothing to do,

If separated parents acted like adults and discussed finances and the well being of their children properly then the CSA would be extinct,,but some absent parents think the children suddenly cost pennies to support and won't pay regular,sensible maintainence so the CSA has to step in and ensure the child is supported.

Don't rag on PWC using CSA,,thats what it's there for ,,and if absent parents don't like it,,they should pay up properly

[TFL is HELL]

jadeybags

 

2 years ago, only 50% of fathers were reported to the CSA, because there was no extra benefit to mothers.

 

Then they changed the law so that mothers would get all their benefits PLUS all the cash recovered by the CSA (less their fee).

 

Now 80% plus claim. It's all about money. Those stats do not lie. Now you get full benefits plus a top up. All women should work to support their child too.

 

95% of fathers who were the primary care giver lose the SECRET court battle to become the PWC.

 

Unlike any other court, the Family Division does not keep any record as to sex, race or religion; neither is any judgement compared on a like for like basis; nor is it referred to the Common Law principle of the UK; Nor can any fact like a judge sending a child back to a paedophile ring be published - NICE!

 

It's never a straightforward case of right & wrong, but time & again children are used as weapons by the PWC. I have no time for any parent who doesn't want to see or support their kids, but women who won't let the person who gave them their children & pay for them should let them see them, & let them see them without demanding more, more more.

 

I've known 3 guys kill themselves over a lack of access.

[jadeybags]

jadeybags

 

2 years ago, only 50% of fathers were reported to the CSA, because there was no extra benefit to mothers.

 

Then they changed the law so that mothers would get all their benefits PLUS all the cash recovered by the CSA (less their fee).

 

Now 80% plus claim. It's all about money. Those stats do not lie. Now you get full benefits plus a top up. All women should work to support their child too.

 

95% of fathers who were the primary care giver lose the SECRET court battle to become the PWC.

 

Unlike any other court, the Family Division does not keep any record as to sex, race or religion; neither is any judgement compared on a like for like basis; nor is it referred to the Common Law principle of the UK; Nor can any fact like a judge sending a child back to a paedophile ring be published - NICE!

 

It's never a straightforward case of right & wrong, but time & again children are used as weapons by the PWC. I have no time for any parent who doesn't want to see or support their kids, but women who won't let the person who gave them their children & pay for them should let them see them, & let them see them without demanding more, more more.

 

I've known 3 guys kill themselves over a lack of access.

 

It was actually mid-late 2008 that the PWC got to keep more of their maintenance, but I get what you're saying, although it's exactly that, what was the point of PWC pushing for maintenance when they got none of it anyway, so it's a bit of an unfair comparison I think.

[Lillibelle]

jadeybags

 

2 years ago, only 50% of fathers were reported to the csa, because there was no extra benefit to mothers.

 

Then they changed the law so that mothers would get all their benefits plus all the cash recovered by the csa (less their fee).

 

Now 80% plus claim. It's all about money. Those stats do not lie. Now you get full benefits plus a top up. All women should work to support their child too.

 

95% of fathers who were the primary care giver lose the secret court battle to become the pwc.

 

Unlike any other court, the family division does not keep any record as to sex, race or religion; neither is any judgement compared on a like for like basis; nor is it referred to the common law principle of the uk; nor can any fact like a judge sending a child back to a paedophile ring be published - nice!

 

It's never a straightforward case of right & wrong, but time & again children are used as weapons by the pwc. I have no time for any parent who doesn't want to see or support their kids, but women who won't let the person who gave them their children & pay for them should let them see them, & let them see them without demanding more, more more.

 

I've known 3 guys kill themselves over a lack of access.

 

it's not just mothers,,,there are dads with custody too,,and they gain too. Dads refuse to let children too. And as for 'secret' court battles to deny dads.....when and where are these held? Please provide evidence ..and the family court we just dealt with has complete records of my home/sex/race/religion on it..you can't continually bash mums as pwc when there are a large % of dads who are pwc too.

[jadeybags]

it's not just mothers,,,there are dads with custody too,,and they gain too. Dads refuse to let children too. And as for 'secret' court battles to deny dads.....when and where are these held? Please provide evidence ..and the family court we just dealt with has complete records of my home/sex/race/religion on it..you can't continually bash mums as pwc when there are a large % of dads who are pwc too.

 

Family courts are very cloak & dagger to be honest. Well, just from the things I have heard about they are. It's a separate issue though isn't it. I don't get why the 'absent' (hate that word) parent sometimes refuses to support their children. The CSA aren't always the ogres people portray them to be. My ex had his maintenance amount set yeeeeears ago, 260 per month for 2 kids, & he has had numerous life changes like moving in with his full time working partner & pay rises since, & food & bills have gone up too for me, but hey, that 260 always stays the same, always has & likely always will now. Only a couple of years & the ex won't have to pay anymore.

So can't really see why some people seem to have an issue with the CSA? Unless they really do treat everyone different?

[Ros1609]

Claims started after a certain date are treated differently now. For example a friend of mine has been receiving CSA for over 10 years from her ex husband, he moved in with a new partner and her children but still had to pay the same amount. My claim is under two years old, my ex husband recently moved in with his girlfriend and her children but my money has reduced by 25% as in the eyes of the CSA he now has financial responsibility for them as well as his own.

[jadeybags]

Claims started after a certain date are treated differently now. For example a friend of mine has been receiving CSA for over 10 years from her ex husband, he moved in with a new partner and her children but still had to pay the same amount. My claim is under two years old, my ex husband recently moved in with his girlfriend and her children but my money has reduced by 25% as in the eyes of the CSA he now has financial responsibility for them as well as his own.

 

Ok, so swings & roundabouts really then. CSA got involved about 10 yrs ago with us as I claimed IS after (we split 11 yrs ago now) he's been with Trace about 7 yrs I think, but her children are working teens now. So under new rules his may have gone down at one point, then up!

[Ros1609]

I think a lot of it is case by case now but am not sure. Its not all black and white. I've appealed the decision but I don't think I'll be successful - at least I know I tried

[farmlama]

Question - If the non resident parent pays £180 per month for one child via CSA, why is the other parent is not made to pay the same amount so each parent pays equal? OK, the child lives with mum, but that was mums choice when she left! Why do us dads (sometimes mums) always get penalised.

 

So the mother leaves and takes the child, but we get charged for it, where is the justice in this?

 

Hardly surprising so many on benefits, they pay minimum csa, get jobseekers allowance, council tax paid, free medical/dental etc.

Whats the point in working? If you 1 child not living with you, one at home and earn £180 per week net, some £26 per week goes to CSA. If you then pay your council tax, medical/dental, and the reduction in other benefits because you are working it don't leave a lot left.

So lets say the child gets £360.00 per month, wish I could have that as an adult!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Another one joining the dole queue as it don't pay to work anymore!

I had a personal monthly arrangement which I had been paying, now the mum with get £5 per week from CSA, and since the child does not want anything to do with me, no contact then it's all they deserve.

 

MY ADVICE: Don't have children.

 

 

you strike me as someone who is a deadbeat and not wanting to pay for their children? CSA payments are to ensure that your children get to enjoy a quality of life, children arent cheap, the payments are to go towards food, clothes, the cost of keeping a roof over their head, even things like holidays, because although you may resent your ex, why should your children have to go without treats like holidays, or basics like having to pay that bit of extra electricity coz the child cant sleep without the hall light being left on.

ive just gone through the csa after my ex stopped paying our mutual agreement (turns out he was paying no more than he should have been), i get £200 a month and can assure you that i spend a hell of a lot more than that on raising my girls. i also had to leave my job when we split (i earnt over double what he does) as my children are both under 5 and i couldnt get childcare, and the ex point blank refused to come to an agreement of arranging times for shared care so we could both still work, so all in all his £200 a month doesnt cover the cost of bringing up the children let alone brush the surface on my loss of income due to his spite, not all women (or men in somecases) are cold gold diggers, most of us just want to be able to provide the best for our children so they can have a happy childhood

[Rachie1973]

Question - If the non resident parent pays £180 per month for one child via CSA, why is the other parent is not made to pay the same amount so each parent pays equal? OK, the child lives with mum, but that was mums choice when she left! Why do us dads (sometimes mums) always get penalised.

 

So the mother leaves and takes the child, but we get charged for it, where is the justice in this?

 

Hardly surprising so many on benefits, they pay minimum csa, get jobseekers allowance, council tax paid, free medical/dental etc.

Whats the point in working? If you 1 child not living with you, one at home and earn £180 per week net, some £26 per week goes to CSA. If you then pay your council tax, medical/dental, and the reduction in other benefits because you are working it don't leave a lot left.

So lets say the child gets £360.00 per month, wish I could have that as an adult!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Another one joining the dole queue as it don't pay to work anymore!

I had a personal monthly arrangement which I had been paying, now the mum with get £5 per week from CSA, and since the child does not want anything to do with me, no contact then it's all they deserve.

 

MY ADVICE: Don't have children.

 

lol would suit me to pay £320 for my 4 each month. The only problem is I wonder where the rest of the money to raise them will come from? Because quite frankly, that £650 odd a month won't actually pay for the roof over their heads and their food.

[vityaz]

I was quite happy to provide for my daughter and was buying essentials for her on a regular basis, until my ex-partner had one of her mental moments and told me to stick the latest load of nappies, food, clothes etc where the sun doesnt shine and called the CSA, who promptly took so much money off me I was left with £45 to feed myself on one month because they had assessed my wages on my gross pay instead of my net pay. I contacted them to apprise them of this situation to be told by the helpful 'advisor' on the end of a phone that 'Thats not my problem'. I duly ended up going off work sick with stress and lost even more money and notified the helpful CSA advisors of this and that consequently my wage would be different at the end of the month because of this and was assured this would all be taken into account. At the end of said month they had actually deducted even more money and a telephone call to them netted the exact same response of 'Thats not my problem' were it not for the level-minded presence of my current partner my next step would have been the nearest CSA office whereby id have made it their problem. I still havent been reimbursed six years later, and last year was made redundant from my previous job. During my last two weeks I was plagued by phone calls from the CSA demanding payment and informing them that my workplace was closing down and I was about to be made redundant were to no avail. They even sent out an assessment and told me how much they would be deducting starting in April of that year. I started a new job in the May but earning a good deal less, however theyre presently taking the amount they assessed from my old salary which was about £150 a month more than im earning now so I am going to contact them and hopefully get this rectified without any more 'its not my problem' responses, especially seeing as how I am currently settled with my partner and raising our four year old son. I also need dental treatment and I dont qualify for free treatment.

 

In response to some of the remarks ive seen posted here im going to just make some pertinent points regarding the issues raised by some posters:-

 

My experience of the attitude of CSA workers is that they are indifferent in most cases and actively hostile to the welfare of absent fathers. The incidents in 2006 where they had left me without sufficient funds to provide for myself demonstrates this. In both cases I had notified them that because of this I would be unable to afford food and to pay for my psychiatric medication to keep my combat-related PTSD under control. They chose to disregard this fact.

 

I have experienced blatant hostility recently from CSA 'advisors'. During my conversations with them during my redundancy process one advisor began talking to me in a very abusive fashion and after me telling her that I had not received any assessment forms at my workplace, she then attempted to lead me into admitting that I had deliberately not filled it in. Fortunately when I am talking to such people I always pause before answering, but a person reacting emotionally might have admitted to something they had in fact not done. When it became clear to her this trick wouldnt work she slammed the phone down.

 

My ex-partner is now receiving payments deducted from my salary, which are not being spent on my daughter. My mother visits my daughter on a regular basis and my daughter also stays with my mother. My mother has informed me that whenever she visits my daughter or collects her from my ex-partner she is always unwashed and / or wearing dirty clothes. In addition she regularly suffers from digestive disorders such as diarrhoea and constipation and has told my mother that she is fed predominantly junk food. My mother has raised issue with my ex-partner over both of these factors and additionally the cleanliness of the household (which was also a problem when I was with my ex-partner so I know it isnt being made up). Additionally my ex-partner has prevented or tried to limit as much as possible any contact between my daughter and myself.

 

If anybody is reading the above paragraph and thinks woe betide my ex-partner because she is obviously struggling for money I suppose I had better add that her and her current partner currently have a 2012-plate car sitting outside their house, both have brand new Ipads, and once a month my ex-partner treats herself to those photo days where you go to a modelling studio, get made up and have nice photos taken. You know, the ones that cost about £200 a time.

 

When my ex-partner and I split up, she had her stepfather and brothers threaten me to stay away from my daughter. She also sent me a text message saying 'Just to remind you that its Niamhs christening on Sunday such and such and you are not invited' and then had the temerity to have a solicitors letter sent out to me alleging that I was harassing her. She also told my mother the same thing and told her that I had said to her I didnt want to have anything to do with my daughter, however I kept the abusive text messages, the solicitors letter and the abusive letter she had written to me and showed them to my mother.

 

So ladies who have been left up the creek by an absent father who refuses to pay their share I fully sympathise after growing up with an absent father who manipulated the court system to the extent he ended up paying only something like £5 a year and we endured hardship as a result. However for every b*****d of a father theres a b***h of a mother as well.