CSA calculations

[Ewoc]

My ex has shacked up with a person with 2 kids, they are supported by her ex.

My ex has now said his payments to me for our kids should drop.

Is this true, if so how effing unfair is that? Her ex pays £1000pcm, she earns and my ex earns and I will get an almost 30% reduction in payments, not aware that our kids are costing less now.

[Petal02]

The CSA will take into account that there are now two children living with your ex, and adjust his payments to you accordingly. Again, another case of the CSA failing to consider the full picture.

I'm quite sure that your children don't suddenly cost less just because your ex is now living with a woman with children - I think it's extremely unfair on you.

I don't think the CSA do people any favours, no matter which side of the fence you're on.

[SecondMrsS]

I actually think this is extremely unfair and if i ran the system it should only apply if the children living with your ex are his.

But yes, sadly it is true that the amount goes down if the non resident parent has other children living with him.

I think it's a bad thing in general but seems particularly unfair when these other two children are being supported.

My Dp does include my DD in his calculations of maintenence to his ex.

Your ex sounds like a wrongun.

[pleasechange]

On the other hand am I right in thinking that if his new partner was receiving tax credits for her children, then your ex would have to pay a portion of this to you?

That's another error in the system, but the other way round

[Petal02]

So in theory, if Mr and Smith have three children,(for example) then split up, Mr Smith goes to live with a partner who has three children of her own, and then goes on to father three more children with his new partner, he'll have 6 kids living under his roof - and then poor Mrs Smith, who still has 3 children from Mr Smith's first marriage, sees her maintenance reducing each time Mr Smith brings another child into his household ......

I think the system is all wrong. You hear of both men and women getting a raw deal.

When the CSA was first set up, I thought it was just going to chase men who refused to pay their agreed maintenance - in which case i think the CSA is a good thing. But as every family has different financial situations, you just can't apply one formula and expect it to work for everyone.

[Petal02]

Ooops typing error - the first line is supposed to say "Mr and Mrs Smith", not Mr and Smith .....

[BigChiefOrganiser]

I think your ex is grossly over-estimating how much the payments will reduce. For example, when DH and I had DS1 we did the calculator and it would reduce our payments by 7/week.

have a play on the calculator here

www2.dwp.gov.uk/csa/v2/en/calculate-maintenance.asp

[Petal02]

That's interesting - I've just had a go with the CSA calculator: and if I'd had two children when DH moved in with me (I have no children) he would have been able to reduce his payments to his ex by nearly 20%, if they had been going via the CSA.

DH's solicitor strongly advised him to make a private agreement with his ex, and not go via the CSA (because the solicitor thought he'd get a raw deal) - DH was working away doing contract work when he split up with his ex, earning good money - and based on the CSA formula, he would have had to pay his ex over £800 per month for two children .....

It's a stupid system that doesn't work for anyone.

[pleasechange]

On the other hand, if the pwc has more children or her new partner moves his children in, and their income stays the same, then by definition, they will spend less on the first children as the household discretionary income will be lower.

This has definitely happened in the case of DH's ex. Since having additional children, she has given up her job, had to buy a bigger car, and as a result the elder 2 never have holidays/new clothes etc, yet DH is still paying the same

[BigChiefOrganiser]

so true allnew, and something people tend to overlook