If your DH currently pays through the CSA how will you approach the changes with CMOptions?

[VadaSultanfuss]

If your DH has an acrimonious / non-existent relationship with his ex and pays through the CSA how is he planning to approach the new system where parents are expected to try to come to a private arrangement?

DH is thinking of writing to ex and suggesting that we will pay the CMO set amount plus the equivalent fee they would charge direct to ex, we would pay until each child turns 20 regardless of whether they are in education or not (provided they still live there). We are also setting money aside to pay for driving lessons and give generous cash gifts.

It's a better deal for ex than if CM options were to collect the fees under their system, but I still feel nervous that things will kick off when the time comes (we could get notification of the changeover anytime between now and 2017).

Is anyone else wondering how it will pan out?

[needsomeunderstanding]

If I was the ex, I'd be biting your hand off!

However, if she's that awkward, why are you being so generous?

CMO can still collect through your pay and the system seems much like CSA (complete with the inefficiencies!).

I'd be inclined to offer her what she would actually receive through direct pay and spend the rest on the kids directly. Also, do the same if they leave education. Why pay the ex when you don't have to and it could be spent on the kids?

Dp's ex never spends any extra on the kids, so we do it ourselves now.

[fedupbutfine]

are you aware that the new system is pro-NRP in that the RP cannot veto payments made directly and insist that the CMS is used? Essentially, the CMS will calculate the amount to be paid and you pay it. The only time they will step in is if it isn't paid and then the charges will be applied. The RP cannot insist on the use of the CMS (and therefore the additional charges) if the NRP is willing to pay.

The CMS doesn't want to get involved with cases where a NRP is willing to pay the legally calculated amount on a regular basis - many cases with the CSA work on this basis where separated couples have used the CSA because the RP was previously on benefits and was obliged to claim maintenance (this hasn't been the case for some years now, however), or because the couple thought they had to use the CSA or where the RP has decided to use it as a means of punishment for the ex. These are not cases where the NRP is refusing to pay and as such, the tax payer is paying to pass money between two people unnecessarily. The CMS's focus is on those parents who won't pay, not on those who are happy to do so.

There is therefore no need for you to try and avoid the CMS by giving financial incentive to the ex to do so. She won't have the opportunity to veto direct payment providing you pay the legally calculated amount on a regular basis.

[Sethspeaks]

I'm not sure that's right fedup. There are various options to choose from. I'm probably going to go for collect and pay, no matter what xh decides he's going to do - and nothing in the paperwork seems to indicate I can't.

It looks like the benefit of using direct pay is that it is clear what is to be paid, and if payments aren't made then action can be taken and the NRP is also covered as there has to be a record of payments. And that's just a one off £20 application fee.

The fees only come in with the collect and pay, in which case the NRP will pay a 20% collection fee and the RP 4% for each payment.

What is is that you are nervous about Vada?

[fedupbutfine]

it's here:
www.gov.uk/child-maintenance/how-to-pay

Either parent can choose Direct Pay without needing the other’s consent, unless there’s evidence that the paying parent is unlikely to pay

So unless there is a history of non-payment, a RP can't demand that payment is made through the CMS.

[Sethspeaks]

You were talking about avoiding using the CMS and Vada is talking about paying privately (and I'm assuming she means the family based arrangement - and could be wrong about that), and the way I've read it is that they won't necessarily get the choice about that if she opts for direct pay.

I've read that guidance but it doesn't make sense. If there's evidence of the paying parent being unlikely to pay, they aren't going to say you can't choose direct pay. It has to mean that you can go directly to choosing collect and pay surely? So either way, if the NRP wants a family based arrangement, it isn't necessarily going to follow that that will happen.

[VadaSultanfuss]

I'm nervous because we are alienated from two of the three children. We have never been allowed to see the youngest, we used to have regular contact with two older ones but they were turned against us in 2010. The middle one has seen the light and is back to regular visits. The eldest one is texting DH in secret so progress is being made there. It's just that we end up terrified that any rocking of the boat will cause contact to stop.

There has been no contact with the ex since the legal action we took over contact in 2010... Unfortunately we ran out of money and all kids were saying they didn't want to see us so we gave up.

We are on tenterhooks at all times that contact will be stopped. Our DS and DD were devastated when contact stopped the first time and it would be much worse if it happened again. If the ex feels she's getting a raw deal through these Maintenance changes she will halt contact.

Also, eldest DSS is doing a college course but would prefer to look for work but she won't allow him - she doesn't want to lose maintenance. We feel as though paying regardless until they are 20 may give the kids some freedom back?

[PesoPenguin]

Not helpful to you, but Dh has been told that, due to the circumstances of his ex and one of her other exs ( which are confidential so we don't know what they are and there are 3 other exs so could be anything) his case will be staying with the CSA. There's only 3 years before it ends though anyway so I guess DH will just pay as usual til then.

[Sethspeaks]

I'm not sure there is anything for your dh to rock the boat over if the payments aren't going to reduce. It's just a case of swapping to the new system isn't it? Am I missing something?

[VadaSultanfuss]

The new system expects the parents to come to their own arrangement and for the NRP to pay direct into the RP's account.

If they cannot agree then maintenance can be collected much like the CSA does it now, only they will bung charges on top...20% charge on top for the NRP, 4% charge for the RP plus a registration charge for the RP.

In the past she has not allowed DH to pay direct as she won't let him have her bank details (no reason for this). He has given her cheques which she never paid in, these are cheques for hundreds of pounds, then says that I have cancelled them (nobody ever cancelled them, certainly not me)... All the while telling the children that we don't pay for them. So DH had to go to the CSA, and then she spent years saying it's not enough. It was exhausting. DH is dreading trying to negotiate with her hence preferring to offer generously to head off any conflict before it starts.

[Sethspeaks]

So how does he pay at the moment?

[HeadDoctor]

My experience is as fedup says. Dh's ex wanted collect and pay, telling us she wanted him to be hit hard with the fees. DH just rang the CMS and said he'd pay by direct pay so that's how it's done. The CMS calculated the amount and sent out a payment schedule for how much he has to pay and by which date. It will only go to collect and pay if the have to enforce the payments.
Being able to opt for collect and pay unnecessarily leaves it wide open to abuse.

[HeadDoctor]

DHs ex did ring in to the CMS the day after he'd paid for that month saying she hadn't received anything - I assume hoping this was enough to get collect and pay. It wasn't, but they did make DH pay again for that month saying payments made before the claim date don't count.