Advanced search

Can CSA claim from EX's wife's income?

(16 Posts)
darleneoconnor Mon 20-Jun-11 12:44:52

Hoping there's some knowledgable about CSA people about...

I've never bothered chasing ex for maintenance as I knew he would do everything to avoid paying (lived abroad, self employed). But he has now got married, to a woman in a very well paid job for a firm I know the name and address of (so easily traceable).

So is it worth me now trying to chase for maintenance, given that his wife's income would not be easy to hide?

I'm also not sure if I come under the old or new rules. When DC was born pre-2003, I had to claim income support and had to put ex's details on form, for the purposes of the csa, but I dont know if this counts as making a formal csa application or if my case would be on the post-2003 rules?

mumblechum1 Mon 20-Jun-11 12:45:35

No. CSA is based on his personal income, not their joint income.

elastamum Mon 20-Jun-11 12:47:16

No. you cannot make a claim against his wife's income. After all, why should she provide child support for your children?

Riakin Mon 20-Jun-11 14:07:30


The other posters are right... to me and i'm sure others you're just looking for your own free meal here... and not in any way looking for the requirements of supporting your child....

colditz Mon 20-Jun-11 14:10:00

His wife is not responsible for your children,

darleneoconnor Mon 20-Jun-11 14:56:49

Well, I dont think the nasty tone in some of these post was called for but hmm

Someone told me years ago that if ex ever married, his household income would be assessed, obviously they were wrong.

It does seem like an unfair and odd quirk of the system that ex can live in the lap of luxury, partly provided for by his wife, never paying a single penny for his child, whereas my DP works day and night to support ex's child.

Meglet Mon 20-Jun-11 14:59:09

I think it was a sensible question. But you can't claim against her income.

Can't you just start a claim with the CSA and see how it goes? I don't think you've lost anything if you get get the ball rolling.

LtEveDallas Mon 20-Jun-11 15:14:05

It certainly isn't fair that he isn't paying anything towards his child - that is very wrong. But if he is living in 'semi-luxury' then that is his wifes choice to pay for it - she doesnt have any responsibility to your child, not is it her fault that her husband is a nob.

You should go to the CSA and start a claim against him, if he is working then your child should be looked after. If he isn't then I'm afraid there is not much you can do.

elastamum Mon 20-Jun-11 15:23:56

Some of this is a bit harsh harsh. OP has'nt had any child support at all from her ex. Hardly a free lunch?

Obviously she doesnt know the rules or she wouldnt have asked hmm

UkeHunt Mon 20-Jun-11 15:30:16

I think the OP is saying that now he is traceable and it sticks in her throat that he is now very obviously living a nice lifestyle and won't pay for their child's upbringing.

marycorporate Mon 20-Jun-11 17:12:23

There will be allowances made if the ex is "living in a manner not inkeeping with the salary he has claimed to be earning" Or something like that. But it has to be huge, like, he's married Jennifer Lopez or something.

Personally I wouldn't fancy some other woman having to cough up for this loser.

Bearinthebigwoohouse Mon 20-Jun-11 19:11:53

I love how darlene is considered to be looking for a free meal ticket when she's been supporting her child on her own! I find that an odd perspective.

Darlene the rules used to be that the new partner's income was requested and taken into account when working out how much the NRP could afford to pay. I think that is where the confusion has come in. If you were to start a claim now you'd come under the new system and it wouldn't apply.

I agree, it isn't right that he hasn't paid anything - and that's regardless of whether he's living in the lap of luxury or not.

darleneoconnor Mon 20-Jun-11 19:22:18

So will I come under the new or old rules?

marycorporate Mon 20-Jun-11 19:30:04

The new. I think the free meal comments (justified or not) were made because it seems like you've never been bothered until the rich woman has come on the scene.. Maintenance is paid so that the children may live in the manner to which they would if dad was still at home. That's why the new women's income isnt taken in to account, because if dad was still at home the other woman wouldn't exist.

Bearinthebigwoohouse Tue 21-Jun-11 13:08:43

She shouldn't have to bother with claiming maintenance at all, it should have been offered and paid all along without her having to ask. She was under the impression that the joint income would be taken into account, and as one of them is now traceable she thought it might be worthing giving it a go. But like I said, she shouldn't even be having to do this if her ex were supporting his child.

niceguy2 Tue 21-Jun-11 16:31:59

You will be on new rules.

The problem here is that the timing is rather suspicious. Whilst I accept father should be making a contribution, the fact is he hasn't, nor has Darlene bothered to even try to chase it up (for whatever reason).....until coincidentally ex marries a potential mealticket well paid woman.

Why you think the new wife's income should be considered is beyond me and was one of the anomalies of the old rules I found rather distasteful.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: