To let you all know that the Child Maintenance Service..

Or (I know this idea is pretty out there) they could just pay in the first place to prevent any of these sanctions, any impact on their life is actually their own responsibility.

Theres a really quick solution for any van drivers /bus drivers out there to ensure they don't lose the license they need to work - pay their fucking child maintenance???

The they won't need to lose their license will they. Not an issue at all. If they would rather lose their drivers license and thus their job, than pay the child maintenance they owe by law, that is entirely their choice.

🙄

I did not know they even had these powers. I have, thankfully, never had the need for this "service". It's a bloody disgrace.
We, the taxpayer, are funding these men failures, why is this not discussed more in parliament?
I would have thought it would be pretty easy for cms to seize/freeze bank accounts belonging to these selfish individuals.

So the solution to them not paying would be to make it impossible to pay anything?

That's a modern equivalent of a debtors' prison where people were imprisoned for debt and couldn't be released unless they paid off the debt, but had no means by which to earn money to pay the debt. A Catch-22 paradox.

The consequence of removing the ability to pass pre-employment checks, to be automatically excluded or at least always discounted upon application from a huge number of roles, to be unable to open bank accounts, accept deliveries, prove name, prove a right to receive medical treatment other than emergencies, no proof of right to work, make it damn near impossible to get a phone, somewhere to live or in many places (as per the regular threads about how it's impossible to work/live without a car outside London and that it's a fundamental part of adulting to drive) get to work would fundamentally be a punitive punishment of destitution for leaving the woman - or of being left - without paying substantial ongoing compensatory damages for the hurt to feelings.

It's not about the children when the proposed penalty would make it impossible for many to pay anything. It's not about the children when the proposed penalty would make it impossible for the NRP to have a home where the children would maintain contact with their other parent. It's not about the children when it's all about destroying the ex at all costs - it's about scorched earth vengeance for being the person the RP decided to reproduce with and is angrily regretting their choice.

None of that would have been any good for my children or our relationship.

You’ll all LOVE this one too!! For a miraculous period of about 4 months, my ex paid. I got a notification that £90 had been received but I didn’t receive it. When I queried why, the CMS said that he owed fees to them and THEIR FEES TOOK PRIORITY!!

They claim that they’re all about the kids but they really aren’t. If you owe the HMRC £5 they’ll hound you for it for years. An NRP owes £25k, the CMS are just like ‘is there any chance you could pay something?’

‘Ah, well…never mind. Sorry for bothering you’

I’m amazed that they’ve used it that many times to be honest. They grandly say that they’ve got these powers but non-payers know they won’t be used so continue not giving a shit.

They need to move to the American system where it’s way more joined up with other department. Eg. in some states, if you owe more than a certain amount ($2500 I believe) you can’t renew your drivers licence and passport. It’s not every state but why can’t this be adopted here?

My child is an adult now but I’m still owed thousands. The only chance of getting it is if my ex ever inherits something but even then I don’t hold out much hope. I’ve already been waiting 13 years 🤷‍♀️

I've said this before on here and got a lot of stick for it, but women are actually the key in this.

We're half the voting public, but we're not vocal about this.

If it was societally unacceptable to women for our partners, brothers and friends to not pay for their kids it would become an issue.

While it's not socially unacceptable it's not going to be a political issue and nothing will change.

The current system absolutely works for the vast majority of men.

I'm not sure why you're so keen to absolve them of the responsibility for their kids and call financial support from their father "extra help" that shouldn't be relied upon.

Nobody is going on holiday with child maintenence payments when their poor dad can't afford to travel to see them considering a variation can be applied for and a reduction to maintenence granted if the travel expenses are over a tenner a week.

Yes. Savings don't generally come into it unless they have so much they have an income from the interest.

So in a euromillions win scenario the interest could be classed as income but the main win wouldn't be considered.

If there were arrears CMS could (but probably wouldn't) take it from their bank account.

As I said it is never going to be fair for either side. The res parent has more support towards rent than non res parent. I was the single res parent and know it’s very doable to raise children without the need of cms payments. Not saying that means fathers shouldn’t contribute. I decided the children were to live with me so it was my job to provide for them, any extra help was appreciated but shouldn’t be relied on.

calculations are done after work place pensions so money could still be moved there to dodge the system.

no one can seem to better themselves financially with this system. The system is abused by both sides but many women will not see that.

if a res parent who doesn’t work can afford to take the children aboard every year due to cms payments but the non res parent can’t afford to travel to see the children then clearly the system is not working. To
me seeing the non res parent is more important than constant holidays!

I do not know the answer on how to fix the system. But I do know the current system doesn’t work for either side.

You’ve nailed it! No one in power actually cares.

Non resident parent can win the euro millions and CMS won’t take it into consideration. It is also really hard - nigh on impossible - for the cms to even look at the bank account of the non resident parent. My ex declared earnings of £14,000 a year to HMRC despite being a plasterer who tells me he works 6 days a week and owes me thousands. Still cms struggle to act apart from sending letters and ringing him (he ignores both)

There is very little political pressure for CM because CM doesn't ptovide a net win for votes. If they improve CM then the claimant is happy and might vote for them but on the other hand the non-resident parent won't be happy and might not vote for them.

Everything in this country is done for votes, the votes to continue in power, v little is done for the right reasons.

What happens if the amount the non-res parent is asked to pay so that it's affordable for them means that the resident parent can't afford rent and basic living conditions for their children?

Btw the reason that they changed from calculating based on net pay to gross pay was because a lot of payers were dumping a big chunk of their salaries into pensions etc so their maintenance obligations were reduced.

It should be added to his tax code and the company be held in contempt.

I've learnt from this post that CMS can confiscate passports and driving licences. If you don't earn enough to pay CM, you need neither. So why isn't this enforced? A group of heavies might be an alternative approach.

That is scandalous.

They are protecting men as usual.

Hang on, so non resident parents can have much more in savings and still escape maintenance than single parents can have in savings (6k to 19k, NEVER increased for inflation either by the way) before universal credit investigates them?

Society doesn’t yet shame men who abandon their children, I hope it does in the future. Some poor woman has married my ex and had more children with him, despite being fully aware of him never seeing or paying for his first child.

My case with CMS is a joke. It’s basically just an incorrect data gathering service, they never do anything to recover any money.

I think a better solution would be to privatise the service, hand it over to one of those parking eye type companies, they seem to be able to get money out of people.

To me over paying is paying more than a person can afford. It’s very easy to sit and say but it’s for the child. But if the paying parent can’t afford his rent or basic living conditions because his calculations as based on gross salary from the previous tax year than that clearly is “overpaying”

I Would hate to be the person that has to decide what a reasonable amount is needed. But every body deserves a basic standard of living

No not really. What does “overpaying” really even mean in this context 🤷

Funny thing is I was a single parent bringing up 3 children, left the cheap council house and moved into private rented while only working part time. At the time I could of took my ex to cms (that started later due to his new partner) but I would rather him have money available to do things with the kids when they were occasionally in his care.

so when I say I see problems for both sides I am being honest.

The worst thing about the whole system is that, say one of my dc decided they wanted to live with their dad, legally I would have to pay about £300 a month maintenance to him. This is despite the fact that a) he wouldn’t be paying ME maintenance for our other child so it doesn’t cancel it out like it should, and b) he hasn’t paid proper maintenance in over 2 years.

Anyway it’ll never happen because no way he’d want one of the kids living with him. But it’s a joke.

I think we should change the system tbh. Instead of it being a % of earnings at any given time it should be a decent flat rate per week, per month. That is truly sufficient to raise a child including childcare costs. And then that should be held as a debt in a similar way to a tuition loan for students. So the resident parent gets the money in the moment and then it is either paid fully at the time or at affordable rates for the non resident parent even if it takes them till their 90 to pay it. Welfare spending could also then be reduced as maintenance could reasonably be factored into household income.