Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Dadsnet

Speak to new fathers on our Dads forum.

Is the CSA legislation wrong?

81 replies

erasurefan · 27/10/2017 13:29

Hi Guys,

First time poster here. I just had to get something off my chest before I go insane.

Until a week ago, since 2008 (when the ex moved her and my kid to Glasgow, 300 miles away) I'd been paying £25 a week for my child to my ex. This was based on the CSA calculator, by us both sitting down and calculating it based on the fact my child would stay with 3-4 nights a week if my ex stayed living just around the corner from me, so making the respective reduction in the actual payment. We wrote up a little letter and both signed it, to this agreement.

Aside from the child maintenance, since 2008, I've also been putting £40 a month (as have my parents - so £80 a month in all) into a bank account (which my and my parents set up) for said child to spend on whatever she likes - I have no idea where this money goes or what its spent on - I've never asked.

I've also contributed £100 every year towards school trips, and £50 a year for school uniforms, without any questions..

So... All in all my daughter gets money to her mum, and money to herself.

Last week, things took a twist and shes approached the CSA, who've said that around £44ish a week is more realistic and told me that is what I have to pay going forwards. Now, considering I actually earn about £2k a year less than when we were together, I found that as a bit of a stab in the chest in the steep (IMO) rise.

I've spoke to CSA for hours over the last few days and asked how this is a fair assessment considering I live so far away. The only reduction they can make are for my travelling expenses (roughly £200 each journey, four times a year), and for the fact I have her 52 days a year.

However - My ex has told the CSA that I dont have her 52 days a year - So, they've just gone with that, due to their "legislation" which favours the mother in every scenario, and theyve refused that particular reduction.

I try to organise to have my child every school holiday, but, as the years have gone by, my ex is making this increasingly difficult to arrange. She leaves everything to the last minute (and now my child does the same!) so my current partner and I have to either pay a fortune for any kind of holiday for us all, or cant get the time off work, anyway and have to only see her for a couple of days.

So, my question, I guess, is, do you think the CSA regulation of going with whatever the mum says is right....?

Because, the situation I'm in at the moment is my ex will do everything in her power to make sure I don't get to have my child more than 52 days a year, which is kind of, IMO, denying access... Safe in the knowledge that she will actually get paid MORE money from me for the "privilege".

I've been on the phone to the CSA for two hours this morning, and all they can suggest (even though they sympathise with me greatly) is that if I dont agree with their regulation to write a letter to my MP to try to get the regulation amended. Yeah, right.

It's heartbreaking to know I keep getting a raw deal - I cant talk about it without having tears in my eyes - I do all the travelling, pay all this money, and have the nightmare of logistics four times a year and a very, very awkward ex, and I'm the bad guy.

I just wondered if there were any Dad's out there in a similar situation that could lend an ear, as, at the moment - although my girlfriend as been absolutely amazing and a rock for me - it still feels like no-one is this same situation, and it feels....well, lonely, I guess.

OP posts:
Akire · 30/10/2017 13:57

If you pay £25 now plus £80 pocket money from you and Gp the new total is only £176 so less than what’s shws getting now. That’s if Gp give you pocket money for you send for maintence.
It is still low to cover everything.

Lottie509 · 30/10/2017 13:59

Squirrels you are aware babies grow into children arent you? They start to want to join extra curricular activities, swimming lessons, Whatever groups they want to join, clothing, shoes all get more expensive the older they get, They eat alot more, Kids are expensive £44 is not enough to fully cover the growing needs of a child.

Ninjakittysmells · 30/10/2017 14:01

Squirrels before I had DS I had a room in a shared flat and needed to move out to get a 2 bed flat. My bills had been included before, but I then had gas / elec / water / council tax to pay. I couldn’t work in my old job (it was in event management and I travelled away a lot) so went back part time in a lesser paid position instead of full time. I got tax credits etc, but it didn’t and doesn’t, even begin to touch the impact of having a child financially. Ds is 5 now, his food intake is hefty and specific. He wants to goto the Halloween party this weekend so he needed an outfit etc. There are lots of little things which creep in. When you have no money and are raising a child as best you can, it’s galling to be told it’s not that hard..... especially from someone who is happily coupled up so is just speculating!

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:04

Ah yours is still in nappies squirrel? That explains it. Babies are (can be) cheap. Children are not (and we're not in anyway a gadgety house or any expensive habits to speak of, but it adds up).

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:06

Course i am. We have a 13 year old as well. He costs slightly more.

You live to your means surely? You cant expect to put your child through x amount of classes a week and buy an expensive food shop and ask your ex to pay more.

Oh and we get £23 a week from dps ex so i am well aware what it does and doesnt cover. But we also get child benefit so i dont feel i can whinge as he doesnt exacrly cost us hundreds.

I certainly wouldn't start buying all sorts and enrollng in clubs then crying about what i cant afford because we live to our means, we know what we get from the ex so we go on that.

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:10

Have a read;

www.cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/CostofaChild2016_web.pdf

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:11

I get that ninja but surely you knew you would have to move and change jobs before you had the baby? So obviously youre outgoings had to change. You cant blame /charge the nrp for that. They of course shpuld contribute to the child but im not sure you changing job is their "problem" (for want of a better word)

Lottie509 · 30/10/2017 14:16

To be fair squirrels I think swimming lessons are pretty basic classes that every child should take, cubs are a fantastic way of getting your child out there enjoying and learning new things and life skills and on the lower end of the pay scale although. I'm not talking about horse riding or golf. Why should a child go without because the other parent barely pays for them. and if you dont have a 13 year old eating you out of house and home and constantly growing so needing new clothes all the time is he really a 13 year old?

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:18

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:19

He eats a lot yes but i dont buy expensive crap so it doesnt cost me a fortune..

I did swimming lessons at school... i dont think it is a must do. You can teach your child yourself like many people do.. its a nice way to spend time together too.

Stuff like that should be a joint decision. You cant just decide yourself and ask the other parent for half without prior agreement.

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:21

Im not saying anyone should go without Confused
Maybe, battleax i am just sensible with my cash and dont like pressuring others into paying for things they had no say in?

Parents should pay maintenance absolutely, contribute to clothes, activities etc with prior agreement. Not just be asked to hand over money left right and centre and i say that as someone who recieves maintenance.

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:22

Stuff like that should be a joint decision. You cant just decide yourself and ask the other parent for half without prior agreement.

She's not. She's applied for statutory CM and so OP has received an assessment that is the legal minimum acceptable contribution for his income. The only problem is that he's too tight and too controlling to pay it, but he's going to have to. So that's that.

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:23

I never said she was.

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:24

Maybe, battleax i am just sensible with my cash and dont like pressuring others into paying for things they had no say in?

Funny it sounded more like you were having a pop at ninja for having the sheer gall and inefficiency to be left a single parent by some feckless man.

Lottie509 · 30/10/2017 14:26

Whether you pay for swimming lessons or take a child yourself to teach them it still costs money squirrel. Everything does. Even "cheap food"

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:26

Eh, no.. i was just stating that she knew shed have to move?

Not her fault he left.. don't think i said it was... i certainly never said she was inefficient..

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:26

Of course it does. When have i said it doesnt?! Jesus christ.

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:27

I am clearly in the minority of people who dont find that children cost millions Confused

LineysRun · 30/10/2017 14:27

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

LineysRun · 30/10/2017 14:29

Actually I've just reported myself. Shouldn't let this kind of crap get to me.

Apologies

erasurefan · 30/10/2017 14:30

You are missing the point... My point or "fuss" as you call it was about the legislation of the CSA to always err on the side of the mother on every debatable decision... And whether this is right or wrong.

For example, every school holiday I travel around 1200 miles to collect and return my child to her home. For years and years and years I've been doing that....

Have a guess what she put for the amount of nights a year I have my child.... Yep, 0.

So, the CSA have registered it as 0.

OP posts:
Lottie509 · 30/10/2017 14:31

Is £44 a week millions then?

LineysRun · 30/10/2017 14:32

Wow, OP. You hit that report button even before I did. You on a mission or something?

Battleax · 30/10/2017 14:33

My point or "fuss" as you call it was about the legislation of the CSA to always err on the side of the mother on every debatable decision... And whether this is right or wrong.

You're actually quite incorrect about that. There are certain things that the ask you that they are also obliged to believe the answers to, even if they're wrong. It's all built on a system of just believing people unless the other side can prove otherwise. All very Alice in Wonderland but it cuts both ways.

HelloSquirrels · 30/10/2017 14:34

No not millions bur not nothing either...

Swipe left for the next trending thread