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

Guest posts

"Loopholes in the child maintenance system mean children are going without"

120 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 05/07/2017 12:46

Time and time again, Gingerbread hears from single parents who are fighting a failing system - the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) - to secure accurate maintenance payments for their child. Child maintenance can help to give a child a decent quality of life by providing vital assistance for everyday expenses – such food, clothing, travel, and school costs. Money isn't everything, but children don't come free.

Our Maintenance Matters campaign has recently exposed some of the loopholes in the CMS that allow paying parents to avoid paying maintenance based on their true income. One common issue is that paying parents with often considerable assets can end up paying a bare minimum, since several sources of income aren't taken into consideration by the CMS. In other cases, self-employed parents are able to get away with under-reporting their income in order to reduce their payments. Our latest report 'Children deserve more' highlights the struggles many single parents face in their fight to get true financial resources taken into account for child maintenance.

Although the CMS is trying to work with HMRC to understand paying parents' taxable data, the reality is that this isn't happening for some families. Parents who have questioned their calculations with the CMS are told to contact HMRC. But often little support or resource is given to find a solution.

It's clear that some of the changes to child maintenance system have been designed for administrative ease, rather than to work in the best interests of children. For example, safeguards that were in place against maintenance avoidance and evasion have been dropped. Although receiving parents can query payments by applying for a 'variation' on specific grounds, they still have to prove their ex has hidden financial resources. As a result, parents have to turn into private investigators in order to push the CMS to take action. To add insult to injury, parents are often kept in the dark about the options they have to challenge maintenance payments.

Lee, a mother whose story is similar to others we hear at Gingerbread said: "It's made me an ace private investigator against my nature. I've turned up all the evidence – jobs, company directorships, director's loans, payslips, spending, assets – everything you can think of. I turned the spotlight on the loopholes he used to claim he had no earnings despite having a job, and built up a stack of evidence as thick as your arm."

The government says that it is catering for all circumstances, and is working closely with HMRC to identify and prevent maintenance evasion. But in the vein of simplifying their service and saving on administrative costs, children are losing out.

Gingerbread is calling for the Department for Work and Pensions to have a comprehensive strategy to combat evasion and avoidance to ensure children do not go without.

Gingerbread has lots of helpful advice and information about this issue. So if you think your child maintenance calculation is wrong or you don't think the full circumstances are being taken into account, please take a look at advice for cases still under the Child Support Agency (CSA) as well as cases now under the new CMS.

You can help Gingerbread spread the word about this failing CMS by sharing the campaign on Facebook and Twitter.

Since the launch Maintenance Matters last year, we've made amazing progress. We've galvanised support across the political divide and continue to work with single parents to share their stories. Now with a newly elected government, we want to support more single parents to engage with their MP and campaign on the issues that matter to them.

Check out Gingerbread's new campaign toolkit for more tips and advice on how to campaign.

OP posts:
LowGravity · 06/07/2017 20:31

Yep, I just mentioned on another thread, it's not just about the financial abuse, it's the emotional abuse too. I recently wrote to me ex at my ds's request afetr 8 years of no contact, he wants to see his dad, completely blanked me. DS is asking daily if he's replied yet, it's fucking heart breaking and harder than the days I've had to skip meals.

LowGravity · 06/07/2017 20:32

my I'm not from Yorkshire!

phoenixtherabbit · 06/07/2017 20:42

Flip the sexes and there is very little support for resident fathers. DH regularly gets told he is a terrible person for "taking her kids off her and making her pay as well". Friends and family support that because it's such a horrible thing to not live with your kids, if you're female, that paying for it is adding insult to injury.

Also because he's a bloke and has a job, he "doesn't need the money". Whereas his ex, a woman with a job, does, apparently. It's also always assumed that we are basically where the kids sleep at night in the week, their "real" home is with mum, when in reality they go to their mums about three nights a month, even school holidays.

Yep. Nobody gave a shiny shit when dps ex refused to pay maintenance after she kicked out her 12yo son because "she's had her baby taken off her"

Yep. That same baby she didn't let dp see for a while. That baby she tried to turn against his dad.

And we got the whole "She's a single mum you're a couple" yes a couple who now have hundreds of pounds extra expense no extra in come to cover it.

LowGravity · 06/07/2017 20:51

Which is why this thread about resident parents , of either sex. It's just the majority (91%) of resident parents are female which will be reflected in the posts.

donners312 · 06/07/2017 21:03

Not paying child maintenance should be treated as child neglect.

The NRP who is not paying the correct amount (and not the pathetic 16% they say) is avoiding paying to financially abuse the ex and DC. Funny how often (I know not always) it is the very same parent who also claims they are not allowed to see their children and that the mother has turned the DC against them (and not because of their lack of care or thoughtless actions)

Something needs to be done it should be a criminal act and they should also have their parental responsibility taken off them (to prevent further abuse and to allow the RP to make decisions without their stupid and obstructive input).

They are not parents and more sperm (or egg) donors with rights.

prettywhiteguitar · 06/07/2017 23:05

All through these changes he pays what he wants and is self employed so I have no idea what is proportionate.

Notreallyarsed · 07/07/2017 09:02

"If we treated our children like THEY do we'd be prosecuted for neglect"?!

Oh get off your fucking high horse, this comment was in relation to NRP who do not step up and take care of their kids, provide for their kids emotionally, financially and physically. My XH is a useless prick, he pays fuck all, he rocks up once a fortnight for his visits because it's his "right", yet in 10 years has done no actual day to day parenting of any kind whatsoever. Do I use that as an excuse to attack all male NRP, because my ex is a dick? No. You need to read back your posts NameChange because you're twisting everything to suit your own agenda. Take it up with the family court if you're unhappy, because believe me, they listen to biological fathers with parental rights, at any cost! It's why I have to hand my beautiful boy over to his violent (to me not to DS) dad, knowing that he'll be stuck playing Xbox in a room on his own because his dad doesn't give a shit. The alternative? I get jailed for 28 days for contempt of court.

user1488198315 · 07/07/2017 10:16

The whole system is unfair because one system does not fit every single situation....

CMS system has been put together by politicians and computer geeks without ANY consideration to the needs of ALL the parties involved with parenting.

The staff at the CMS do not seem to know their backside from their elbow and don't seem to be given adequate training to communicate effectively or help anyone.... so given that, is it any wonder than the CSA and now the CMS have been failing ALL the fair and decent parents.... and more importantly children.

Everyone goes on about CM having nothing to do with a parent seeing their child, however, as part of the formula to calculate the amount due, you have to enter the amount of nights the child stays over with the NRP??? that in itself is a contradiction in terms... some RPs refuse over night stays with NRP in case their CM is reduced, and some NRPs fight for 50/50 shared care so that they don't pay anything and the poor child is caught in the middle... no matter what time a child spends with it's parent, money is always spent... whether it's on food, entertainment, electricity... but that's not included in the calculation...

My personal experience is that the CMS said that the minimum my daughters father should pay (based on his income) was hundreds of pounds per month and he was really upset so we both sat down to work out his basic core outgoings and he genuinely couldn't afford what they said... he had all the same bills I had to pay and when they were, he was left with very little, so we agreed that he just spent money on our daughter when she was with him and we have never fought over money and my daughter has never gone without.... she has a fantastic relationship with her Dad and we all get along fine...

I truly believe that money is the root of all evil... and our government needs to open their eyes...

user1488198315 · 07/07/2017 10:33

donners312

Your comment really pIsses me off.... 16% is a lot of money to come off before anything else is paid, such as rent, bills, food etc...

Could you afford to hand over 16% of your income before anything else is paid.... seriously, sit down and work it out... assuming you are NOT getting WTC or CTC because that is not money you have worked hard for and earned... it's you being subsidised by the government and I'm sure if NRP's were subsidised in the same way... they would not think twice about paying 16%....

Kpo58 · 07/07/2017 10:39

Why can they not force the maintenance to be paid with an Attachment of Earnings Order? Surely it's easier to make HR automatically pay a percentage straight from their salary rather than CMS keep having to work it out. Though this probably won't work for those paid cash in hand or are self employed.

Notreallyarsed · 07/07/2017 10:53

Or if NRP actually contributed clothes/school trip money/dinner money/new shoes/basic expenses of parenting maybe the CMS wouldn't be needed? I've never wanted money from XH, just a basic sense of responsibility and contributing half of big expenses like school uniform/school trips/new clothes, but have had fuck all. He actually wanted thanks for buying a tracksuit and the wrong size trainers a month ago. I told him that there wasn't a chance in hell I'd be grateful for one effort in 10 1/2 years, and in fact he should be thanking me and DP for ensuring DS1 has never gone without!

user1488198315 · 07/07/2017 11:35

absolutely Notreallyarsed.... that's my feelings... any contribution is better than nothing... if it's not money to the RP then clothing, food, money to the kids... something/anything that benefits the kids is what it should be about for both parents...

NameChanger22 · 07/07/2017 11:51

I got nothing for over 8 years because the CSA were beyond terrible and I had to do all the investigation work for them, which I wasn't able to do. I think they assumed I was dealing with a reasonable human being who was happy to tell me where he lived and worked (when it was obvious I wasn't dealing with a reasonable human because reasonable human beings don't try to avoid supporting their children).

Then when the CMS came in I was completely sceptical that they would be any better and I was completely against being charged for using their services. So I didn't register for a while. But when I did I was pleasantly surprised and it appears they've got their act together a little bit and I'm now in receipt of a small amount of maintenance. I think I'm still in shock. The ex is too, he assumed he'd never have to pay a penny to support his child.

I think the main problem now is tackling the self-employed workers and those who earn extras on top of their salary. There needs to be a huge crackdown on this.

donners312 · 07/07/2017 12:48

user1488198315 - Your comments don't make sense - how can you imagine that 16% of your income is too much to pay when by your comments you can't live on the 84% you get to keep by yourself?

I think you would be pretty hard pressed to find a RP only contributing 16% of their income to bring the children up?

It will be 100% plus debt plus other family contributing!!!

Faithless12 · 07/07/2017 13:41

user1488198315 Yup. I would happily hand over 16% as 75% of my earnings went on childcare. I'd be far better off if I just gave over 16% and only fed DS two meals while I had him for 2 days out of a fortnight. It's utterly ridiculous to moan about ensuing your child doesn't go without.

Diamonddealeroncemore · 07/07/2017 13:53

It's the self employed bit that is a big problem. The CMS got a deduction of earnings for my ex so now he contracts through his own limited company. They can't touch that bank account so he pays himself a tiny amount for paye and then takes everything as directors dividends straight from the company. And keeps moving so they can't find him. And still has full contact with our son. I agree with what others have said, make non payment on a par with tax avoidance, HMRC wouldn't wait 9 years for their money and yet that is how long I've had to wait!

donners312 · 07/07/2017 13:55

yes it is disgusting - self employed, going overseas, refusing to work etc it all amounts to the same thing. The financial abuse of your children and they are getting away with it!

lifeinthecountry · 07/07/2017 13:57

I hate that every thread on this issue is hijacked by NRP griping about completely unrelated issues.

The CSA/CMA are completely crap and not fit for purpose. I began dealing with them over 20 years ago - at one time they assessed arrears of over £30,000, never got a penny, of course. I eventually stopped even trying and just accepted I'd be bringing my children up with no help. Four years ago, found myself a single parent again, no maintenance yet again, but this time I just didn't bother. Why put myself through all the stress of dealing with the CMA for absolutely nothing? So I alone know two NRP who completely abdicated their responsibility (three, in fact, because my first exh's wife refused to pay maintenance for her 4 children too). I'm sure I'm not alone, I would guess there are many more RP out there who receive no/minimal maintenance than those who receive a decent amount.

It's completely wrong and I agree it should be treated much more seriously, with significant penalities. Until that happens nothing will change.

reallyanotherone · 07/07/2017 13:57

Directors dividends are declared on tax returns and company reports so are easy to track. I think it's about £11 to get company accounts if cms need evidence.

It's the sole trader cash in hand that's the bigger issue, if they don't declare it it doesn't exist.

Graphista · 07/07/2017 19:54

What lottie911 said at 0708 yesterday is spot on.

Also what smileyface said. I moved to be near family for support too. Ex kicked off big even though as he's in army he can be sent God knows where at any time AND he was moved not long after we moved anyway and it's actually easier for him to see her IF he was actually interested as both of us now live near international airports. It's a 50 min plane ride and not that expensive. When he was seeing dd I not only met him halfway on cost but also on travel even though I'm a terrified flyer.

"As to this, "I have yet to come across an nrp who has GENUINELY been unfairly stopped from seeing their children. "

This is so utterly ignorant its unbelievable." How is it ignorant!? It's my personal experience AND I'm not just talking about fathers. I'm well versed in 3 cases that involve mothers as nrps who were not seeing their children for at least some years since the split because seeing them would have been harmful for the children. In one case serious drug & alcohol addiction, in another post partum psychosis and in another seriously harmful neglect.

Abbsisspartacus if she's in full time education he has to pay until she's 19.

Also agree it's wrong that many children are enduring contact they don't want. Even when my ex did see our dd he treated her different to his other kids and infantilised her. He also as she got older took her phone off her as he didn't want her calling me when she was there. She's much older than his other kids but she was given same portion sizes. She has a high metabolism and needs a lot of (healthy) cals. She'd come back having lost weight and starving. First thing I needed to do every time I got her back was give her a big meal. And yes I did try to get all this addressed but to no avail. Dd made her own decision not to contact her father first 6 years ago. It was always her calling/messaging him. He now calls once a year on her birthday for maybe 5 mins and has only vaguely mentioned her visiting him twice.

BUT back to the topic. Whether the nrp sees the child or not it's still their child their (half) responsibility to ensure that child is fed, clothed etc.

"I don't pay just the minimum. I also have to pay for clothes which then disappear to their Mums every fortnight and don't come back, shoes, makeup, toys etc ditto. That's a bloody expensive game." I did read the full sentence - heard it all before. I'd lay odds you STILL don't pay out as much as the RP.

"even before she decided she'd play away and end the marriage" the reason the marriage ended is NOTHING to do with your responsibility to your children.

What was the stated reason for your ex's move? Because the court wouldn't agree for no reason.

Going after non paying nrp's makes no difference to the benefits bill, it's not included.

Caroline'sbeanies that's only the RP's that have applied to cms AND a 'successful collection' can be as little as £5 over a YEAR. Many especially victims of Dv never even apply to cms.

A friend of mines ex is now married to a woman of 'independant means' neither of them work as they don't need to. But he also doesn't pay maintenance even though he is literally living a millionaires possibly even billionaires lifestyle.

"Let's be real about who deserves condemnation here, eh?" Hear hear!

Instead NRP's see it as

1 NOT a minimum payment but an amount they are 'forced' to pay unfairly

2 a payment superfluous to requirement by the RP - NO it makes a huge difference to be able to pay things even a little more easily.

3 As purely a financial issue - NO it lets the nrp know that they're not taking the burden of raising the child alone.

4 that the kids will either not know nor care. Yes they do they're not stupid, even if the RP doesn't say anything to them they figure it out as they get older and will ask RP or NRP. When they learn their nrp doesn't pay it hurts them. Whether they're kids or adults when they learn this. Plenty of adult posters on here have said how hurt they were by their nrp not paying. Not just because they missed out as a result (school trips etc) but because it shows them that

the nrp DIDN'T care, that they HATED their ex MORE than they LOVED their kids!

user1499421397 · 07/07/2017 23:36

My son's dad called them to voluntarily declare his earnings of £1300 a week so he could pay the correct amount of around £150-£200pw instead of the £24pw they calculated from his tax return from 2 years prior. They asked him to provide evidence of his earnings which he didn't do because of the hassle. 🙄 He owes £5000+ in arrears dating back 10 years, the rate he's paying them off my son will be 40 by the time they're cleared. Meanwhile they deduct money from the current payments and he picks and chooses when he pays but as long as he's paying something they won't hassle him. I will have waited 30 years for child support when I eventually get it, which I won't because he'll be dead by then 🙄

phoenixtherabbit · 08/07/2017 09:22

4 that the kids will either not know nor care. Yes they do they're not stupid, even if the RP doesn't say anything to them they figure it out as they get older and will ask RP or NRP. When they learn their nrp doesn't pay it hurts them. Whether they're kids or adults when they learn this. Plenty of adult posters on here have said how hurt they were by their nrp not paying. Not just because they missed out as a result (school trips etc) but because it shows them that

No it actually hurts when a parent cba to see you. The money my dad never paid didn't and doesn't mean anything to me.

Money doesn't buy you love.

user1499421397 · 08/07/2017 10:19

My son's dad actually emailed the words 'I'd rather die than give you what you think you deserve' translation: I'd rather die than support my kid. No surprise there, my son wrote him off years ago when he realised himself that the only thing he's consistent at is being inconsistent. Except if there's drinking involved.

ShapelyBingoWing · 08/07/2017 10:49

user1488198315

If I could raise DD on just 16% of my income, I'd jump at the chance. Perspective, dear. Ex's monthly contributions don't even cover his half of her childcare costs after government deductions. So, the remainder of those costs plus literally all of her living expenses fall to me to cover. Despite his income being more than twice what mine is.

Paying 16% of your wage to cover a phone bill would be excessive. Towards the cost of raising a child though? Unless the paying parent is very well paid, it's abysmal.

phoenixtherabbit · 08/07/2017 13:26

I've just worked out 16% of my wage I don't spend that amount every week on my child. It doesn't cost me that much to feed/clothe him.

If I didn't have him I'd still be paying mortgage gas and electric so i wouldn't really count that.

I spend a lot on childcare but then if I was single I'd get a lot more tax credits to cover it so...

On balance based on my own wage 16% seems fair to me.