CSA reform - single parents to pay to use service - to be very angry!!

[timefliesby]

www.gingerbread.org.uk/news_detail.aspx?ID=235

So, the government is closing all existing child maintenance cases over the next three years and washing its hands of the £3.5 billion it has FAILED to collect on behalf of single parents. They say they'd like to give separated parents "the chance to come to a private arrangement" or failing that, all those single parents - you know, the ones that aren't getting anything for their children - to PAY to use the CSA. Yes that's right...pay to use the service which has FAILED to collect £3.5 billion owed. But just to hoodwink you into thinking you're getting a new service they'll rebrand it the CMS (wonder how much that's costing?).

Here's a revolutionary thought...the parents that are on friendly enough terms to agree a private arrangement have got a private arrangement already. Which harebrained, ignorant, idiot sat and looked at it and went "I know...we'll just get them to agree it between themselves"...no matter that some of them may have escaped just about with their limbs in place or endured years of control freak behaviour from the non-resident parent.

WHAT A JOKE!!!!

It used to be with the jurisdiction of the courts, because the only language these non-resident parents actually understand is "the bailiffs are going to be sent in" or "you will be going to prison.. if you don't adequately contribute to your children's upkeep."

Then the CSA came along and children suffered for it...now it's the CMS which is basically just the government's excuse to wash their hands of the whole debacle because which cash strapped, single parent can afford to pay for a service that fails to actually secure them any financial contribution towards their children???

Oh and the £3.5 billion is much lower than the figure would be had they actually made a maintenance decision on all those self employed fathers claiming they live on £600 a month whilst owning several companies...

DISCUSS PLEASE!

[Lioninthesun]

It is sounding very much as though many people are still under the false idea that single mothers are teens mainly on benefits. IIRC over half are in their mid 30's and most of us would work if childcare fees didn't cancel out our wages. Myself, there is no point in working to pay nursery fees until she is 3 and gets 15hrs free. I intend to do this. I am not on benefits either.
I also like the assumption that women are out to 'trap' men, not than men shagged around fecklessly and therefore it is 50% of their responsibility.

[Lioninthesun]

So Lisa seeing as I am not on benefits, am I now too well off to be entitled to maintenance for DD?
Single mothers can't win whatever we do. We work = never see kids and always tired so bad mum. We don't work = feckless, lazy and entitled so no need for father to pay for his own child.

[JohnFarleysRuskin]

Another thing that really annoyed me about the csa, was that their letters were riddled with mistakes.

If you're going to demand every bit of financial info from someone from the last five years (twice because of another racking mix up) at least bloody spell correctly.

Hmmm.

[fedupbutfine]

I am not assuming that at all. it was a viable general question

no, it's not a 'viable general question'. Whether I work or not has no bearing whatsoever on my ex's financial (emotional, practical...) responsibility towards our children. As it happens, I manage pretty well. But that doesn't mean that my ex should walk away scott free. My childcare bill alone comes in at over £800 a month. Why shouldn't he be making a fair contribution towards that (let alone put some food in his children's mouths and clothes on their backs or give them a warm house to live in), regardless of the fact I can afford it without his support? Similarly, if I find myself unable to work tomorrow, my ex still needs to be making a contribution, regardless of whether or not the State will make sure we're not on the streets. My working status (or not) has fuck all to do with anything, frankly.

[Lisa3578]

I totally agree that child care costs are far to high and wipe wages out. Child care should be free or heavily subsidised that it allows single mothers/married mothers/ mothers in relationships to go out and work.

as said, there are a lot of people out there who sponge off the state by having children and because they are too lazy to work, and there are fathers out there who shag around and want nothing to do with their child and have no responsibility towards them.

the point is not to tar everyone with the same brush which is what a lot of people do. "Single mothers are all on benefits etc and single feckless fathers should be jailed for avoiding maintenance" because this is not always the case.

[fedupbutfine]

Yes, it's all about the feckless....sigh. You miss the point. Big time. Never mind.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

Neither is being offensive about lone parents lisa how exactly is it greedy to want the minimum amount they should be paying if assessed? Incidentally how does one obtain 3 children by 5 men?

Last time I checked according to gingerbread more single parents are in work than not.

happymummy you jump on these threads all the time saying exactly the same things about pwc implying they are feckless neglectful and then throw in a fair amount of benefit assumptions.

Do you imagine that the only people who have issues getting the other parent to face up to responsibilities are those who sleep with people they don't know and that they must be on very low incomes irresponsible immature child abusers?

[TheGirlFromIpanema]

Fucking hell!! Lots of people really really eager to come along and point out that not all NRP's are like that

Nice to know that the owners of such comments as -

I think it's fair to say that there is as much anecdotal evidence about vexatious RP applicants as there is about non-paying NRP

or

Might I point out that some (not all mothers) who are on benefits and have 3 kids to 5 different guys, their families are probably of the same mindset in getting something for nothing, so this will be 'socially acceptable' for them in the point of view of family/friends

or

in the cases where the 'child maintenance' is not going towards maintaining the child (booze, fags and alike), then there needs to be a system of accountability or an electronic system where both parents can see where monies have been spent (rent, utility bills) and that that money has been spent of 'maintaining' the childs needs.

are all out in force today to really, really, really make the important points they have

I mean a discussion about CSA reform should really be all about the poor NRP's who do nothing but play fair yet still get bad press

[Lioninthesun]

There are some figures for you here Lisa actually 57% of us work
www.gingerbread.org.uk/content/793/Mythbusting-through-Storify

As I said I don't but will when DD is 3. That is worth adding to the figures - how many of those non-working can't work due to child care costs. How many would work if NRP paid the percentage they were meant to? How much tax does that give back to the system.

Remember 3/5 single parents get NO maintenance at all.

I get £5 per week from DD's dad who is on around £60k working for his old company diverting wages through his own company mysteriously set up when CSA caught up to him and is now claiming to earn below minimum wage. It's a common lie, but CSA can't prove it [long story I won't go into] despite telling me they see this every day and are relatively powerless to collect.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

theGirl

It is almost impossible to have any type of discussion on here about the ones who do everything they can to avoid or minimise payment commit fraud and stuff like that without a few posters jumping in with

But your all malicious greedy slags who are using the CSA to punish the NRP. Yet nobody but nobody has ever been able to explain exactly why paying the % required on time is a punishment

[Lioninthesun]

TheGirl remind you of this? www.theawl.com/2014/04/the-adventures-of-not-all-men

[Happybeard]

What's the bit about paying CM for stepchildren???? As in, towards your step children if you leave their biological parent, or as in pay the RP of your stepchildren maintenance?

Either way I can't understand under what circumstances that would be ruled.

[NeedsAsockamnesty]

You've lost me there happybeard

[Happybeard]

lioninthesun that is hilarious!

[Happybeard]

Sorry sock, here:

What child maintenance payments can a court order?
The court (or the sheriff in Scotland) still has powers to make orders for:
Payment of school fees
Child maintenance for stepchildren or disabled children
Child maintenance for those who are in further education and certain other specific situations

[alita7]

firstly I was close to both my friend and his ex until recently when I got fed up of her disgusting behaviour, she personally told me she was enjoying messing his life up... she knows he can't afford maintenance as well as court fees and the dna test.

Secondly in my situation we weren't offered a disability reduction, I wonder why!! and it definitely did go up when she moved in with us which I thought was mental, it might be because it was then that they reassessed us and dp had recently done the week when he covered the friends shift and earned more. Dsd 1 and 2s mum seems to delight in making dps life difficult and I have no idea why, lots has gone on with the kids and things she's doing which sickens me.

I don't see why so many people think that a woman can't possibly be using her kids to get at the father or has to be doing right by their kids, I know it's the minority but there are real psychos out there!

whether or not contact should be relevant to payments should be relative. There are many cases where, like my friend, the mother refuses to put the father on the birth certificate, so he has no parental rights, yet then claims csa, she could say the most wealthy man she slept with around that time was the father If she wanted to, even if she knew he wasn't! She could put the child up for adoption and he wouldn't have to be consulted first!

[nahidontthinkso]

Completely unfair to charge to set up a claim when nothing may come of it.

I set up a claim with CSA in 2006. XP avoided them by working cash in hand, self employed, job hopping and giving false addresses for years. They couldn't get a penny out of him. He racked up £4500+ in arrears.

Last year he got in touch with me via FB as the CSA had found him and wanted to take £300 a month of him in current payments and arrears. He earns just over £1000 per month. He was crapping himself and offered to start paying current payments direct to me because he also knew these new costs were coming in this year and said he couldn't afford to live if they took that much off him per month.

We have now switched to maintenance direct. He pays me £187 per month direct from his employer and i have had to write off the £4500+ in arrears otherwise he would have quit his job again and i would have got nothing.

Our child has a disability and them arrears could have made a huge difference had the CSA been of any use and actually got them for me.
I would have been completely peeved if i had to pay to set up a claim for nothing. It costs enough to ring them on there 0845 number and sit on hold for ages before they can be bothered to answer and then wait for them to try and find somebody who knows what is going on!

[HappyMummyOfOne]

Of course NRP should pay but so should the PWC. The amount of PWC who slate the NRP for not paying when they dont either is outstanding.

The old nugget of "childcare costs" gets trotted out as an excuse so many times. Childcare costs can be googled in seconds and surely financial plannng is done before getting pregnant. It takes seconds to calculate how many children you can afford childcare for both current circumstances and for one salary alone. No relationship is cast iron guaranteed.

[gatofeliz]

I understand why they are now charging but theres a limit to what services you should be charged for.

No one on here has mentioned the additional charges which could potentially build up.

The new Child Maintenance Service (CMS) will start charging a "£50-£300 finding fee" to locate an ex-partner who has fallen behind on child support payments, it has emerged.

The Department for Work and Pensions is introducing sweeping reforms to the previously free CSA, including turning it into the CMS.

Other charges include:

A £50 charge if the CMS has to arrange a deduction from an employer.
A further £50 if they have to take a late child support payment out of a bank account.
Taking a former partner to court will now cost £300

WTF! Who is footing the bill for this or is ITV web page wrong. No one else has mentioned it

www.itv.com/news/story/2014-05-21/child-support-agency-charges-separated-couples/

[FrontForward]

Lisa3578 I'm sorry you have such a poor view of women regarding them as feckless women procuring children off multiple men to stack up the child maintenance they can claim...as a totally vexatious act. Either you are a new wife begrudging your partner paying for his children or a man pretending to be a woman. Either way your purpose shows through as most of your comments are inaccurate

Whoever wrote this: Whether I work or not has no bearing whatsoever on my ex's financial (emotional, practical...) responsibility towards our children has it right ...and you can replace 'whether I work' with almost any other status since it's not about responsibility belonging only to the RP with the NRP offering a token gesture if he/she feels it's justified.

When you have children it's a commitment. You commit to provide for that child and do so alongside a partner. Whatever happens in the parents relationship, that commitment should stand. Too often, money and access are used by either side as a weapon to beat the ex with regardless of the collateral damage to their child(ren)


It's a great shame and should be a source of shame that NRP seek to evade a responsibility to a child because they believe the ex might also benefit. Shame on you

[fedupbutfine]

oh here I am with the expletives again...fuck off, love. Seriously. Take some time to understand how life actually works for some people.

I am a parent who did it all 'right'. Educated to Masters level. Travelled the world. Married at 30. Waited 6 years into the relationship before having children. Own business. Decent, caring guy. No signs of abuse. And them wham, out of nowhere, he's been having an affair and walks out leaving me pregnant with 2 toddlers. I won't go into my personal financial details but i can assure you, like many, working at minimum wage or even considerably above wouldn't be financially viable for me as a single parent. The figures don't add up. Yeah, sure, on paper I'd have more than on benefits. But I'd also have more outgoings. It doesn't work. That's the reality for many people and unless children are very young, there is no right to education or training or the opportunity to re-train because you have to be job seeking to get the benefits. There is a benefits trap - whether or not people want to believe it - and it disproportionately affects single parents and particularly single parents who have an ex who makes no contribution. And I know plenty of single parents - not one of them has children by more than one father, none of them had children out of marriage and none of them had children under the age of 25. Shit happens and unfortunately, it can be very, very hard to navigate around it. I don't say it often, but I sincerely hope shit happens to you.

[EffectiveCommunication]

I think the second wives who support absent preants who get up to these tricks are a disgrace to the sisterhood.

[Milmingebag]

My ex husband owes £60,000 + in child maintainance arrears and despite there being liability orders in place,because he is self employed,they claim they are unable to get any of the money owed.

I have asked my MP to be involved (again) and find out why his driving licence hasn't being removed or imprisonment considered because all other avenues have apparently been exhausted.... I await a response.

Firstly I want to say that the onus to pay for the CSA should be on the NRP who is evading meeting their financial obligations.

Secondly, it is time that NRPs who routinely evade paying child support to be prosecuted through the courts for child neglect.

It isn't okay not to pay towards the food,shelter and clothing of your child/ren just because you don't live with the child/children that you have equal responsibility for. It is neglect.

I think this is ,primarily,a feminist battle and needs highlighting as such. Most non-paying NRP's are men. Women's careers/standard of living/long term prospects are severely compromised as a consequence of these repeated failures to insure that these basic responsibilities are met and the burden of care,shared. When it comes to women and children in this society we are still second class citizens.

My eldest child is disabled. My ex husband has refused to either share the care ( he doesn't even bother to see them for minimal access)or meet any child maintainance obligations. He is guilty of child neglect but nobody is doing anything about it.

I have given up my career as a consequence ( my long term prospects have been demolished) in order to do his share as well as mine because I have had no other choice.

If I refused to care for and meet my children's basic needs I would be imprisoned. This blatant inequality needs to be campaigned against on behalf of all the women and children who have been repeatedly let down by this sham of an organisation.

Interestingly enough there is a more robust response to those who evade council tax than those who fail to support their children.

[alita7]

I also disagree entirely with people saying that all rps should be paying for their kids by working not relying on benefits... what do you expect a single mum of say a 3 year old and a child 1 or under to do with her kids if her relationships breaks down and she is the sole carer during the week and maybe eow? she could maybe work eow but there aren't many jobs that would accept you eow... Child care is extremely expensive and would most likely wipe out her wages... I would question why a mother of a 15 and a 17 year old with no health problems couldn't work, but surely most single mums who don't work, can't?

[FrontForward]

The CSA have just put into place a system which will fail everyone but minimise their costs whilst doing so.

RP struggling to get NRP to pay will be forced to give up as they won't be able to afford the system.

This will cause more poverty for women and children Well done govt