OK, so this will be quite long. 13 months ago, my child's father and long-term ex was arrested on suspicion of serious offences (relevant). Due to the nature of these offences, my DC has had no contact with him since. Maintenance used to be arranged between us based on the online calculator, though I was reliant on him inputting a correct income. Anyway, in August last year, I went through the CMS and have been receiving a regular payment based on information from HMRC about his earnings for the tax year 2017-2018.
The case has now come up for annual review and the amount to be paid has increased. Coincidentally, I have recently been told that he actually changed jobs in October last year and I can see that this is the case from his LinkedIn profile online. I'm not bad at maths and have been able to calculate myself that his earnings increased by about 10K pa last October (way more than 25%). He didn't report that change. That means that since October last year, he has been paying far less than 12% of his income and also their annual review is based on the tax yr 18-19 - for 6 months of this, he earned at a reduced salary! So the average earnings they are using is around £100 too low, compared to what he actually earns and HAS earned since Oct 18. Surely he should be paying based on what he actually earns?!
I have talked to the CMS and they have told me that because they are using HMRC income and not current income, he was under no obligation to tell them about the change and that they will not go back and recalculate retrospectively nor will they approach his current employer to get details of his actual earnings and recalculate the ongoing liability.
He has now been charged with the aforementioned offences and is likely to get a custodial sentence (and even if he doesn't, he'll almost certainly lose his job once everything comes out) at which point, his liability will reduced to nil or very little. He earns a certain amount per week and should surely have to pay based on this amount. He has underpaid for the past 10.5 months and is allowed to continue to underpay. How is this fair or reasonable? Is there anything I can do about it? Why does this system bend over backwards to enable paying parents to shirk their responsibilities? It's all well and good to say that at the next annual review, the income will be taken into account, but that doesn't help me if he's in prison?!