Looks like H has fooled the CSA, anything I can do?

[mybrainaches]

H works caual hours, so can pick and choose when he works, while he was waiting for the SCA to catch up with him, he was refusing hours offered to him, and only working on average 18 hours a week, as soon as the CSA had assessed him and decided how much money he is to contribute, he decided to work all the hours god sends, so now he is paying a measley, £9.92 a week for 3 children. If I inform the CSA of my suspicions will they keep an eye on it?

Ask them to reassess him, explain the situation and they can check his earnings via the tax office.

thanks

BTW, Many, many NRP will have done this to pay less CSA, I'm sure they are used to it and will know exactly what to do.

Many, many? What are the figures for that VS?

Thanks I will call and tell them what I know, its not the money, its the principal, I would'nt get more than a £10 a week regardless of what they take of him, I just dont see why he should get away with it, I dont know how he thought I would'nt pick up on this either, considering his boss is a good friend of mine, the stupid twunt.

I can probably give you names of at least ten, probably more if I rack my brains.
That is just people I know.
If you were to relate that to the amount of people in the Uk, it would be a lot.
I'm sure you know 'many' is a word that is relative to situation and circumstance, not a particular figure.
Many, many more may pay up front and over the odds, doesn't make the people who do this any less though unfortunately.

Add my exh to that list too VS. He only pays £17.32 a week for 2 kids.

Yeah, you can add my xh to that list too VS.
I get £5 a week for his 4 dc's (not EACH. £5 for the whole 4, per week, whilst he's saving for a 4 bedroomed house. Grrrr).

£2.50 a weekl here

after he did all those tricks he then said he wan't working OR claiming benefits

then decided to claim beenfits but I know he's a bit fraudster.

lots and lots of people I know have experienced what you are going through. I think it's very common to be honest

What do you do with your £2.50 a wekk MOH? Buy a small glass of wine and raise it in his honour? Bunch of gits, some of 'em.

lol you can't get a small glass of wine for £2.50 where I live.

I wonder how the CSA think you can raise a child on £5 a week, assuming that they assume you pay half each. LMAO at the whole ridiculous idea

I pay £300 a month for my son and I'm not on a brilliant wage...how the hell can other people pay so little???

Always been a mug!

well lostdad, maybe you are in the minority of absent PARENTS that actaully want to support their children financially and emotionally

rather than the losers who think they can just walk away or pick up and put down as it suits

MOH - serious question...do you have any figures to back that up? It's a common statement, but I've never heard any statistics. Not making a point here...but is it true that I am in a minority?

And absent parent? Walked away? Put down?

No. I'm in the same house my ex left with my son. She left, I didn't. She's moving my son 300 miles away in a couple of weeks' time. I found out in court.

I may even find out the name of the man who is going to be living with my son at some point. That'll be nice, won't it?

Lostdad. We have crossed on many a thread, I don't understand why you feel the need to take it personally and defend all absent (as in NRP) parents.

You had told many times your particular situation and I am sympathetic to it.

That said you need to recognise that aside from the fact that there are other women and men in your situation there is also a large number of men and women who feel that they do not/should not/can not pay for their children. In amongst this group are men and women who feel they have every right to see their children as and when they see fit on their terms without actually contributing to the childs unbring other than cherry picking the good times.

Every situation is different and I really don't understand why you take is so personally when absent parents are discussed. I do believe you are part of a minority and I have every respect for you in wanting to eb a part of your sons life. I do not have cold hard facts. I post from work, dip in dip out.

My comments are from my experience

I would go a hunting for cold hard facts to support my statements here but to be hoest so much too much of my life has been wasted on the CSA already

Lostdad, in my circle of friends/family/colleagues yes you are in the minority.

I can think of around 14 couples that have children that have split, for whatever reason, only two of those have regular consistent contact with their children (this is not because the mothers won't allow it, but because the fathers just can't be bothered) and only two of them pay anything towards their children on a regular basis, another 3 will rarely pay something, or buy a packet of nappies or an item of clothing and think that excuses them.

More often than not with the excuse 'I'm not paying for her to go out,' re:maintenance,
and 'I'm not babysitting for her to go out' wrt contact.

Out of those couples I only know one NRP that is a mother, she doesn't see her children either, nor pay.

Most of these men are labourers of some sort and work as and when they feel, lowering their hours, or working cash-in-hand only when the CSA get involved.

I did do a quick google for stats wrt people lying about working hours, but as they are lies, they aren't recorded iyswim.

The point I making here MOH is a sweeping generalisations that you must know are untrue.

Most of the fathers I know have ex's who do their best to cut them out of their children's lives.

Would you not feel aggrieved for me saying `Most single mothers are contact blockers' - based on my experience? Because if I went on the basis of people I knew...it would be true. And that would be very unfair.

But I knew that this is a false perception - and one that does damage to a lot of people who quite frankly deserve it.

Why do I take it personally? Because although you may know what you are talking about...other people may not.

lostdad if the majority of parents wanted to pay for their children there would be no need for the CSA.

...which is like me saying `if the majority of RPs didn't block contact there would be no need for Family Courts.

Which is also untrue.

Just because there are 40,000, 50,000, 60,000, whatever does not mean they are a majority. It means there is a problem that needs dealing with.

And don't think I am sticking up with them...because the automatic assumption I get as an NRP is that I don't contribute to my son's upkeep. They give NRPs a bad name...and lead to unfounded statements like `The majority of NRPs don't pay maintenance'.

Giving up on this thread now.

That's partly true though lostdad, question is why they block contact though.
I can't see a valid reason for someone not to pay towards their childs upkeep, I can think of plenty as to why they would stop contact.

I couls be classed as a mother who blocks contact, depending on how you see my situation, H sees the dc 2-3 times a week, however a short while a go he was coming over every single day, wanting to sit with them in my home and put the dc to bed, I put a stop to it because I was'nt comfortable with him being in my home and it was confusing the dc, we have only been seperated 3 months now because he thinks the grass is greener on the other side (or to be precise, the house across the road from me) He made his made and has to lie in it, he cant come and go as he pleases, 2-3 times a week suits me and dc better.

He made his bed......even.

How can an absent parent lie about their income. Surely the P60/tax return tells it like it is.