CSA - taking on self employed/own company non-resident parent

[timefliesby]

PLEASE JOIN THIS THREAD IF YOU ARE IN A SIMILAR SITUATION.

Hello all,
I broke up with my ex-partner a year ago. During that time, I have been trying to get proper maintenance payments for my children aged 2 and 4. This is proving to be a difficult task. I was never married but co-habited with my ex. He has his own company and draws a salary. He states that his income is lower than it actually is.

I believe that the CSA is not equipped to deal with higher income families, especially where the non resident parent has his/her own business or is self-employed. In my case, we also lost our home and most of our belongings (my ex stayed in the family home). There appears to be no allowance for replacing these things.

I disagree with maintenance being set as a standard 20% of the non resident parent's salary which decreases the more often the children stay over at the non-resident parent's house. The resident parent by default ends up forking out for uniform, clothes, classes, school trips, etc. It is easy for the non-resident parent to avoid sharing costs on these. So therefore taking a further percentage off what is already a low contribution (20%) is fundamentally flawed. Surely, it should be based on what the children actually cost? And then the higher earning parent should pay a higher percentage of these costs? That would be fairer don't you agree?

Why aren't individual circumstances taken into account?
My children are very young and I was the one who sacrificed career to bring them up taking a significant pay cut. My ex was the main bread winner. Why is this not taken into account? My ex earned 90% of the family income to support our children whilst I stayed home to look after them. Why, therefore, when he chooses no longer to be with us, should I suddenly have to pay the vast majority of their costs when I am not set up to do this? In the past year, I have returned to work part time but child care fees are paid for solely by me, with no input from my ex. Why does the CSA not insist that these costs are shared at the very least equally?

As it is, the children and I can not afford our own home and live with my mother, whilst my ex enjoys a wealthy lifestyle. The CSA are implicit in spreading child poverty whilst they cannot bring self-employed/higher income non resident parents to task.

PLEASE JOIN THIS THREAD. I will not accept the above and I intend to take our plight further. The rules governing child maintenance can and must be changed.

In numbers, we can do this. Even if you don't want to share your story, please just add that you are in by adding "I'm in" to this thread. I will then keep you updated and ask for support where necessary. First stop is my local MP.

Many thanks,

Hi Karen

The essential thing is the timing usually within one month of decision (amont assessed)but you can appeal within one year

If you telephone to ask for appeal - do ALSO in writing just write to appeals
You only have something to lose if you do nothing
Just write stating I wish to appeal the decision made by Csa on ,,,, as ...... ( eg his lifestyle is inconsistent with earnings

Just give it a go to get to court

Even if at this stage u do not have evidence just appeal otherwise you will lose your right to appeal

Good luck
Address central appeals unit
Child support agency
Lo box 33
Presto
Pr11 2 st

Do it ASAP

Karen

You can also apply for a departure if you believe he his hiding money eg lifestyle inconsistent ie would not be able to pay his bills on the amount of earnings he has stated

This is confusing but you can apply for a DEPARTURE at the same time as. An appeal ask for a form fill it out even if and complete it as best you can

Both these routes will get you to a tribunal send everything recorded deliver to these departments photocopy and keep

Ask the Csa for departures address it's in Blackpool and call them - no matter how negative they may be fill out forms send appeal

@witsend333 thank you! I will go check now whether it is IMA A or IMA B, presumably they can still enforce it whilst awaiting a decision on the variation? The amount is OK, it would be helpful, I imagine it should be double though based on what he is actually earning and can afford. So I'd be reluctant to agree it as a final figure...but as SOMETHING, I would be happy to receive it! I haven't heard of a departure form...

Hi witsend333, I thought I replied to this but didn't appear to have posted. I will check whether it is IMA A or B. Many thanks for this info. I don't even know what a departure form is, so they clearly haven't provided this.

Karen here is some info on applying for variation. www.gingerbread.org.uk/uploads/media/17/7051.pdf

Hi, Im so glad I read this thread!!
I'll begin with apologising that my space bar is being a pain and sometimes stops working, I do my best to go back but sometimes miss co-joined words!!
I am a single mum of four - ranging from 8 to 14 all with the same 'father'. My story echoes much of what I've read from others. He barely sees the children, is self employed and hides his money so as not to pay. He was committing benefit fraud, but because he was on benefits only had to pay £20 per month for them all. Now he's been found out (wonder how that happened )hes hiding his income and hasn't paid a thing. There are so many issues I could go into, but I'm more interested in getting the law changed. I've been living with this since our split and divorce 8 years ago. To me it seems clear. absent parents should pay a reasonable amount. If having their own business prevents them from earning enough to do so, they should be told to get a job!!There should be jobs available (manual labour etc) until they can find something themselves. Iwant to get the legalities of this shambles changed - I don't think it will in time to help me, but maybe to help others. If we, the resident parent, decided all of a sudden to only provide £20 per month towards or children, quite rightly we'd have social services banging the door down and removing the children due to neglect, so why then is it ok for an absent parent to commit this offence without so much as a question about their behaviour. We need to change this. Its not fair and its our children who suffer as a result.

It looks to me very much like self employed people are going to find the new maintenance service even easier to scam.

A poster up thread asked how we know hmrc are not interested.

With my situation I spent hours giving them evidence all legally obtained and I took them step by step through exactly how he was doing it. Most of the evidence was obtained using a private detective who specialises in tax and benefit fraud and a specialist accountant.

This evidence included film evidence of him openly admitting he was and how.

I was treated like a spiteful ex and they still believe he only earns £65 pw despite him admitting in a taped call to them that he works a 75 hour week

I'm in!!! I will do everything I can to support the changes required for future parents to not go through what I have and still am. I have twins through 1st time IVF age nearly 10 and my ex left for a younger model. He stopped paying the mortgage and bills when he moved out and forced the sale of the house. He lived rent and CT free for a year in a pals flat whilst claiming 6k self employed income after having supported us in a 5 bedroom house with 2 people carriers, holidays etc and paid nothing via tax return statements affecting CSA assessments as being non existent.

He then bought the flat, had 3 holidays abroad within 12 months, one being Florida Disneyworld with the girlfriend at the time and NOT his kids! and still claimed zero income. Marital house was sold and we were homeless so council helped with private let. Owner then sold and we moved again. He then became a student and was not liable for any CSA.
Now he is renting his flat to his son (no written agreement and not in excess of £65 in equity so no claim there!) and he lives with his fiance and they are getting married. She owns the new house but he is doing all the alterations to it and claims she covers everything including his new transport. She only works part-time and currently based on his less than £100pw he pays £21.81 per month for the twins. I have fought for 8 years and been to Tribunal twice. He knows every trick in the book. Do I have any chance of proving Lifestyle inconsistent with income and diversion of income via the partner?? I am one step away from Jeremy Kyle!!!

I'm in!

My own present difficulties are at www.netmums.com/coffeehouse/house-garden-194/money-finance-entitlements-267/1111961-cmos-proving-diversion-income-lifestyle-inconsistent-earnings.html#post11563631 - I'd have joined here too at the time if I'd found the page though.

I'm still going through a request for a variation process with the CMOS and my self-employed lavish-living money-spending ex who apparently earns so little that a 'nil' assessment has been made by HMRC/CMOS in respect of our child maintenance... although he has a property / business portfolio of over £500,000 (and that's what I CAN prove 'in black and white'... there's got to be loads more that he's hiding), takes multiple extended long-haul holidays abroad for himself, his new Filipina wife and child, and relatives, all at his expense, throws money at the kids in quantities of £100s at a time for birthdays or if he's otherwise in the mood, has major building works on his house, buys a new fleet of vehicles and keeps them on display in front of his house............ sigh! And we were only getting £15pw per child from CMOS before that anyway... we used to have a family based arrangement, which worked OK (he reduced it at will when he felt like it, but we managed), but then he just seemed to decide he didn't want to pay any more, won't talk (I get told to f-off), and now we have no recourse.

CMOS keep asking me for evidence that I don't have - how likely is my ex to hand me his bank statements and pension fund statements, for example?!

However, the useful info so far that I have is:

• Get a copy of title register for ex's property from the Land Registry. Info could be useful to show current mortgages and charges, or lack of them. For me, it's useful because he owns his property outright and has no mortgages or charges - this knocks down the argument I've faced from CMOS that just because my ex is spending loads of money, doesn't mean he has it - he could have remortgaged his property. Well, no, he hasn't, and I can now demonstrate it. Someone else suggested to me that if there are mortgages or charges, then you can estimate the kind of mortgage that would be needed (thinking of how many years until retirement of your ex), taking into account the purchase price, and then ask "how can X afford that mortgage, if he's only declaring [low] income?"... and argue that he's (sorry, it could be she, but I guess it's mostly 'he') getting money from elsewhere.

• One woman is taking the matter to her MP! I may well do this if I don't get a result on my variation application.

• Gingerbread apparently offer advice on applying for a variance - I've not called them yet, but it's on my 'to do' list!

• Write to HMRC / National Benefit Fraud Hotline yourself with any information... this is a hard one, and I'm down the road to doing it, but I get little information. However, I have to do it, for two reasons: 1. HMRC - the CMOS advise that if my ex is working and not declaring income, or there are lifestyle-inconsistent-with-earnings flags, then if I notify HMRC and they investigate, and he then declares more income, then we get more money. Yeah, right... I'm still waiting on that one, but we're trying. As regards the NBFH, I have to write to them because my CMOS calculation is based on a child living there with him, whereas a child does not (his daughter is in the Philippines; I think he forgot to mention that to the CMOS, same as someone forgot to stop claiming their Child Benefit for the absent child... oops...) - so, here obviously, if I can get it recognised that there ISN'T a child lliving at his house with him, then in theory our payments go up (although, the ex is assessed at 'nil' at the moment, so that's a bit of a joke maybe!). However, no-one seems to have done anything - it's been months since I told CMOS / HMRC / NBFH; CMOS forgot to deal with the information I sent to them (I found out yesterday, grrr! They've apologised, but really....), and as one might expect, I hear nothing from HMRC or NBFH (the latter I had asked if they could at least notify CMOS if the Child Benefit claim was terminated, so that I could have my own case reassessed - they haven't even done that. CMOS are still operating on the basis that there is a child living with my ex... it's maddening!)

Hope that some of the above might be useful to someone. I'm cross as anything - the principle is just not right. Apologies if I've duplicated anything that anyone else had put, as I've not had chance to read through every post, but just wanted to say, big style, I'M IN!!!

Oh, does anyone else, like me, get mad when they read this sort of rubbish that the coalition spew out about the virtues of the CMOS scheme.... really!!! It makes me want to gouge my eyeballs out... :-(
www.gov.uk/government/news/f...em-is-launched I think that lobbying may be a tactic... this system is NOT working for the parents-with-care when non-resident self-employed parents are involved.

Right, now to get a coffee and scroll up through your posts... very glad I found this thread!

Hello, by the way... this is my first post! :-)

:) Oooh, look what I found!

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/65930

I'm signing! However, I think the way it's worded needs to be improved, and maybe another petition created? Some of us have problems with the CSA, some of us have problems with the Child Maintenance Options Service, but BOTH organisations are letting self-employed parents wriggle off the hook. Thoughts anyone?

(I have posted my own up-dates and 'tales from the battlefield' on Gingerbread too... www.gingerbread.org.uk/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=5804&Page=1)

Just one word of caution re. that petition. Change the rules with regards to limited companies and you'll force a lot of small businesses to close down.

Also, make sure you know the difference between a limited company and self employed. Two different animals. If ltd it's the companies money, not the individuals, and as such not relevant to csa.

Re. The O/p. It's not feasible to go on a case by case basis. It used to be done like that and I for one am glad it isn't. The division of assets is dealt with as a separation/divorce issue, and therefore housing, pensions etc are not included in maintenance. Should men who have been forced to leave the family home pay less csa so they can afford to "replace these things"?

Thanks Micah.

Yes... I think maybe another petition would need to be carefully worded.

For me, the issue is around Diversion of Income, so, whether 'self-employed', or 'director of limited company', if the effect is to control their income in such a way as to deny child maintenance, that's the problem.

So, if anyone's interested, what I'm thinking of for example is the kind of (ostensible) concern mentioned in the Child Maintenance Service calculation leaflet at www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/325219/how-we-work-out-child-maintenance.pdf which states that they can be asked to consider:

"'diversion’ of income – this is when the paying parent may be able to
control the amount of income they receive by diverting it to another
person or other purpose, which means it is not being included in the
income we use to work out child maintenance."

Maybe some version of that is what would need to be reflected in the wording of any new petition then, rather than whether the non-paying parent achieves that by means of a limited company or other kind of entity... really, it seems to be the diversion itself that is the wrong, and those diversions seem to be achieved in many different ways!

Thanks again!

You've got me thinking about definitions Micah!

So, I had a quick Google, and now I'm wondering whether, for the purpose of any new petition, 'self-employed' is somewhat of a semantic issue... even the tax office can only offer 'probables' about how to define it:

www.hmrc.gov.uk/working/intro/empstatus.htm

So I thought I'd offer it up to anyone else who might be interested in having input if we do get a new petition going...

...is 'self-employed' a good umbrella term for the problem, or is 'diversion of income' a better covering phrase... or is there a better way to name the overarching problematic feature of this particular problem that's at hand for us?

I'm in! Too late to post story (it's a long one!) but I agree, I have had 2 years of trying to prove ex dh's potential fraud which has resulted in me being in debt, while DH is now going bankrupt in order to get out of paying anything at all!

Woo hoo! Great that you're in too Wilcos!

If you and anyone else who is interested in having input into a new e-petition, or would just generally like to keep in touch, there's more and more info unfolding on the Gingerbread thread that the OP also created.

If you'd like to follow us to Gingerbread then, www.gingerbread.org.uk/forum/messages.aspx?TopicID=5804&Page=0, you'll find more information from them that they've posted onto the thread about how to engage with your MP, information about the charges and their present campaign work on that which should get media attention next week, and offers of support for us to formulate our petition, as well as all the other advice they offer on that site... :-)

Hope to catch you all again soon! Kim :)

Hi, I'm new to this, please count me in!

I'm a mum of three and I think I am about to enter a similar situation. Four months ago my ex husband took a more senior roll within the company which hires him. Shortly after this he decided to set up his own company and informed csa that he is taking a wage of just over £600 per month (for a senior engineering role!). I believe he contracts for the company who employs him, deposits his wage into his business account and draws the paltry wage. This isn't the first time he has avoided making full payments and CSA have been less than helpful in rectifying matters.

I am still waiting for csa to confirm what this will mean in regards to his maintenance payments, I have put my dispute in writing in the meantime.

Does anyone know if the new service which makes calculations on gross income will be more or less useful to parents in my situation?

As a resident parent many of us will be on call and caring for our children 24/7, 365 days a year and will often work a minimum 16 hour week on top. I don't think it is too much to ask that the non resident parent contributes that set % of his wage, which lets face it, is at most one week - 40 hours a month towards their children's upbringing.

I wish the csa would get their act together and provide a service fit for purpose.

There's a new petition started on 360degree change. Please sign. you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/make-child-maintenance-support-fairer

My MP has just tabled a Parliamentary Question about the discrepancy between lifestyle and the assets that are considered in the variation/revision/supersession rubric. It has been picked up by a journalist at the Bristol Post so watch out for her article.

I know this isn't the safest thing to do but I'm going to leave my contact details here JUST for people who seriously want to change this - please don't send me garbled sob stories, you already have my sympathy. But if you have tried to appeal to the FTT or made a complaint to the ICE and the same thing has happened days later, then please DO contact me.

Jo Archer
07943 000409
[email protected]

Here's a link to Parliamentary Questions and Answers about child maintenance - the first thing we need to do it find out what MPs are already sympathetic. I happened to be a parliamentary researcher for a former Speaker when I first left uni, so I know a little about lobbying. It's not a bad word - like any tool, it can be used for good or bad depending on whose hand it is in!

www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?q=child+maintenance

C'mon, people - I know we are all really busy doing mostly unpaid and unrecognised work (bringing up our kids!) but let's show Simon de Montford (700 yrs after his body was ripped to pieces after the Battle of Evesham) that his death was not in vain and Parliamentary Democracy works!

And, if that's a new name to you I am not surprised because the government seems to think it is more important for our kids to know about Egyptians than our own history. www.simondemontfort.org/

Here's my MP's question...

Department for Work and Pensions

Children: Maintenance

Written Parliamentary Question asked by Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, 17th December 2014

219326

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will review the degree to which assessments for Child Support calculates an individual's assets, to ensure that the assessment is comprehensive.

I am on first name terms with my MP over self employment/limited companies and the CSA! He is young, Conservative (wouldn't vote for him if he were the last man on earth) but I have found him to be very considered in his responses and he has passed on my letters for response from whoever happens to be currently in charge of child maintenance matters and then forwards that to me. He certainly 'gets it' but beyond that, will not say anything that commits to being someone who will seek change.

Essentially, the rules on self employment and limitied companies are just slightly askew the rules on child maintenance. For business to thrive and for people to take chances setting up business, there need to be tax breaks and legitimate ways of getting the most out of your business pound. It is these rules that the CSA/CMS struggle to overcome as their bit of the legislation is slightly different and it just doesn't join up in the way it should. If it did join up, setting up a business would be riskier (for everyone, not just people who have child maintenance to pay) and we would, over time, begin to struggle as a country to create new opportunities and jobs.

The other issue of course is the fact that by far the majority of people are paid on a PAYE basis and the system works very well for these people. The rest of us, I think, will never be a big enough group to be able to change public perception (we will have all been told to 'get a job' rather than ask our ex partners for maintenance...even when we work!) and it is this that is needed to have an impact to change the legislation.

You can consider me 'in' and I am entirely committed to seeing change happen but I remain cynical as to just how it can possibly happen for the wider public good and I think that whilst we have a legitimate claim and even more legitimate complaint, we - and of course our children - don't matter enough.

I'm very fortunate as I have twice managed to get hold of a proper financial disclosure through separate court action, which I have sent to the CSA. It should be very easy for me to show 'lifestyle incompatible with delared income' as he keeps a luxury yacht in the South of France and transfers 50K per annum to each of his 2 (known) credit cards from his current account despite claiming to pay himself no more than the personal allowance!

However, the CSA repeatedly calculate our income on the basis of his tax return without considering the context of his variation requests ie. the fact that he has already been found by the First Tier Tribunal to be 'diverting his income'.

Even if I am only one person, I am the one person they need to worry about!

DeMontfort, great info, thanks I looked on Bristol Post for the article, and could only find a piece giving glory to Steve Webb. I couldn't find anything on your situation. It made me so cross that I posted a comment on the Steve Webb article (as KaySwift999, see: www.bristolpost.co.uk/Steve-Webb-praises-Child-Support-Agency-absent/story-25920357-detail/story.html#ixzz3SrGgbraG
Follow us: @BristolPost on Twitter | bristolpost on Facebook)

It went like this: "Sloppy journalism, and partial in every sense, Firstly, the CSA are being phased out - the CMS (Child Maintenance Service) is the superseding organisation. Secondly, despite many CMS staff valiantly wading through bureaucratic treacle every day in an effort to try to assist parents, they are not always able to do so due to the fact that they now have NO investigatory powers (unlike the CSA, who used to be able to investigate). It seems that the Bristol Post knew about these kinds of issues prior to the above piece being published - where, for example, is the reporting on this item posted on Mumsnet on 15 January 2015: "My MP has just tabled a Parliamentary Question about the discrepancy between lifestyle and the assets that are considered in the variation/revision/supersession rubric. It has been picked up by a journalist at the Bristol Post so watch out for her article." (See tinyurl.com/qfb8usx)? That example illustrates how the children of self-employed paying parents are missing out, due to the fact that the 'taxable earnings' of the self-employed can be manipulated - to avoid tax as well as child maintenance - leaving children high dry. The CMS can't investigate, they have no powers to do so. Who knows how many other children are being deprived under the new system, due to their circumstances being less than straightforward? Shame on our system, shame on Steve Webb for basking in the light whilst he and the Coalition show little interest in changing this, and shame on the Bristol Post for giving glory to Steve Webb instead of shedding light on the real issues."

Maybe the Bristol Post did run your piece, but I just couldn't find it... lots of glorification of Steve Webb on there though!

I'm just getting my Mandatory Reconsideration Notice in respect of an Application for a Variation on the basis of lifestyle inconsistent with earnings / diversion of income (and all the associated accumulated assets and unearned income)... I gave a stack of detailed evidence to CMS, including copies of documents from Companies House, Title Register of his personal property, photographic evidence of improvements to his private home at a time when he was saying he had no income, extensive foreign travel, multiple vehicle acquisition.......... etc.) I'm going to take this to a Tribunal next, so will let you know how I get on. I'm quizzing the CMS on the basis of some of the information posted on the 'they work for you' web page, so thanks for that. I used the search facility on that page to look for 'child maintenance' and 'self employed', and found some statements from Steve Webb that have the potential to provide leverage. Here's an extract of my letter to the CMS today:

(the quotes from Steve Webb come from his answers to questions from Jacob Ress-Mogg and Paul Maynard, links are www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2014-12-17.219326.h&s=child+support+individual%27s+assets#g219326.q0 and www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2014-09-26.209541.h&s=child+maintenance+self+employed#g209541.r0)

*

The Minister of State for the Department of Work and Pensions has recently indicated, in his answers to MP’s questions, that the individual assets and profits from self-employment of paying parents are taken into consideration when working out ‘income’. I have copied in the web addresses and web page content overleaf for your ease of reference on this matter, but it seems important to note that he states:

“The new child maintenance scheme introduced in 2012 applies a broader definition of income to take account of taxable income derived from assets not included in the main calculation”

and

“For self-employed paying parents in the 2012 Scheme, gross income is determined by reference to gross taxable profits for the latest available tax-year. As with the 2003 and 1993 schemes, there is scope for receiving parents to provide additional evidence if they feel further enquiries into a paying parents income are required to establish the correct liability in their case.”

Given that my report to the CMS which accompanied my Application for Variation provided many details about the existing and growing company profits and personal and company assets of Mr XXX, including specific details about accumulations in multiple companies owned and directed by him during the period that my CMS case has been open (and where Mr XXX is often the sole or majority director and shareholder, or shares privileges with his father), then please can you explain whether the Child Maintenance Service sought to apply what the Minister of State for DWP says above?

For example, did the CMS try to “take account of taxable income derived from assets not included in the main calculation” (such as, but not necessarily limited to, possible rental incomes from Mr XXX's lettings company), or to attempt to ensure that Mr XXX’s “gross income is determined by reference to gross taxable profits for the latest available tax-year” (for the many companies he owns and directs and is often the sole shareholder of, and for which details of growth in profits have been supplied)?

I have provided a wealth of “additional evidence” in my report to you which accompanied my Application for a Variation, which evidence could have helped you to facilitate your enquiries, but I am unaware as to whether it was put to use in any attempt to “establish the correct liability” in my case?"

*

I don't imagine that I'll hear anything much that's helpful, but I am using this to try to ascertain, ahead of the Tribunal, what attempts the CMS have already made to try to obtain information which - according to the Minister of State for DWP - they are supposed to be able to take into account. If not, then at least my queries might lead to the identification of what kinds of information remains to be sought by the Tribunal (assuming they have the powers to ask for it).

Does anyone have any resources or information regarding how to approach representation at Tribunals? I don't know whether to just go by myself, or to try to get a professional to advise on my likelihood of success and/or accompany me to the tribunal. I'm a bit concerned that my ex will hire someone and that I won't be able to engage with legal / financial / technical arguments that they advance. From what I've read, it seems that it's beneficial to have an understanding of Child Support law / case law beforehand, but it's all so inaccessible! Books are really expensive, and aimed at practitioners it seems.

Anyway, sorry for long post, and thanks for the info all! Hope my input might help someone else too.

The Judge dealing with my Tribunal has asked for a whole liad of financial evidence. NRP claims not to have a bank account of any kind. Sent Tax Returns,but already had this false information and of course they are not detailed. Because he said his wife pays for everything, her bank accounts were also requested. They were sent in with everything bkacked out. I wrote to the Judge, but he seems happy with this and has sent the case to be listed for the first available hearing date.

If I hire a solicitor or barrister, it would cost me more than I ccould ever expect to get.

Does anyone know what will happen when there is no real evidence from NRP? I on the other hand have sent in recordings and photographs. Will the Judge just use these, despite NRPs desperate efforts for them not to be used?

I have been told that the Judges are fair and that I will not require representation, but unless the Judge has got something up his sleeve, I don't fancy my chanxes and it has taken two years to get to this point.NRP is likely to have a barrister as he can afford one.

Please can anyone offer me any advice.

There's not much I can add to this conversation.... I have been experiancing the same difficulties as most of you, I probably don't have as much info on my ex as most of you, I don't even know where he lives although my children visit there every other weekend? (That's if he's not on holiday) but he claims to take home £180 a week his van rental is nearly that! I can and won't ever understand why Csa find it so easy to make the less fortunatate suffer, I work 50 hours a week trying to provide for my children I have a few health issues but it scares me to take time off as I wouldn't be able to afford to send my children to school, that's what my ex's money used to pay for now he has somehow lied about his income I find this pretty hard to get my head around it all, do I work weekends as well as 50 hours mon-fri? I'm so tiered, I bet most of you could agree but I need a break!