My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

Find financial and money saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum.

Money matters

Did you know that our Government is now lifting children out of poverty by making other children homeless

162 replies

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 21:13

I just want people to know about this as it is so so shocking.

For the past few months the Government has been ordering the CSA to take out court orders against absent parents who are complying with existing agreements. This occurs where arrears cannot be paid back in two years. There is no mention in the enforcement guidance of ensuring that any other children do not lose their home or suffer other severe hardship as a result. The Government will try to recover arrears through the courts even when they are outside the legal time limit and has powers to force an absent parent to sell their home.

Even the CSA does not agree with this!

OP posts:
Desiderata · 08/08/2007 21:59

Jesus wept! You are fighting an old, toothless crocodile.

Ignore them. They are an infringement of civil liberty, and any shite solicitor in the land will get you off.

BELIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ME!

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:00

I will say this once more and then I'm off (probably). The CSA itself told my DH that this is new Government policy. Even if it isn't true, then they are putting many many families through hell with their new lies. That's almost as bad.

OP posts:
margoandjerry · 08/08/2007 22:02

I didn't not care. I did not understand your post. I still don't really understand and it seems nor does anyone else as your family seems to be having real trouble with the CSA but Desiderata has had the same threats but no action and doesn't appear concerned. So it seems to be a confusing situation.

I must say that the CSA does seem to have been a very very badly run organisation. And if your partner has always paid his dues and kept to his side of the deal, I don't understand how he can now be taken to court.

As a general point it seems to me though that if you have children, they take up almost all of your income. If you then have a second family, money will be very, very, very tight. For some people, the pressures might be difficult to deal with either financially or emotionally. I don't think anyone can do anything about that really. There's no judgement in that. Obviously families break down for all sorts of reasons. But if you have two sets of children to support, it's bound to be crippling, financially.

I am sorry if you are stuck in this horrible situation.

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:03

One final point. My OP is not about absent fathers. My OP is about children. In my book all children are born equal, and they all have an equal right to a home.

OP posts:
Desiderata · 08/08/2007 22:03

It won't go to court.

But if you want to be defeatist then that's what you'll get.

If you've made a mistake, it's been in responding. Just like anything else, they target the law-abiding buggers.

My dh has paid amply for his children. They're all in univerity, we live in a council house with our little ds.

Not on paper, unfortunately, despite a divorce agreement.

They're wrong, you're right, so fuck 'em.

Challenge it! Rip the letter up! Honestly, the CSA is about to be disbanded. Giving them money now would be akin to paying the Poll Tax two weeks after it was abolished.

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:04

M&J - if people know where they are and what they have to pay then they plan for it, and that's fine. But with this situation, people are having the rug pulled out from underneath them and being treated like criminals when they have done nothing wrong in law.

OP posts:
Desiderata · 08/08/2007 22:04

Get a grip, Twinkle.

For fucks sake.

localgirl · 08/08/2007 22:05

I work for the CSA and they do have legal powers still Desi is wrong

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:06

Localgirl - is my understanding correct? Or is my DH being led a merry dance again?

OP posts:
startouchedtrinity · 08/08/2007 22:07

Have you seen a solicitor? Sounds like it would be a good move.

It may all be balls and you are worrying for nothing, but if I were in your shoes I don't know if I'd be able to think straight, let alone stick to the niceties of polite conversation. Everyone makes mistakes.

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:07

Desi - I'm not panicking. I think we can sort things out with the ex - she is human thankfully. But some people might have really vindictive ex's. The only way the liability orders can be stopped is if the ex agrees. Now imagine if the ex still bears a grudge?

OP posts:
Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:08

Can't really afford a solicitor, more's the pity. The CAB will be the first stop if his ex doesn't come good. Then we'll see.

OP posts:
startouchedtrinity · 08/08/2007 22:10

There is a solicitor in our town who does freebies one day a month. Does someone offer that near you?

I really think paying for half an hour might be worth it.

localgirl · 08/08/2007 22:10

if there is a libility order it is valid in law the CSA does still exist as a legal organisation

Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:12

Localgirl - can you really take out liability orders even when the NRP is complying with an existing arrears agreement. We were told that you can if the arrears will take more than 2 years to pay off under the existing arrangement.

Also isn't it the case that you can't recover arrears incurred before 2000. If that's the case, why are we being threatened with recovery of amounts incurred years before that?

OP posts:
Twinklemegan · 08/08/2007 22:13

I should clarify. I'm not actually getting at the CSA here. The people DH spoke to said they were horrified by what they were being told to do.

OP posts:
harman · 08/08/2007 22:16

Message withdrawn

gomez · 08/08/2007 22:17

TM - If a liablity order is granted (and that is in itself is a big if as malicious non-payment needs to be shown) then at that point your DH can still come to an agreement to repay what is due. This is agreed with the Court and so should probably be fair. If DH breaks the LO then further action (i.e. bailiffs) may happen. The two year rule is a CSA rule as to when they will progress to a LO it doesn't mean that any re-payment reached under an LO would need to lead to repayment within a 2 year payment.

You and your DH should continue to pay what you can afford each month.

You can also still challenge the arrears stated by the CSA and would perhaps find the LO proceedings a good opportunity to test these figures.

It is very improable that you will lose your home - particularly if you continue to make regular, reasonsable payments.

HTH

localgirl · 08/08/2007 22:17

I don't work for the enforcement but they have to go through hoops to do a liability order, if it gets that far, it probably means they have for some reason decided to collect the arrears in a lump sum instead of instalments. I know they can ask for but can't legally enforce a debt going back 6 years or before.

Desiderata · 08/08/2007 22:18

They may have legal powers, but they're currently unenforcable.

For instance, I live in a block of flats. Within the terms of my agreement, I am not allowed to keep a steam roller in the front garden, or make candles in the kitchen.

Like I say, even a fuckwit could get you out of anything.

localgirl ... I'm not wrong. The law may exist in stasis, but it is a bad law, and up for challenge. The UK does not have a written constitution. Anybody can challenge anything. One of the main reasons the CSA is being disbanded is because it has no legal teeth.

So do not pay them.

The dissenters on this thread have their pensions to think about. They all work for the council, and what a cushy fucking ride that is.

gomez · 08/08/2007 22:19

TM the CSA has to ask a magiatrate to grant a liabiity order and they need to prove why. They can't just 'get' one. If you have been making payments in line with an agreement they won't get one.

margoandjerry · 08/08/2007 22:19

OK I really don't understand this thread...

Council? Pensions? Totally lost.

gomez · 08/08/2007 22:20

Once again excuse dodgy spelling etc. one-handed typing now added to with increasing quantities of rioja.

harman · 08/08/2007 22:23

Message withdrawn

Dinosaur · 08/08/2007 22:23

margoandjerry, me too!

I'm off, I think. I wish you all the best in sorting this out, twinklemegan.

But blimey, how does anyone, man or woman, ever have enough dosh to support two families? I am the breadwinner in our family, but I tell you there is no way I could afford to get divorced, I could never pay for DH and the DSs to carry on living in this house and put a roof over my own head too, let alone put a roof over the head of a new family. It just would not be do-able. I don't know how anyone does it.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.