Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk

Back to thread
MNHQ

Changes to child maintenance system: looking for Mumsnetters' responses to a government consultation

4 replies

RowanMumsnet · 22/08/2012 11:13

The government is considering some fairly major changes to the child maintenance regime (where money for child maintenance is exchanged between parents who have separated), and is asking for the public to give its views on the proposals.

If you're a separated parent who currently uses statutory agencies (such as the CSA/Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission) to arrange financial matters with your ex-partner, these changes could have a significant impact on you - so now's your chance to have your say.

Proposed changes include:

  1. A strong emphasis on getting separated parents to make independent arrangements (or 'family-based arrangements') without using statutory agencies. Parents will be strongly encouraged to make their own arranegements, with the help of non-governmental organisations such as Relate, mediation services and so on.
  2. For cases in which parents can't come to an independent agreement, there will be a new statutory agency (the Child Maintenance Service) to replace the CSA.
  3. Fees will be charged to parents who use the Collection Service aspect of the Child Maintenance Service (ie, in cases where the non-resident parent fails to pay voluntarily and promptly). The non-resident parent will be charged an extra 20% on top of the sum of child maintenance s/he is paying; the parent with care will be charged an extra 7%. The government says: 'We are actively seeking views on the detail of how charging and case closure should operate in practice, and strongly encourage interested parties to submit their views on this. However, we are not consulting on the principle of charging itself as this has already been consulted on extensively.'
  4. Fees will not be payable by victims of domestic violence, or by parents who are under 18.
  5. Cases that are currently handled by the CSA will gradually be transferred to the new regime.

Further details on these and other changes are available in the consultation document, and further details on how to respond to the consultation are given on this page.

The consultation closes on October 26 2012.

Do please let the government know what you think, either by responding directly to the consultation or by posting on this thread.

Thanks,
MNHQ

Go to post
MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 22/08/2012 11:51

Thanks matana - I'll start a thread directing people to this one!

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 22/08/2012 14:04

Hi all

Thanks for your responses so far.

We will reflect the strength of feeling on charging back to the DWP, but please note that the charging issue is specifically excluded from the consultation - they're open to suggestions on how charging could work, but not on whether it will be introduced. (I'm just pointing this out for clarity - as I say, we're happy to reflect the strength of feeling on this one.)

Re. domestic violence: the info on this is in Annex B, p34 of the consultation document. They say:

'We will not charge an application fee where the applicant declares that they
have previously reported an incident of domestic violence to one of the following individuals or agencies:

? a court;
? the police;
? a medical professional;
? social services;
? a multi-agency risk assessment conference (MARAC);
? a specialist domestic violence organisation or service including a refuge;
? an employer; or
? educational services.

For the purposes of the exemption, we have aligned the definition of domestic
violence with the Home Office definition: 'Any incident of threatening behaviour, violence, or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial, or emotional) between adults who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality.'

And the specific consultation question they'd like responses to on this is:

'Is our ?self declared? approach, guarantee of no contact with ex-partners and exemption from the upfront charge sufficiently inclusive to ensure that there are no barriers to victims of domestic violence?'

Thanks for the Lone Parents suggestion - I'll put a thread there directing people over here (trying desperately to keep all the responses in one place!)

Thanks
MNHQ

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 22/08/2012 17:12

@MrsJREwing

are you sending this link to government or is there a link where to send thoughts for the consultation?

We will try to collate thoughts from this thread and send them on, but if you want to respond directly, details of how to do so are on this page

MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 23/08/2012 11:45

Never had a consultation thread be this lively before

@NotaDisneyMum

MNHQ I appreciate that you wanted all answers in one place, but this thread has become a NRP bashing thread and any alternative views are being dissected and dismissed Sad

Is there any chance of a thread so those of us who have a less polarised view can express their POV?

My ex isn't any of the things that NRP's have been made out to be here; but as a victim of DA and a current CSA client, (and a second 'wife' who in the opinion of some is undoubtedly stealing food from the mouths of my DSC) my views are equally valid.
Will the MNHQ summary of this thread as a response to the consultation reflect the views of those who have ranted shouted the loudest?

In terms of responding to the consultation, we're going to be restricted (mostly) to answering the actual questions in the consultation document (which are summarised on p41 here). As I've said, the consultation is specifically not about the principle of charging. Given the strength of feeling about charging, we will almost certainly make reference to this issue in a covering note - but within that we will also note that there were other views being expressed.

Do please note that individuals are very welcome to respond to the consultation - so if you have a strong feeling that you wish to ensure is expressed, you might want to consider going down that route. But that's not to say that minority views on this thread will be ignored (far from it).

(Just as an aside, I'm a PWC who has an excellent relationship with the father of my children, so I have personal experience of NRPs being excellent, responsible parents.)

Hope that answers your question.

MNHQ

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread

Back to thread