Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Step-parenting

Connect with other Mumsnetters here for step-parenting advice and support.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Original poster

CSA calculation - is this right?

185 replies

ticklemonster123 · 13/03/2015 12:20

DH's ex went to CSA asking them to recalculate his payments as she believed he'd got a pay rise. He hadn't, he's now in a more senior position but he no longer earns commission so he still earns a pretty similar salary.
He was asked to send his last two payslips, which he did, and now he's had the letter through saying his payments have gone down.
I've looked at the figures and they've calculated the figure based on his net salary, after childcare vouchers have been taken off.
Is that right?
He wasn't getting childcare vouchers the last time they assessed his payments, plus he now has a company car which comes off his tax and he puts more in to his pension so his take home pay is significantly less than it was previously, but his annual salary is roughly the same.

I think DH will probably just continue paying the original amount, after all he isn't actually earning less, but I just wondered whether it is right that they're working it out based on the figure after the childcare vouchers have come off his pay?

OP posts:

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 10:13

Be a wee dear and spell it out for me would you then whereis

wheresthelight · 14/03/2015 10:32

sweetie if you can't manage to work it out for yourself by actually reading the op then I am afraid however simplistic I make it you are still going to be too dim to get it

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 10:51

attacks on my intelligence have no effect on me (but perhaps are a reflection on you )

I love it when people oh so smugly proclaim 'you are totally missing my point dahling' haw haw haw but cant see fit to actually explaining what that point is. Is there actually a point being missed or is it just a case of "i dont like what youre saying but cant think how to correctly address it so i'm telling you youre wrong but wont tell you why in attempt to make you look stupid" as if that will put an end to it

If anyone other than whereis would like to explain the point ive missed i'm all ears.

StarOnTheTree · 14/03/2015 11:15

It's the sneakiness of running back to the CSA instead of discussing it with him.

The only reason why he "kept it from her" is because he wasnt actually earning more.

My ex would absolutely keep it to himself if he was earning more. And if I knew has was earning more I would absolutely run off go back to the CSA. If he hadn't willingly increased the payments (he pays me directly through DD) on increasing his salary then I'll presume that he's not willing to pay the extra. I shouldn't have to ask him to increase the payments, he should just automatically do it.

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:18

Allow me to help out. Receiving a letter from a government department because the woman you had a child with can't quite believe that you are so pathetic as to have not received a pay increase so as to be able to contribute more to your children doesn't feel very nice. Maybe that sounds like something that shouldn't be felt. Maybe it sounds dramatic. But it is the way that it can feel.

It is particularly galling when half the time mum earns nothing or next to nothing herself and no one is allowed to question that. Because she is in possession of the golden uterus.

So in the case of OP, seeing as had it been higher then her DH would have paid, the fact that it's lower should also mean a change. Not so she and her husband can rub their hands together with glee, but because then dad can decide how to spend HIS money on his children and the family.

The car allowance and childcare vouchers both benefit the kids, surely.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:24

the woman you had a child with can't quite believe that you are so pathetic as to have not received a pay increase so as to be able to contribute more to your children doesn't feel very nice

Do you think the "pathetic" status is something she thinks or is that something your DP thinks of himself? You have used the word several times now and i cant help but wonder if he or you perhaps have a bit of an insecurity that is being projected here and that maybe the only people thinking he is pathetic is the two of you.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:27

Fwiw i have to chase my EXp every month for the maintenance, (for some reason he wont set up a standing order) there is no way he would voluntarily increase his CS payments if his wage increased (infact i know he has a second job that i just havent bothered asking about because he'd just quit it and find something else and keep even quieter)

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:31

Ops DH isn't like that though is he? So stop projecting.

I don't think my DH is pathetic no, but after 15 years of being told as much by his ex, yes he does feel sometimes like he isn't doing enough and isn't providing enough. I've tried to help him with that and he's a lot better now. But the letters and "have you still not managed a payrise?!" Texts don't help.

yellowdaisies · 14/03/2015 11:33

jovia I was assuming the childcare vouchers were for care of a different child, not the ones he's paying child support for, which is a bit of an anomaly in the system (and won't happen once the new system comes in using gross pay)

If he is using the childcare vouchers to pay for childcare for the DCs he's also paying child support for then could be paying quite a lot more than the CSA amount, which is fine if he wants to or feels it's fair to do so, but he and his ex should both be aware that it is more.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:36

I was trying to explain why some people "run to" the CSA instead of asking their exp about maintenance. In my case its because ex wasnt paying anything and if i were to suspect a pay rise i would go to CSA too rather than speak to him. It would be nothing to do with thinking he was pathetic! Nothing to do with humiliating him. Nothing to do with greed or wanting to poke about in his finances. Nothing to do with being sneaky. It would be because i suspected a pay rise and thats it.

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:37

Ah yes, I'd assumed the opposite

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:40

But that's you. Ops DH doesnt seem to be that way.. As far as we can see.

If never ask anyway. I've no time to chase my ex around for a few extra quid. I'd rather work harder

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:43

It is particularly galling when half the time mum earns nothing or next to nothing herself and no one is allowed to question that.

If she is earning nothing she is either being supported by the state or someone else and this is supporting the child. If she isnt using that money to support the child then yes it is questioned because the child would be being neglected, not fed or clothed.

Because she is in possession of the golden uterus. probably more to do with the fact that there is nothing to question- she is supporting the child. Would be the same if she was a male (without uterus) PWC.

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:46

How is not earning any money supporting a child? It's just taking handouts and distributing them towards your child's costs. Fine, that's how it works. But don't then question your ex's income that he earns through working in order to support the child you both had. That's just beyond audacious

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:47

If never ask anyway. I've no time to chase my ex around for a few extra quid. I'd rather work harder

Good for you. It isnt always possible to "work harder" when you are a lone parent with no support. It isnt always possible to increase your hours or budget even tighter. Sometimes those "few extra quid" are signifcantly more than a few quid and would make a hell of a difference to your child. But if it suits you to believe people are greedy and lazy then carry on.

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:49

And if you want to carry on thinking women are helpless victims at the mercy of a payrise by proxy then go ahead.

StarOnTheTree · 14/03/2015 11:51

Curlysue. Why have you never earned enough to not need tax credits? Surely you've had payrises recently?

Really? My pay got cut by 40% a couple of years ago so I found another job, well, 2 other jobs actually. I work 40-50 hours a week and I still need tax credits. I can't get a better job because of childcare issues and until my ex steps up and has the DC more than a night or two every month I can't get a better job.

So my contribution isn't just financial (and more than my ex contributes anyway even though he earns 4x what I do) it's also physical, the actual care and looking after them. So any tax credits that I get are actually subsidising his lifestyle because if he had the DC 50% of the time I wouldn't need tax credits because I would be able to earn more. He would be financially worse off because he would have to fully support the children 50% of the time.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 11:53

How is not earning any money supporting a child? It's just taking handouts and distributing them towards your child's costs.

Wow! So SAHPs are taking handouts from their partners? Carers arent "earning" the money that comes into their home? If i had charged my EXp for half the childare i pay out his CS would be a shitload more than what he currently pays- SAH exes provide that childcare for their exps that they otherwise could be forking out to a nursery or childminder. Taking handouts my arse!

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 11:59

Ah "carers" I wondered how long. In fact I nearly put in the MN disclaimer "and I'm not referring to carers" but didn't because I thought I was communicating with an intelligent human. Of bloody course I'm not referring to carers.

But people who are able to work, yet who don't, and who claim benefits and chase their ex's down for a percentage of every sniff of a payrise are not supporting their children and are audacious, entitled, and rude.

StarOnTheTree · 14/03/2015 12:00

I agree CurlySue Supporting children is not just about providing financial support. Someone has to look after them.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 12:03

Of bloody course I'm not referring to carers.

Do you include childcare in that?

Is this your DHs ex? Or do you know a lot of people like this?

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 12:04

Tons sue.

SurlyCue · 14/03/2015 12:08

Really? and they tell you all this about their finances and that they chase their exes at every sniff of a payrise? I cant think of anyone i know as well as to know about their finances or attitude to their exes finances in such detail.

jovialjulia · 14/03/2015 12:11

Oh god no, none that I know personally. I don't keep friends like that. But you see it all the time on MN.

StarOnTheTree · 14/03/2015 12:13

I know quite a few people who live on benefits but they're mostly 2 parent families. Most of the single parents I know work bloody hard AND do the majority of the care.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8