CSA calculation - is this right?

[ticklemonster123]

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?

Thats good to see you are aware of these issues jovial and arent so quick to judge those single parents who arent working every hour as your posts suggested.

whilst I agree both parents have a responsibility to provide for their children, the fact that one might be on benefits doesn't cancel out the responsibility of the other. I was a SAHM and pregnant when my ex walked out - no choice but to fall back on benefits for quite some time. I also had to move house as a result of the divorce - and consequently lost most of my support network. Getting back to work was difficult and I had to wait until all the pieces of the jigsaw fit together. In the meantime, I was the best possible parent I could have been with the money from benefits that I received. Why shouldn't my ex have contributed during that difficult time? It certainly had fuck all to do with his new partner what my financial situation was and she had no right to judge me worthy or not of receiving maintenance.

What happens if I lose my job? What happens if my ex loses his job - is it OK then for him not to contribute because he has no income but not OK for me to be on benefits? Your arguments are unbalanced and ignore the fundamental fact that parenting is a joint undertaking and for many, that undertaking is badly skewed once separation takes place. There is nothing at all wrong in expecting an ex to contribute that the Government says they should contribute. Whether or not I have had a pay rise has nothing to do with it.

I didn't say I wasn't judging surly. I said I understand the issues because I had the same ones.

jovialjulia if myself and my ex were both responsible for 50% of the time that would include 50% of the childcare costs which would be significantly higher than he is supposed to pay in maintenance. I am also the one who has to do any medical appointments, deal with any sickness which also means I lose out financially in other words the day to day caring costs fall on my shoulders both in time and money his contribution does not come close to matching it.

Be interesting to know how many nrp pay more in maintenance than full time child care to enable them to work would cost.

Oh so you are judging. Good to know.

Jovialjulia - how do the childcare vouchers for his and the OPs child benefit his other DCs.

I am a single mum, can sure as hell tell you my 3 DCs did not come from a golden uterus, it managed 9 pregnancies to get 3 DCs!

This not so golden uterus has worked from the arrival of DC1 and still works and thank god I do because what EX pays for his DCs would not cover much. But then he is a higher rate tax payer and god bless him is entitled to child care vouchers for his new DC and her DCs - just a shame he does not consider coughing for his share of child care which I am providing because of his piss poor abilities to have his DCS on anything more than a speck of time.11 ONs last year - in between that I do pay all the large child care costs, summer camps whilst I work etc.

I bust a gut, whilst his new partner works 33% time and he pays for her 2 DCs and their new joint DC!

The OPs partner had not had a pay rise - fair point. His reduction in CMs for his kids comes from benefits car, child care vouchers and increased pension contributions. Bar the car - can not see how any of those do or will benefit his first DCs.

And whether I get a pay rise or not his not his new DPs business. ergo, if my pay rises he should pay less because I have more monies coming in. Yeah right - 15 yrs of marriage and 3 DCS - he is responsible for 50% of the costs of bringing them up. That the law / CM rules etc state whatever, morally he is resonsible for 50% of his DCs.

It's the sneakiness of running back to the CSA instead of discussing it with him. She thought he had got a pay rise and didn't. The calculations have now gone down so more fool her for not trusting him

He is just as responsible for not facilitating that conversation.

Sorry I seem to have started quite a debate.

Just to clarify AGAIN - this has never been about which figure DH should pay, I just wanted to know whether the calculation was correct as I never for a minute thought that they would calculate the figure based on his net net pay, after the childcare vouchers have come off, after all, they are income.

I have stated all along that I think it would be unfair to reduce the amount as DH's income hasn't really decreased, but if he decides to pay the lower amount then that is up to HIM. I am shocked that the CSA have actually calculated it this way, because it doesn't seem right or fair for the amount to be reduced because of DH's company benefits.

I have also stated several times that I doubt very much that DH will decrease his payments as he just wants a quiet/easy life and it really wouldn't be worth risking an argument or risking his ex reducing contact over the sake of about £10pw.
He is not the one who asked for a reassessment, he was happy paying the original amount, we're not wealthy people but we can afford it so there's no reason for him to reduce his payments, especially not just for the sake of 'getting one over on her' as some people have suggested. This isn't his attitude. He is the most laid back, easy going person, that really isn't his style.

I only mentioned his ex's pay in reply to somebody asking if the children would go without if he was to pay the lesser amount.
The answer being - no she is on good money and their (her and her partner's) household income is much greater than ours.
This does not mean that DH should not pay a fair amount (he does, always has done and always will pay what he should) but I was just making the point that she is not a poor struggling single mum who relies on DH's money to put a roof over their heads.

And in reply to those insinuating that I am some bitter new wife who doesn't have a clue - I also have an 11 year old who I brought up on my own for a number of years before meeting DH. So I do know what it is like to be a single parent.

I am not ''living off my husband'' - I am temporarily working part time until our child starts school, because that is how we decided that we want our child to be raised. And even if I did work full time it would make little difference to our income due to childcare costs, so would I still be ''living off my husband'' if I worked full time but paid out most of my wage on childcare?

I don't like the woman for very justified reasons (reasons which I won't go in to) but that is pretty irrelevant. Whether I like the woman has got nothing to do with the amount of money DH will pay for his DC's.

DH is a decent bloke who works hard to provide everything he can for ALL his children, they all get everything they need.

Its ok OP, its clear from your posts that your DH is decent and that you werent trying to reduce payments. The thread moved away from your OP a bit and people started discussing different senarios so some of the comments wont be about your situation.

He is just as responsible for not facilitating that conversation

There was no conversation to be had though, his pay had not gone up. Is he supposed to have a weekly/monthly/quarterly/yearly conversation with her to confirm the amount he is earning?

I don't have a problem with her going to the CSA, but I do think it was a bit petty to lie and say that she hadn't when she clearly had.

In an ideal world he should be talking to her when changes happen. He did have a change he was promoted.

Most reasonable people would assume with a promotion comes a pay rise.

A simple "I've had a promotion at work but my income is the same so you don't need to fret about CM changing" would have been the grown up thing to do.

Sometimes a little thought would not be amiss especially when it would be fairly reasonable to believe a financial change may have occurred

Yes, but if you think the money being paid is really not being spent on the children! I think I would reduce the amount according to the CSA's calculations, then throughout each month check for what seems needed, coats, shoes, school clothes etc, and just go out and buy them! I'd also be keeping a very careful record of every penny spent, where and what on, I might even take dated photos of the children wearing them!

I'd also be keeping a very careful record of every penny spent, where and what on, I might even take dated photos of the children wearing them!

For what purpose?

So that, if any discussion came up in the future about how much he pays, he has evidence that he is spending the money he saves from reducing the money he pays to EW, totally on his children...proving they are not losing out!

I'd also be keeping a very careful record of every penny spent, where and what on, I might even take dated photos of the children wearing them!

My DH has done this for years. Why? Because you can't know what the future holds. And in my DH's case, Mum likes to bend the truth, especially for DSD.

It's all incredibly sad.

I am one of those who went to the CSA and saw the money he was required to provide to our children nearly double.

I would always advice resident parents to check. One case does not make a generality.

If you feel that the current CSA isn't being used appropriately then use the £40 difference a month to send DC home in decent shoes/clothes/haircut.
If my stepsons go more than a reasonable amount of time without a haircut then I just get it done when they are with us.
She's been a sneaky bitch but no reason for DC to suffer, think of it as gaining some control on what it's spent on!

Was I a 'sneaky bitch' when I queried my ExH's contribution?

Wdigin2this - IKWYM but I think if you knew their relationship you would agree that it will just be best for everybody to keep paying the original amount. DH has been through a lot to get to where he is now in regards to contact and trying to keep a civil relationship with his ex, it's been pretty crap in the past and it really wouldn't be worth rocking the boat.

We spend extra on clothes etc, if they need something and we can afford it we will buy it them, I'd hate to be having to keep a track of how much we spend because then we could end up begrudging what we spend or putting a cap on it. I don't do that with my own kids, I'd hate to find myself thinking ''no we can't buy him/her that as they've had their quota for the month''.
It sounds very stressful and life is a bit too short for all that.

My DH doesn't keep a record to put a cap on it OP. She gets what she needs end of. Just like our other kids do. No quota.
But he was advised early on to keep copies of everything. Doing that has served him well in the past and he continues to. Not for anything specific and hopefully he won't need it. Just in case he does.
His contact with DSD has been difficult from the get go. He didn't get regular contact until she was a toddler and it's been fraught all the way. Things are waaaay better now but there will always be a sense that what he has could be taken away in a moment because although things are 'cordial' , there isn't really any trust. Anyway, I'm not recommending you write everything down or keep receipts. It is stressful! Just answering another poster's question as to why one would.

tickle - I do get where you are coming from and appreciate you were asking a question. It is the age old issue for single mums, that when their EX has a new kid their maintenance goes down - costs for the kids has not decreased and the short fall for his/your new kid in many relationships is picked up by the EX - I am in essence supporting his new family whilst he neglects his kids. It is not the same as in a normal family, where more kids mean monies go further, in a split family it means one side pays less and the other through no fault of theirs picks up the difference - it is galling.

It would be sensible to have a yearly conversation re pay and maintenance, it stops the above happening and noe one feels like they are in the dark.

Keeping records is petty - I did whilst Ex paid the sum total of zero and then realised that he was never going to pay what he was supposed to and if the DCs found it on my demise, it would only hurt them.

My solicitor has copies of costs to start with but nothing now, he does not pay what he should and that is never going to change. Does it make me resent him and his DP - oh yes. It clouds everything, including the fact it is Mothers Day tomorrow and for the second yr running he has not taken his DCs out to even get a card for me. He is responsible for all his children but some of us are on the receiving end of knowing that not all his DCS are equal. For any parent mother or father that hurts.

Quesera - you seem to be projecting your feelings from your situation on to mine,
although our situation is completely different.
The payments have not gone down because we have a new child, DH has never reduced the amount of money he has paid his ex, payments have only ever gone up over the years. He has no intention of reducing his payments due to this calculation.
Admittedly yes if DH didn't have two children living with him, his ex would be entitled to more money but he has never reduced payments.

But if you look at the bigger picture, in my situation there have been times when my DD from my previous marriage went without things because I have been providing for DSC, like when DH was made redundant (no redundancy pay as only been there 6 months) and was out of work for a couple of months, at the time he was paying half the mortgage on the marital home, so I had to use my savings to pay that and the maintenance. Well I didn't have to but that was the decent and right thing to do.
Did I ever get thanks from the ex? Did i bollocks!

There's been times when I have been worse off than I was when I was a lone parent and I could have thought "I'm funding their children" but you know what? Life is hard enough as it is without stressing about things that you can't control and don't really matter.
As long as I have a roof over my head and my family are all happy and healthy that's all I care about. I'm not arsed if my account is overdrawn or I can't afford a night out or I have to go without something I'd like, it's all materialistic bollocks.
Try doing some voluntary work with homeless people or disadvantaged families and it just puts everything in to prospective and makes you realise how lucky you are.

"Try doing some voluntary work with homeless people or disadvantaged families and it just puts everything in to prospective and makes you realise how lucky you are." I'm sorry tickle but that's very insulting. How are you to know how damaging the lack of maintenance has been to Quesera? It may not be the case that her account is "overdrawn" or that she can't "afford a night out". It's insulting for you to assume this.

I didn't assume that her account is overdrawn or that she can't afford a night out, I was talking about my own situation and that I'm not bothered about materialistic things. It wasn't about Querera.
I said about working with a homeless charity because that's what I do and I can honestly say it has totally changed my outlook on life, I didn't mean it to sound patronising and I wasn't trying to insult, just saying that the only thing that really matters is that your children have a roof over their heads and are happy and healthy. Just enjoy what you have because we are all lucky and blessed to have children, family and a home.

awkward one.

We have had hell on with CSA payments going up and down (mainly due to their incompetence).

If you are underpaying and they come back to you with it a few months down the line, they will add the 'arrears' on so you may end up paying more.

I'd query it (if it's going to be same amount you've always paid, you're not out of pocket, if it goes up, I wouldn't imagine it going up too drastically).

I feel for all parents in this situation. As much as CSA is for the CHILD, some parents don't always spend this on the child especially when my partner's ex seems to be getting her hair and nails done at £95 a time then crying the "I'm poor" tale. We're lucky to get to payday without going into our overdraft paying bills!

Good luck with this one!