CMEC is under review by the government

October 14, 2010

CMEC are on a list of quangos under review. What are the coalition waiting for? It’s a glorious opportunity to get rid altogether.

It cannot be right that £4 billion pounds is uncollected and those who pay are repeatedly targeted. It discriminates against the ones who have never received any monies and the ones who are paying above and beyond what they should be paying. There has to be a better way for everybody, but without the ‘shambles’ and ‘incompetence’ of CMEC! Billions spent on failed computer systems, large bonuses paid for failure….and the taxpayer picks up the tab!

Perhaps they could start by asking parents what they would like to see happen instead of imposing draconian laws that target the weak and vulnerable and allow others to evade paying! Not once have I been asked what I would like to see happen. This ridiculous/shambolic system is jeopordising my childrens inheritance and has to go!

Comments

13 Responses to “CMEC is under review by the government”

  1. Colin Bennett on October 14th, 2010 5:45 pm

    Maybe this is why they rushed my illegal liability order forward on a deferred debt I 'don't' owe!!!! Over many years the CSA have railroaded their way through my life, constantly telling me lies and using illegal enforcement laws even after the ICE team found basic accounting errors from them bringing £13,000 down to £1,800 which was paid up in full last year. Sadly due to my honesty they are putting on me to make up for the absent fathers they should be chasing!

  2. Phil Lee on October 14th, 2010 5:48 pm

    It should be closed down – end of – all parents should be encouraged to share responsbility – those that don't don't. The state should stay out of it – but hey we hand over our children at birth so the state actually owns them anyway.. but you probably knew that.

  3. Jem Pogue on October 14th, 2010 5:54 pm

    STOP co-operating with these animals and they will be closed down sooner !!!!

  4. Colin Bennett on October 14th, 2010 6:00 pm

    Sadly you cant do that when a court summons lands on the mat – that's why they are doing that now.

  5. Jem Pogue on October 14th, 2010 6:39 pm

    Yes you can colin, i have and they back off :)

  6. Shaban Afzal on October 14th, 2010 6:52 pm

    Jem is right, Colin you can back them off by getting a summons out for them……counter claim. Judges are not stupid, CSA are not above the law, its the judges decision not the CSA's. rmember that.

  7. Colin Bennett on October 14th, 2010 7:00 pm

    So many people have told me though that the csa and the courts are one of the same with the same interests. I was also told that if I appeared at the liability hearing I would only be able to confirm my name and not be able to produce my evidence. Currently my MP is still waiting for a very important answer from them but as it is an akward one for them they are now 4 days over their own deadline.

  8. Colin Bennett on October 14th, 2010 7:39 pm

    Hi Shaban. Looking at your profile I am assuming you are a lawyer in the know? If this is the case I would like to speak with you as I have been a fighter all the way through and will see justice in my case.

  9. Chall Mod on October 14th, 2010 11:43 pm

    Shaban Afzal, What exactly do you recommend the grounds of counter claim be? – Judges are unable question amounts.

  10. Lee Hughes on October 15th, 2010 2:32 pm

    Less co-operation, more costs! Excellent, the more it costs then the more the government might consider finishing it off!!!

  11. Paul NoEgo on October 16th, 2010 10:05 pm
  12. graeme on October 18th, 2010 11:23 am

    Would’nt that be so nice to hear that this bunch of thieves are being shut down and the staff are all made redundant. I for one would be throwing the biggest street party known to mankind to celebrate.

    And before I recieve a load of comments from angry PWC’s, I am one of the guys who does not, nor have i ever shirked my responsibilties of being a father, whether that is emotionally or financially. I am just a divorced father who loves and pays for his son. My ex is not the greedy type either. Yes I would love to come to an arrangement with her, however she is looking after herself by going through this shambolic bunch of thieves, it is this shambolic agency who is taking the money from me at the rate that they have set. It has nothing to do with my ex. I actually applaud my ex for being the woman that she is, but I also feel that she could have and can do more to support herself financially. But that is her choice. As long as our son is well catered for that is all that matters to my ex and myself.

    So i cant wait to hear that this agency has closed down for good.

    Graeme

  13. John on October 22nd, 2010 3:47 pm

    Well said Graeme. It is for parents to provide for THEIR children. The Children do not belong to the state, nor should there be skyscraper buildings full of faceless tossers interfering between parents and children.

    Like you I hope the staff are all made redundant and the whole chaotic shambles shut down!

Got something to say?