It can seem that you’re on your own when you’re in a divorce battle, and everything you do seems to result in expense, anger and resentment. There are plenty of places where you can get help on divorce though, but most companies offering divorce advice are very expensive and, as someone who knows, speaking to a divorce solicitor can be like throwing money down the drain.

A new website however aims to offer advice for people going through the burden of divorce, in much the same way the CSAhell.com offers advice on dealing with the Child Support Agency. The website, DivorceTalk.co.uk, is relatively new and has just launched a feature whereby people struggling with divorce can email in their stories for publication on the website. By doing so, people can get advice and help on their divorce situations, or at the very least have a good rant about what’s upsetting them right now.

So, if you’re in the midst of a divorce and you’d like to get a few things off your chest, have a look at DivorceTalk.co.uk and send in your tales of woe – they’d love to hear from you. Tell them CSAhell.com sent you!

However, John – one of the finest British comedy actors ever to grace the screen and a national treasure – is being forced to carry on working well into his seventies, just to pay the alimony and child support required of him following his third, yes third, divorce.

John’s last divorce has apparently cost him £12.5 million, and he claims it has left him penniless. So broke is he, and due to the fact that he also has to pay his latest ex-wife a ‘wage’, that he has embarked on a new comedy tour in order to pay the money – dubbed his ‘alimony tour’.

For someone who has given us the brilliant Monty Python, and then the stupendous Fawlty Towers, it’s a disgrace that this man has to work into his seventies just to pay money to ex-wives who want to continue living ‘in the manner to which they have grown accustomed’ due to his genius and success. Yet, the man who played Basil Fawlty in Fawlty Towers, possibly the greatest ever UK sitcom, is working himself into an early grave in the name of money.

Fawlty Towers was so successful, so madcap, that you can even experience the insanity of staying at the hotel and being served by an incompetent Manuel and a dictatorial Basil yourself with one of the many Fawlty Towers Dinner Shows that are held throughout the country – if someone misunderstanding your order or failing to know what a Waldorf Salad actually is appeals to you.

Perhaps John Cleese himself should go to one? It would take his mind off the money he has to earn to just to pay for his ex-wives.

Recent reforms to the Child Support Agency have been heavily criticized in the past, and it seems almost no one feels its efficiency has improved in the least. Although the Child Support Agency has some degree of power over absent parents, the measures it enforces are often ineffective.

In addition to the possibility of losing their driving licenses and passports, non-resident parents could also have money taken directly from their bank accounts. However, these proposals have already received criticism, with many calling attention to the fact that, without driving licenses especially, parents could end up losing their jobs and would therefore be in an even worse situation for paying child maintenance.

At the moment, the CSA can take a parent to court in order to remove their passport or driving license, however these proposals would mean being able to do it almost instantly if a parent refuses to cooperate, without any legal action needed.

Matthew Elliot, from the Taxpayers’ Alliance, heavily criticised these plans, stating that removing a parents’ driving license would likely stop them from being able to earn money to provide for their children. For the moment, it is unknown whether these proposals are likely to be implemented.

In the report it published, the committee called the plans “excessive” and stated that the government should be focusing on aiding parents to make voluntary arrangements for child support, rather than focusing on charging for the use of their service. The committee feels that the government needs to offer much more support to separated parents, rather than simply having the idea that the charges will mean parents will have to cooperate with one another on their own – which there is a lot of doubt is a realistic expectation.

The report goes on further to state that these charges shouldn’t be used in most cases, and should instead only be used against a parent who is uncooperative and is not willing to otherwise make child support arrangements.

The chair of the committee, Anne Begg, said in a statement that these charges will affect parents who are in the position of caring for the children the most, rather than affecting the non-resident parent.

Another worry about the charges is that parents may feel they are not getting value for money. The Child Support Agency is still highly inefficient and fails to collect millions of pounds worth of child maintenance payments every year. Additionally, the Fatherhood Institute supported the opinions of the committee, stating that separated families need better support in order to come to agreements.

This new contract was created after the CSA realised how much trouble their current system was causing them, with thousands of cases being processed by hand each year. This meant that costs went up and efficiency went down. The new system was supposed to be a “ready to go” package that was simpler and a lot more efficient.

However, according to a statement, the installation of the software is on time and was never meant to be ready quickly. They claim the system will be ready for their target of 2012 and there was no intention for it to be rolled out any sooner.

In the statement, reassurance was also made about the current system, stating that although it is not perfect, it is able to continue functioning well enough for the moment.

However, the spokesman did admit that due to the plans to make the transition gradual, the current system could partially still be in use for as much as 18 years.

The group of MPs were triggered into making this announcement when they found out how many parents who have separated do not make regular payments, while others do not make any payments at all. At the moment, those parents who don’t make payments when they are due can have the money taken directly from their bank account, however the MPs feel this situation could be alleviated more if all payments were made directly.

This move by MPs comes after the highly controversial introduction of charges for parents who wish to use the service to receive child maintenance payments, which the government justified by saying it would encourage parents to come to an agreement on their own. Despite these recommendations from the group of MPs, the government still stresses that it wants parents to sort out their differences to set up regular child maintenance payments rather than seeking an intervention straight away.

In addition to this, the replacement to the Child Support Agency was also found to be highly inefficient with regard to money – costing 50p for every pound it managed to collect while missing out on collecting billions of payments it was owed.

The bus company in question is Coakley Bus and Coach Ltd, which is based on Motherwell, and the prosecution relates to allegations that they failed to deduct earnings for child support from one employee in 2010.

The company went into liquidation during May and 55 jobs were lost as a result. During the hearing, no one from the company was present, however solicitors representing the company made a not guilty plea on their behalf.

The detail of the charges involves the allegation that the company did not deduct earnings for child support payments from the employee from August 19th until October 19th 2010. The case however has been given extra time in order for the prosecution to consider the nature of the company’s liquidation, which could affect the outcome of the verdict. It is expected a decision will not be made until near the end of July.

When a parent is ordered to contribute part of their earnings towards child maintenance, the CSA simply has to issue an order to the individual or the individual’s employer, which must be followed. In cases where this does not happen, the CSA is entirely able to charge those it deems responsible for the lack of payments.

Tim Ford, of Pentrich Road, has been trying to set up a direct debit for 8 months. But every month, when the payment is due, the money does not go out of his account.

This has led to monthly letters from the CSA demanding that he pay the amount, or threatening him with legal proceedings. Vital Payments that should be going towards bringing up his two year old son are being delayed by 2 or even 3 weeks.

This is an example of a NRP who wants to pay, but is unable to do so – the sort of story that the Child Support Agency does not highlight.

He said:

“I have just got to the end of my tether with them I really have.”

“You get a standard threatening letter every month off them that is five pages long.
Then I have to call them to explain to them what has happened and I can be on the phone for any time between ten minutes and an hour.”

“They have given me no reasons, they say it is an administration error – but I have to call them and they take my details again and again.”

The phone calls that Mr Ford makes can vary between ten minutes and an hour in length and sometimes cost him as much as £7 each time from his pay and go phone. He also thinks that the CSA has carried out credit checks without his permission, something which they admit they sometimes do.

A CSA spokesperson said:

“We will be urgently contacting Mr Ford to apologise to him for the delay in setting up a direct debit payment plan and to resolve the problem as soon as possible. The Government has recently set out its plan for a more effective and efficient child maintenance system.”

Adrian Haddon, 37, of Bowness Avenue in Thornton, said he was completely stunned when Lancashire police arrested him on the orders of Canadian officials where his son lives. They are claiming that he owes a total of £34,402 in child support payments that are dating back 16 years.

Haddon, a former soldier, served in Canada for three months in 1994, which was where he met the child’s mother. Adrian commented:

“I was shocked. I’ve never refused to pay, I wouldn’t refuse it. I just didn’t know he was mine.”

“I’d met his mother in 1994 and she fell pregnant. She was Canadian and I was serving there at the time. We were serving in Canada for three months and then we were moved on. I went back in 1995 and bumped into her.”

“I saw she’d had a baby but I didn’t know he was mine until a DNA test three years ago. Since then it’s been an on-going thing. Because it’s from another country, it takes, months and years to sort out. We just need to go through the courts to sort out the arrears. But they’ve added up over so many years, those arrears will always probably be there until I die.”

Mr Haddon, who moved to Blackpool after he left the army, also has a 5 year old son. He was bailed pending an appearance in court next week.

While Garry was handing out flyers in Nottingham, dressed in his usual Batman costume (to protect his secret identity) he was attacked by a member of the Child Support Agency, who tried to grab his camera from him.

This photo shows the attempted assault on Garry, where a manager at the CSA was clearly angry at Garry’s peaceful display of flyers and posters.

The police even attended the fracas, and instructed Garry to delete this photo. Luckily Garry knew his rights, and you are entitled to take photographs in a public place (as this was, in the town centre) and we are also allowed to publish this photo as copyright is owned by the photographer.

This is another example of how the CSA operates, and how they believe they are above the law.

The demo is on the 19th June. You can also see a short video of this woman, where one of her colleagues shouts ‘You Pay’ at Garry, slandering him in public about his responsibilities towards his daughter, right here.