Ex not interested in seeing his son
October 31, 2010
10 years, thats how long I have waited for the CSA to find him assess him, garnish his pay, which is of course when he left his job to become self employed, find him again assess him again, take him to court to get him to pay the £12k in arreas, then move his case to Scotland, where he now lives, to then tell me as the law there is different, and he “clearly” does not have the money, because he says so…. then they have had to wipe the slate clean and…. oh the icing….. he doesn’t have to pay any more until he has an income again.
I can only hope that he genuinely is as poor as he claims or my shear incandescant rage will burn him to a crisp from 500 miles away!
He has not seen his son for 10 years, no birthday cards not a christmas gift not one single phone call, no matter how I have begged and pleaded, untill I remarried two years ago and gave up.
He is not interested, and I still have to ask for his permission for my husband to adopt a young man who adores him. Sucks Huh!
Comments
Child Support Agency Poll
Loading ...
Recent Forum Replies
Recent Forum Topics
-
what impact of media for children
by 5 years, 11 months ago
-
csa arrears after case closed confused?
by 6 years, 7 months ago
-
Pay Your Way – Avoid The CSA
by 7 years, 1 month ago
-
Can the CSA find me?
by 7 years, 3 months ago
-
CSA to CMS
by 7 years, 7 months ago
-
what impact of media for children
by
Well!!!! the law is in favour of NRP in that respect however! you need to accept that this is how it is…..There again, does your child want to change their name??? have you asked your child this???????As for the CSA or NRP in payment arrangements….. If the NRP is like this now as an absent parent then you should learn to accept that this is how it is… unfortunately you will place suffering to your child if you allow yourself to suffer…. continue your life and dont allow CSA to control your feelings!!!!MNo point in complaining if there is no compliance, your worry will not change your circumstances….
i think you should just let it drop too. Your time and energy is better spent on your child than the complete waste of skin that happens to be his biological father. From what you said, he will go to any lengths to avoid his financial responsibility. I fully inderstand your peristance, it is the principle more than the actual money and I have been exactly with regards to my ex. They see our not giving up as greed and 'not moving on' but its about them ignoring our children emotionally and physically and if financial action is the only thing that can be enforced then at least its an acknowledgement of some sort that they contributed to creating that child therefore they should contribute to their upbringing.It is frustrating that there are so many loopholes and bad policy for these so called 'fathers' to hide behind, but you've managed for ten years, don't waste another minute of your time on this, and I use the term loosely, man!My ex declared he wanted no contact with our daughter during a court hearing, he also stated that he did not want his whereabouts to be disclosed and just walked out of court. I questioned the issue of parental responsibility with the judge and was told that although they couldn't remove his right to this, if he ever took action with regards to any decisions made regarding our daughter then the courts would take the view that as he was uncontactable that he couldn't possibly be consulted, and I got the impression that the general opinion between family court judges is that if a man chooses to exclude himself from his childs life he cannot then go screaming parental responsibility when it suits him.With regards to your son being adopted by the man that so graciously stands in the roll of his dad, it is unfair that you should have to consult someone that clearly has no interest and, the chances are, he would refuse anyway. If your son wants to take the name of the man that has cared for him, he can assume his surname until he's of age, then make the change himself by deed poll. There's more than one way to skin a cat!! Best of luck to you all
Charmaine… great comment! It should now be up to the child to decide name change!!
You could of course move on…
Well Helen if you take that view then unfortunately I bid you farewell. However I couldn't agree with you on your conclusion. I think you may have arrived at that view from the fact there seems to be a few who are very vocal and do seem to have that opinion.The biggest issue as I see it is that the system is inherently biased towards the PWC, that however doesn't mean that all PWC's actually get it easy going through the CSA.So long as you aren't FORCING the NRP to go through the CSA and are being fair with access then I would sympathise with your position. After all if the NRP is truly DEADBEAT then everything should be thrown at them!
Might I also add that my responsibility is to my child and NOT my ex. What I am doing now is none of their business, so why are the CSA involved in my business? The PWC is given the ability via the state to interfere in my life but I'm not offered the chance to ***** their life up!!! LMAO
yes bye Helen we do take are responsibilites very serious regarding our kids not like some people with pwc who are gold diggers your words taken right out of my mouth
here here!!! Oddly there are PWC's who remain focused on their greedy desires for tax free money causing NRP's child to suffer financially…. Upon such questioning of such actions, they will respond with venom!!!! nasty little snakes……
else they respond with the venom of a black widow!!!!
helen is again unable to provide response to questions that are put to her comments!!!!And I'm aware that women love arguments but only hate them when they cannot find a suitable answer!!!!
EPIC FAIL… Helen!!!!!!!
bye bye helen, your comments weren't worth reading anyway……..The PWC in our case is a coniving b****, we took her to court so my husband could see his kid, was OK for about a year, she then decides that the daughter doesn't want to see her dad, she was only 6 at the time, adorded her dad from all accounts, the ones I saw anyway, the PWC decided it would be in the daughter's best interest to make fale allegations against my hubby, yet still wants him to be punished by the CSA, for not payin her the money she is owed. She can fight as much as she likes, lie to the CSA however much she wants to, BUT the fact remains, she won't see any of the "arrears" he is "supposed" owe !!!
Helen,As I wrote previously, assuming your version of events is correct (not that I am doubting them) then I can only sympathise with your position. I'm not anti PWC, I just resent the PWC having this ability to interfere in my life through the CSA. It was after all, her choice to be single. You can therefore see how NRP's can begin to resent PWC's in general, unfortunate as that may be.The only way things will improve is if we work together to end the CSA, if parents can work together then they should and the government should get the hell out of our affairs. The quite clear bias in the legislation needs removing and the ability of one party to wield interference in the other persons life should be removed promptly! The truly non compliant should have there lives turned into a living hell but only when a number of reasonable attempts to resolve things have taken place. If you force someone to do something, a lot of the time they will fight back!
The CSA get things wrong time and time again for both PWC and NRP, but if the CSA were not place it would only be some other agency. Even if it was a court that said (for example) 15% of your salary there would no doubt still be arrears due to PWC because it takes so long for cases to get court dates.
Matters should be dealt with via a fixed process that would end in court if absolutely necessary. The company that is the CSA/CMEC should only exist to chase money off truly non compliant NRP's where there is a record that the PWC has been prepared to co-operate. Each case is different, this percentage lark is daft anyway! Two adults made a child and so BOTH parents should contribute towards their upkeep. If it is shown to the court that the NRP has contributed sufficiently then the past should be disregarded!Access/Custody and Maintenance should be linked and dealt with via the same process. It is ridiculous that you are expected to pay while having your childs rights (assumed that they want both parents in their lives) abused by having their right to see their NRP interfered with by the PWC!
well said Lee!!!!
also NRP's WFTC's should be left alone… especially wen PWC recieves WFTC's also!!! taking from one child to give to another, all children deserve equal financial provision!!!!
when either NRP or PWC finds new partner… partners income should be supportive to the household….to were it finances the children of the relevant household!!!!!
I agree that tax credits should not be brought into the equation, that's just wrong for so many reasons. And I think you'll find that when both parents move on to new relationships the new partners do contribute to the household, but that does not give a NRP the right to stop supporting their biological children whilst supporting someone elses. My ex tried that one in the appeal and shot himself right in the foot!! It is disgraceful to suggest another man finance the upbringing of your child yet expect to retain contact and parental responsibility
I agree, thats why I prefer to be able to make sure my child is provided for and not my PWC being provided for…. he hasntbenefited from it the way he has from me buying himclothes and footwear and trips out or away!!!!! I can do that myself without having to hand over to the PWC….!!!! thanks to shared care and nil assessment with a build up of arrears!!!!! how will she cope when I'v popped me cloggs ?????
At least my son will know I did my best for him!!!!!