Increased my pension contributions so the CSA gets nothing

March 7, 2013

When I split from my ex seven years ago it was agreed between us that I would continue paying monthly the mortgage of at £484 per month for her as part of the maintenance for our two children.
I have no interest or share in the house.

In February of this year the CSA have told me that they do not accept this because I paid it direct to the lender.

They are now demanding including arrears £500 per month through deductions of earnings order.

Unknown to myself my ex made a claim for maintenance back in 2008.

The outcome is that I no longer pay the mortgage and the CSA get nothing because I increase my pension contributions.

Comments

  • Smithy says:

    Fair enough, a couple of potential issues, they are changing over to gross pay to make the calculation but they don’t have a fixed date when cases will be transferred over to the new system. Your ex could if she wanted money now close the case, wait and start a new case on the new system and I guess the arrears would be cancelled on the old case as it was closed but you’d need to check that.

  • Bob says:

    Come and have a read of this document http://www.facebook.com/notes/child-support-agency-corruption/what-steps-to-take/386972484732475 it may help with some issues. Find out if he us actually claiming any benefits if he is then your CSA payments stop.

  • lisa says:

    To be fair your actually contributing more than enough to keeping the roof over your kids heads as well as trying to survive, the CSA really dont handle anything very well, i suggest putting in a huge complaint, send it to your mp and all relevant people, which you can see the from post above, good luck

  • Sally says:

    I have to disagree with you Amanda, his ex is forcing their kids out of their home!! She was the deceitful one who raised a claim with the CSA behind his back in 2008 and continued to let him pay the mortgage… What was he supposed to do??

    The only person in the wrong here is his deceitful ex… And the poor kids are going to suffer because of her greed and selfishness!! Sad 🙁

  • wilf says:

    Its not the CSA who get nothing its he QCs.
    Charges for the CSA are still in the future.
    Recouping of benefits ended in 2010.
    This kind of behaviour by NRPs is why the CSA is moving to using gross income obtained from HMRC.

  • Sally says:

    Hi wilf, i’m a bit confused by your comment… What kind of behaviour? From who? The author?

    Stephen and his ex had a private arrangement (which the CSA apparently encourage) whereby he paid the full mortgage instead of child maintenance he continued to pay £484 each month until the CSA got involved… What would you expect hom to do? Pay the CSA £500 each month AND the mortgage?? Could you afford £984 every month plus all normal expenses??? I didn’t know many people who could.

    If his ex had spoken to him before going to the CSA then he would have at least known what was happening so that he could plan ahead… The CSA chose not to believe him, if the had, then Stephen wouldn’t be in arrears!!

    The system is unfair and bias towards greedy, selfish, single-minded PWCs … Like Stephens ex!!

  • wilf says:

    Sally:- The PWC asked for CSA to become involved therefore the private agreement stopped at that point (obviously one party in the agreement was not happy).
    The authors behaviour by deliberately increasing pension contributions to reduce the level of income available for assessment.
    All monies collected by the CSA go to the PWC for the care of QCs so the CSA is deprived of nothing.
    Yes everybody would prefer that private agreements were in place as it would save taxpayer’s money and the CSA could be closed down for good.

  • Sally says:

    And I agree with you but if the PWC had not been deceitful in the first place this whole situation could have been avoided!!

    She may have been unhappy but she could easily have spoken with him… £484 per month is a lot of money so the author quite clearly wanted to contribute to his kids upbringing and welfare…

    It is completely unfair that he has ended up with arrears because of his deceitful ex and the incompetent CSA…

  • Gonk says:

    I agree with you sally and lisa Wilf, if you can’t see that the PWC contacted the csa out of greed,hoping she could screw him for even more money.its got nothing whatsoever to do with one party obviously not being happy.as Sally said do you think he should pay the csa and the mortgage????
    What she did is deceitful and had a purpose.and if the csa was fair then a NRP would not go to certain extremes to pay less to the PWC and let’s not start on about it’s the kids that will suffer??? A vast amount of money collected by this filth for PWC is not spent on the kids.
    Hell…..I was not aware that if I paid into a company pension I would not have to pay as much cs? Anyone can clarify this? Because I will bloody make sure I follow this up as I pay £93 a month into a pension.screw the mother, if I was allowed to know how and even if my money was being spent on my daughter then I would not go down that road…the csa made me this monster as some of you might brand me as? The hell….I resent having no say in my money being spent on my daughter but instead subsidising her mother and partners social life.

  • Sally says:

    @ Gonk – it is 100% correct about the pension… I believe this not the case for CSA 3 though…

    You will pay less CM when you pay into a pension…. 🙂

  • wilf says:

    As soon as the NRP was contacted by the CSA all he had to do was stop paying the mortgage as a contribution to maintenance and realise monies had to be paid through the CSA.
    Arrears accrued might not have been so great although everybody knows the CSA take so long to complete an initial assessment that some arrears always occurs because of delays.
    I can not comment on the motives of either the NRP or PWC as I do not know the full story.
    I commented that this kind of behaviour is what led to use of gross income from HMRC for CS3.
    Previously they introduced flat rate percentages in CS2 because many NRPs were abusing the allowances allowed for cost of living expenses on the CS1 system.

  • Gonk says:

    Sally
    Thanks for this information..could you advise me how I go about getting this sorted? Also I’m not sure what system I’m on? My ex put her claim in may 2011 I been robbed by the csa since May 2011

    Gonk

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- You should be able to tell from your assessment letter whether your pension contributions have been taken into account.

  • Gonk says:

    Wilf
    The csa do not take a long time making initial assessment . I was called by them beginning of may and had a DEO in place by the middle of the same month.
    As I said before.if the damm csa was a little fairer then no one would be trying scrap back,claw back or do whatever they could to reduce cs…the main reason people do this is because they have no say whatsoever about cs…we are forced,dictated to by a government…that makes my blood boil and therfore will do whatever I can to reduce payments that are forced out of me.If I was self employed I’d go to hell and back to ensure the mother with the csa help didn’t get a penny out of me…if the mother wanted to talk a sensible and fair amount with me and where I had some say and control on ensuring the money is spent on my child ? Then I would 100% be there and ensure my child never wanted for nothing….the system is corrupt and unfair and heavily biased towards the PWC.
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    Thanks Wilf
    I know they have not because my pension plan didn’t kick in until a yr ago.i been paying csa 2 yrs in May
    Gonk

  • Sally says:

    You will be on CSA 2 (same as my partner, all cases after 2003 are CSA 2) and they do take into account your pension contribution. As wilf says, it should be on your assessment letter, if not then i’d contact the CSA and inform them of your pension contributions…

    🙂 every little helps!!

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- Call today saying you pay into a pension plan and require a change of circumstance and when a reassessment is done it will be backdated to today.

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- I’m pleased to hear their reassessment times have improved.

  • Gonk says:

    As you say Sally
    Every little helps….it’s sad we have this attitude but if the stinking attitude of the csa and some PWC’s didn’t quite stink so much? And we had a system that was fair,then no one would mind paying….of cause…no one wants a dictating government agency sticking its nose into a families affairs in the first place,but alas we are stuck with them like an irrating flee that can’t be crushed.
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    Thanks again Wilf
    I will take your advise but I am inclined to write and get it recorded delivered as I read so many times on here about NEVER call the csa,they lie and deny everything.if I write…I have a paper trail.
    Gonk

  • Sally says:

    I would never have thought I would have to put joint property in my name only to avoid paying my partners greedy ex so much money or suggest he returns to further education to prevent the CSA victimising him and taking money he doesn’t have…

    The CSA puts us in terrible situations that they could not live in and they get away with it because our Government are corrupt… its disgusting…

  • Gonk says:

    Wilf
    When you say backdated to today does that mean it won’t be backdated from when the first pension contribution was taken from my salary ?
    Gonk

  • Sally says:

    Government is corrupt and MPs are corrupt… typo… lol

    Let us know how you get on Gonk!! 🙂

  • Gonk says:

    Well said Sally 🙂
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    And certainly will let you know.need to check my assessment papers but as I said,at the time they assessed me I was not paying into a pension plan as I have been doing so this last 14 months or so.
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    Wilf here’s another question if I may….from June the 1st I will TUPE across to another company therefore the DEO in place will be severed from the old employer.I will be very reluctant to advise the csa of the new employer details,infact will not give it to them but instead arguing that I will pay direct to my ex. Of cause the monies I owe will be put aside until the issue is resolved.i did not or was not given any other option on how to pay at the time of them first contacting me…all they wanted to know was my employers details…ie address of my HR dept
    Gonk

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- They will only back date to when they are told of CofC which is why I said calll today then follow with a recorded delivery letter.
    You should have been given the opportunity to pay by direct debit before a DEO was issued.
    If the PWC agrees to direct payments to her there is no reason why you should not do this.
    She will need to inform the CSA.
    You are supposed to inform the CSA of any change to your circumstances, including change of employer or they may deem you to be non compliant.

  • Gonk says:

    I understand Wilf but they have already deemed me as non compliant because I was not given an opportunity to pay via an alternative method,I therefore told them where to politely go…they branded me as non compliant
    So being brained non compliant again won’t worry me.
    So I will not give them my employers address. I will however email the ex and ask her to ring them.
    Gonk

  • Carrie says:

    Sally ,you are right the NRP was happily paying the mortgage on the family home (possibly more than he would even have to pay in CM!)and was driven to this by the pwc happily taking the money for the mortgage & not saying anything but going behind his back to the CSA.
    Exactly the same happened to us ,our pwc said nothing about not being happy with our arrangement ,the CSA took over 13 months to contact us while we carried on paying.When the CSA admitted they took too long, they gave us a consolatory payment of £50, but wont count ANYTHING we PAID to pwc if she wont admit it !!!WE paid CM by SO every month (we have every bank statement!)but she is saying it was just for the mortgage.So now we are £0000’s in ‘arrears ‘despite NEVER missing a payment to her!!! Where is the justice in that ?

  • Sally says:

    Hi Carrie… I sometimes think I’m going mad when I read some of the comments on here.. If someone is fair, honest and clearly making an effort to pay FOR THEIR CHILD (with proof that they pay) then how can that be wrong or seen as non-compliant…

    The CSA believe everything the PWC says because its easier to process and generate a re-assessment…

    There is no justice and its 100% unfair… I wish you all the luck in the world, keep us posted…

  • Carrie says:

    Thank you Sally,lovely to have someone on our side, it doesn’t feel like anyone at CSA is !!We had to take them(CSA) to a tribunal to have the children that lived with us allowed for .They said we didn’t claim for them !!,we said were in a private arrangement, they said it was too late to claim for them and wasn’t possible to back date to include them. We went ahead because we said we didn’t know there was even a problem with the private arrangement or obviously we would have claimed for them for the past 13 months If we knew we were under the jurisdiction of the CSA.We were successful, at the tribunal, to have the children taken off the so called ‘arrears’ ( a quick check that we received child benefit for them would proved this, why did it take a whole day,2 CSA staff ,a judge, various official people taking notes of the proceedings, & us taking day off work etc etc ? ) so a step in the right direction but still ‘arrears’ we shouldn’t have anyway !! Still working on the rest but at a bit of an impasse at the moment .We are being compliant as they would go for a DEO anyway which would be highly embarrassing for someone who has always paid for the children. Will let you know how it goes .

  • carol says:

    ANY money going to an ex partner when you no longer have anything to do with them except for the kids, IS maintenance. But the CSA twist and manipulate this fact to suit their agenda.

    Im sorry, but why would someone send their ex hundreds of pounds a month via standing order?

    Bank statement you think would be proof enough to suggest that support was given and should be counted.

    But this is the slimeball civil serVICE at play here

  • Carrie says:

    Exactly Carol, why do they let the pwc decide what they will ‘accept it as’ especially so many years down the line.Yes ,the CSA say it could be for anything any debts from the relationship that the pwc was left with !! I don’t think so ,my husband paid ALL of those when they split up which could be proven anyway.She had a generous settlement ,a car, all the furniture,We had the children EVERY WEEKEND so she had all that free time when we had them(and there were 4 children in addition to my own)It was a lot for me to do every weekend feeding them all and keeping everybody happy.! Do the CSA not think they might of heard something from her before ,in all these years ,if she wasn’t getting any money from the NRP !!
    I’m fed up with this Child Support Agency- if they want something from you they got to have in within a very short space of time like 7 days-If YOU ask for your Data files, you have to give them up to 40 days for you to receive them, but you only get 30 days to appeal something! Anybody would think they didn’t want you to get them in time!! A lot of pwc’s are restricting contact as it affects the amount of money they get ( no reduction for overnight stays )and guess who they ask for confirmation… the pwc!)I could go on & on…

  • Steve Martin says:

    All that needed to be done to resolve this issue was for someone to use there common sense. What is wrong with the nrp paying the pwc mortgage if he has no interest in the property and the amount is above the maintenance level. Couldn’t somebody say we prefer it if you pay the money direct to the pwc from now on rather than trying to bankrupt the nrp with arrears.

  • Alice says:

    All changes reported to the agency will be taken on by the notified date – if the agency require evidence (pay slips, chb confirmation etc) this may hold up an assessment being processed but the new assessment with be effective as from the date the NRP/PWC or 3rd party notified the agency of the change. As such changes reported by phone are quicker than those reported by letter.

    Gonk – if you fail to inform the CSA of your new employer your employer will do so – it may not be until the CSA contact them regarding non-payment of the DEO and as such there will be at least 1 missed payment on your account. Maintenance Direct requires both NRP and PWC to agree – it is most likely that the PWC stated in her initial application that she wanted the agency to collect the payments and when you refused to arrange payment via the agency the DEO was imposed.

    Carrie – the agency will give an allowance for any children living in the NRP’s household but only if they are advised by the NRP of the children – if your partner did not inform the agency at the start of the case of the children they would not award the allowance on the initial assessment – if he has advised the agency of the children at a later date they will confirm CHB as being in payment for these children at his address and do a re-assessment

    Pension contributions are taken into account when an assessment is done – as are certain salary sacrifice, but only to a reasonable level. In certain cases inflated contributions can be questioned and possibly disregarded

  • Sally says:

    Hi Alice – as usual you only respond to issues you can clearly answer but with regards to this particular issue… The NRP (as far as he was concerned) had a private arrangement with the PWC and only found out his ex had gone to the CSA 5 YEARS EARLIER??? The PWC is being deceitful and underhand ant the CSA are completely incompetent… 5 years later the NRP finds out the facts!!!!

    You state ‘if’ they agency requires proof…. When would they not require proof??? 3 times we were re-assessed on the lies of the PWC and because the CSA were too lazy to investigate or find out the truth my partner ended up in arrears, so please, tell us when the CSA wouldn’t be expected to ask for proof??

  • Gonk says:

    Lol…Alice…typical csa reply from you and yes I’d half expected the csa have a plan in place to prevent a NRP paying extra into his/her pension for his/her future retirement so’s not to sacrifice lower payments to the money grabbing ex.
    You do make me sick and as Sally says you only reply to post that you can clearly answer and always for the csa.well done have another gold star.
    Looking back I’d probably be better off having a DEO in place? At least that way I only need to deal with ghost arreas that the csa may dream up and not have to deal with the lies from the ex,telling the csa that I paid her no money via a private arrangement and the bastard csa beleiving her without question.well all I can say is I do indeed pay £93 a month into a pension and FULLY intend exploiting this.you see Alice,because of the csa and greedy ex’s us NRP have to resort to these tactics,if the csa didn’t stick their ore in,then I wouldn’t bother with what action I’m forced to do.
    Another example of the csa driving a wedge between a NRP and his/her kids, the greedy ex hopefully will get less from me when I’m re assessed and sadly my daughter.GO AWAY CSA WE DON’T NEED YOU OR WANT YOU.its disgusting that you can suggest that inflated pension contributions can be questioned..WHY..every person would want to make over and above pension contributions to secure their old age and with the government promoting this.And yet what you are effectively saying is if you are being robbed of Cm by us then don’t pay extra pension contributions because we will stop you…fucking disgusting….you opened another can of worms Alice and revealed the dirty stinking csa for what they are…just like your comments about essential travel to work and it being ones own problem if they choose to work far from home…disgusting skank filth the csa is and hell…I’d love to see you all burn in hell
    Gonk
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    In a nutshell
    What Alice is saying is…don’t pay too much into your pension pot for your retirement if it’s at the expense of the treasury….we are fucked with these animals..they take more and more and pull on that leash if you try to contribute towards your own well being..to sum up…fuck your well being….as long as the treasury is well fed…you are happy. That’s what it adds up to..simples…no matter how the csa will try and dress it down.
    Gonk

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- Remember the OP said he achieved a nil assessment through increasing his pension contributions an Alice only said they would be questioned in certain cases, she didn’t give any indication of amounts or percentages.

  • Gonk says:

    Carrie
    You are BANG ON with all you say.and typically no response from Alice about the data files taking up to 40 days before you acquire them but only given 30 days to appeal…VERY CONVENIENT ……ARSEHOLES !!!!!
    Gonk

  • Gonk says:

    Hi wilf
    I understand,BUT her very reply suggest that the csa ultimately will make sure you do not pay in too much to your pension pot if it has an effect on cm? What is an inflated contribution anyway….I would for example love to pay into my pension pot far more that I do, £250 a month lets say…and not excessive amount these days to secure ones old age.would the csa consider that over inflated ??
    Gonk

  • wilf says:

    Gonk:- I would think anything more than 15% of your gross income would attract interest. This is only a guess at what might appear reasonable.

  • Lyn B says:

    I am separated female with 2 children, work full time and am of limited means. My ex is with someone else and they are financially very stable. Have not had a penny from my ex – neither do I want his salary. Would far rather he maintained a relationship with his children and ‘spoilt ‘ them. So far my children have had amongst other big ticket items driving lessons, cars, car insurance (not cheap as a teenager with a convertible…..), designer goods etc……. This makes me far happier than having to fight for resented for payments and he is also ‘happy’ to be able to spend his hard earned cash himself. As I see it a win win situation.
    If there were a male contraceptive pill there would be far less work for the CMS.
    I dread to think how many blokes are conned into having children – why would you not believe someone you are in a relationship with is not taking the pill when they look you in the eye and tell you they are? Would you insist on using durex when your partner tells you they have a latex allergy? This goes on big time – I know many women who are looking for a meal ticket…. 🙁
    My current partners ex has recently gone to the CMS 11 years after she left him in a lot of debt….. Told him she couldn’t have children…… Had affairs…. Conned him out of 10k+…… Changed the childrens surnames and remarried as soon as she got a divorce….. Stopped him having a relationship with the children…… Had another 24k ……….
    He’s just started to get back on his feet and is nearly 50.
    The CMS have released details of his income to his ex. This is Private and confidential information and thus covered by Article 8
    Of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Releasing this private information to any 3rd party, let alone one who has previously been in a close relationship with the other, is a clear breach of Article 8 of the ECHR.
    The CMS want 20% of his salary after pension contributions but before tax – he earns less than £9.00 an hour………
    Now he’s putting 90% of his salary into his pension and the CMS have been hounding him for the last 7 months. No day in court just a Detachment From Earnings Order.
    The Child Maintenance Service sent him the following booklet: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/325219/how-we-work-out-child-maintenance.pdf
    On page 12 it states: How we work out child maintenance Step 2 – Things that affect income A paying parent’s gross income at Step 1 can be adjusted if certain things apply that we can take into account. Payments into a pension scheme made by a paying parent The amount of gross weekly income at Step 1 is reduced if a paying parent pays contributions into a private pension scheme. For example, if a paying parent has gross income of £300 a week at Step 1 but pays private pension contributions of £20 a week, the amount of gross income we now take into account is £280 a week. Remember that contributions to an occupational or employer pension scheme by deductions from pay are usually made by an employer. If this is the case, we will have already taken these into account in Step 1 and the paying parent does not need to tell us about them. But a paying parent can tell us if they pay their contributions in another way – for example, direct to a private pension provider. If a paying parent makes payments into a private pension scheme, we will usually reduce the income figure we use by the full amount they pay, including the value of any tax relief.
    The Citizens Advice Bureau advise there is currently no limit to pension contributions.
    Am no longer sure if we are dealing with the CMS or the Gestapo……..

  • >