Are we missing something and not understanding this properly?

November 20, 2013

Please can you help my husband and I to understand this. We recently updated the CSA to the fact we recently had a new daughter. We were thinking because we had a new addition that my husband would pay a little less maintenance to his ex.

Today we received this from CSA.

Following a review of your case the amount you need yo pay has changed. To £31.00 a week from 8th Nov 2013

To £24.00 a week from 30th August 2013. This review found that you were paying too much for child maintenance in the past. We’ve taken this amount off the arrears you already owe. Amounts for arrears are included in table below.

What you need to pay 1 x £132.33 on 12th Dec 2013 regular maintenance amount £93.03 plus maintenance arrears of £39.30 Then it says 11 x £135.27 every month from 12th of Jan 2014 to 12th Nov 2014. Regular maintenance amount £132.27 plus arrears £0.00.

So by now we are totally confused they said my husband paid too much but his payments have gone up from £113.00 a month to £135 a difference of £22 a month but he was paint to much so why have his payments increased.

So I worked it out myself and 135.27 x 11 is £1487.97 + £132.33 is £1620.30 which includes £39.30 arrears.

But £24 a week x 52 is only £1248.00 plus £39.30 arrears is £1287.30 By all my calculations they see charging us £333.00 more for the year.

Are we missing something and not understanding this properly? We really can’t afford this increase of £22.00 a week especially not with a new born baby n the cost of everything else going on.. Advice please.

Thanks in advance

Comments

21 Responses to “Are we missing something and not understanding this properly?”

  1. Amy on November 20th, 2013 8:18 am

    I personally feel this is harsh. Whether the payments are calculated wrong or right just because he has had another baby with you, why should he pay less for a previous? That’s ridiculous. Meaning the mother and child would be worse off over your decision to have a baby together.

  2. terry scott on November 20th, 2013 8:43 am

    Never speak to the CSA go here http://www.nacsa.co.uk who will represent you and do everything for you for £30 a month. At least they will get it right and the CSA dont like them as they fully understand the CSA tricks

  3. Author Chris Jones on November 20th, 2013 8:44 am

    Many people are suffering from these scum. Im sorry for what they are putting you through especially as you have a new baby. They are a disgrace to the government but the government love them destroying people.

  4. Stuart Byrne on November 20th, 2013 9:04 am

    I have a user at work who counts like the csa. 3+2 is 5 unless it’s a Tuesday. Then it’s just 3+2

  5. Lee Patsyfraser Foley on November 20th, 2013 10:22 am

    Appeal and fight the fools . They pick numbers out of thin air . CSA SHITE .

  6. Aimee Purcell on November 20th, 2013 11:05 am

    Appeal it! That’s just wrong! Your daughter together matters just as much as his other child/ren! Why should she go without?

  7. Becca Bee Preorder on November 20th, 2013 11:25 am

    if the ex has one child with him n you have oen child he pay 15% of . but best bet gettiong fall break down and taking it to the lawyer they deal with them less stress on you to try do it by your self

  8. Bill on November 20th, 2013 12:54 pm

    Your husband’s maintenance from 30/08/13 is 24 pounds per week.
    Your husband’s maintenance from 08/11/13 is 31 pounds per week.

    31 x 52 = 1612 pounds per year from 08/11/13 = 134.34 per month.

    So it looks as though the maintenance was reduced at 30/08/13 but then increased at 08/11/13.

  9. Carol on November 20th, 2013 12:57 pm

    Amy – should an nrp not be allowed a life after separation? PWC will be getting child benefit and tax credits so won’t be disadvantaged whereas nrp and their new partner will not get much financial help. As Ellie has stated this increase will cause her financial problems which is a disgrace.

    Ellie – can see why you are confused and I am sure the Agency do this intentionally. Have the CSA taken into account a reduction on their assessment for your daughter? From memory they should take 15% from his net income for your daughter and then assess maintenance for his ex. Have they calculated his wages correctly?

    Go back to the CSA and question them, preferably in writing that way you have a record because it’s amazing what this Agency lose. Check this site aswell to see if ongoing maintenance is correct https://www.gov.uk/calculate-your-child-maintenance/y

  10. Nathan Menet on November 20th, 2013 2:05 pm

    What I don’t get is I have a child with an ex. And three children with my wife. And the csa take my three other kids child tax credits. As a form of income. So they also take percentage off my other children. They are welcome to take from my wage. But can’t see that it is fair to take from the mouths of my children. Have anybody else been in the situation

  11. Ellie Sellars on November 20th, 2013 2:13 pm

    Yes I’m in that situation too my husband has 1 child with his ex and 2 with me. His 1 son is entitled to 15% of his income and my child tax credit where as my 2 children are onlt entitled to 10%each of my husbands income. The CSA are saying the non resident child is more important than the resident children who both cost just as much and to top it off can have a slice of their tax credits too.. Absolutely Outrageousand disgusting!!!

  12. Ellie Sellars on November 20th, 2013 2:17 pm

    Also @Nathan Menet if you go to epetition at hm gov and sesrch for childrens child tax credits taken into account for child maintenance you can sign that I found it yesterday n signed it because I think its wrong. This petition needs a big push.. So if anyone else is in same boat and agrees its unfair go get it signed

  13. Grace on November 20th, 2013 3:59 pm

    Have to agree with Amy….

  14. bob on November 20th, 2013 8:48 pm

    Amy and Grace this is perfectly fair, if another child is born less money should be paid to the ex wife support agency. They have another child now and accordingly contributions should go down. That’s like saying if you had a baby with a new partner the NRP payments should go up.

    Another pair of greedy pigs with their cakes

  15. Ellie Milao on November 20th, 2013 10:45 pm

    I’m sorry Grace and Amy, but why the hell shouldn’t we have had another baby. We didn’t want our son been an only child. The only bloody reason her payments have increased is because we had another child so my tax credits increased. So why the hell should she be entitled to the child tax credits that are for my children. For crying out loud she is in receipt of her own child tax credits for the son she had with my benefit.. I’m all for my husband paying for his son and I used to always buy him the same amount of clothes I bought for my son. This is a mother who deprived her son a relationship with his Dad from the day he was born and always used him as a weapon. My husband has fought tooth and nail to have a relationship with his son. Including having 2 court orders because she broke the 1st having my husband travel over 300 miles to go visit him just for her to tune not turn up at the meeting place. Well im sorry if you think its wrong that I think its outrageous that my childrens tax credits are used to pay for their half brother. I suppose you also think im wrong for thinking my children are worth just has much as he is. How would you feel if the shoe was on the other foot and and your children were having their tax credits taken to pay for another child and that they were only allowed 20% between them and the non resident child got 15%.. As for the comment of we shouldn’t have had a baby then well that’s ridiculous we are entitled to have a life and family together.we have 2. She has 5 to 4 different men and never worked a day in her life.we work hard to provide for our family including his other child and would never not pay for his up keep.

  16. jo on November 21st, 2013 7:53 am

    Ellie im an nrps wife and totally agree with you. I don’t think people realise that an nrps children are calculated less and their tax credits included in the assessment plus if you’re a family you probably don’t get as much in benefits like a single parent especially like in our case if the nrp works.

    Why should my childs tax credits be included if the pwc gets full entitlement to theirs?

    No child should be worth more or less but treated equally and kept fair.

  17. jo on November 21st, 2013 8:12 am

    Also Ellie, as its government that make up the legislation lodge a complaint with your mp and also make sure any arrears owing is correct

  18. Ellie Milao on November 21st, 2013 10:03 am

    Thanks Jo, I contacted my MP last week and still waiting for a reply. There is also a petition at epetitions direct gov that Iv signed regarding child tax credits been included. You should take a look n sign and your partner. My husband and I both signed it 🙂

  19. jo on November 21st, 2013 10:55 am

    I’ve signed it Ellie and as ukip are gaining in popurality have asked them to look at current legislation which they say they disagree with and are looking into it. I’ve also contacted my mp on the issue. Tax credits are given to help low income families and no way should be used in maintenance calculations as a pwc isn’t means tested on income in their home.

  20. Ellie Milao on November 21st, 2013 2:14 pm

    Brilliant. I keep promoting the petition and I’m going to get my friends and family to sign it too. The legislation definitely needs looking into and alot of CSA rules need.to be changed. Lets hope something does 🙂

  21. Ellie Milao on November 21st, 2013 2:18 pm

    oh n Amy is not my husbands job to.support the his ex partner only his son!!!

Got something to say?