Complaint regarding the way my wife was treated on the phone

March 7, 2012

My wife, Michelle Wilton, contacted the CSA on 05/03/2012, and spoke to a lady called Hillary (I am affraid I don’t have a surname). She was ringing to try to sort out her payments from yourselves, to have them paid into a savings account in Santander. She was trying to explain that without having the reference number for the account the monies owed to her cannot be paid in and will be returned by Santander, which they have been. Hillary would not listen to her and just kept telling my wife that the account number and sort code was all they needed and “there is no space for any other information.

There never has been and there never will be”. She would not listen to my wife who tried to explain that without the reference number the money would continue to be returned by Santander. Hillary told my wife that it was her fault that she had not received February’s payment as she had not given the correct information. When infact she has and on numerous occasions.

I do not appreciate my wife being treated the way she was on the phone yesterday by Hillary who refused to listen to what my wife had to say. The phone call ended with Hillary telling my wife that the payment would be sent to her account again. However, as Hillary did not take the referrence number it will once again be returned by Santander through no fault of theirs or my wifes.

I would appreciate it if you could instruct Hillary that she should be polite to people when they phaone and listen to what they have to say. If you find out who Hillary, an apology from her to my wife would be well deserved.

Could you also tell me who, for future reference, I should contact to make a formal complaint about any members of staff if this should happen again.


  • bri says:

    Welcome to the CSA can complain to your MP to be honest and from experience that is how the CSA treat you, talk to you and look at us all like dirt.

    Your complaint is worthless. Just don’t use them and shame on you if you do.

  • Brett says:

    They are a despicable,vile,loathsome organisation. Your wasting your time complaining. They have been given obscene powers and can do what they like.

  • chall says:

    Ignore the above posts Peter.

    Your wife should make a formal complaint to the agency, initially this should be addressed to the office that deals with her case.
    She should also contact her local MP, enclosing a copy of her complaint and requesting their assistance with the matter – keep copies of all correspondence sent and post signed for.

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • bri says:

    Chall could you offer some examples of SUCCESSFUL CSA complaints?

  • chall says:


    The OP is pertaining to a PWC NOT receiving funds paid by the NRP, as the CSA will not take the correct banking details for her.

    You explain to her, me and everybody else why you have deemed it worthless and why she should not complain. Also under what grounds do you consider it’s ‘shame’ on her for using the agency.

    Remember your moto, One voice, justice for all and all that!!

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • John says:

    Having had 12 years of crap from the CSA, I think that I am qualified to speak.

    Many years ago I complained to the CSA and learned of their ignominy and then contacted the Independent Case examiner.(ICE). The ICE were at that time quite helpful in resolving and admonishing the CSA. However, the CSA continually and repeatedly ‘botched’ my case up, and eventually the ICE didn’t want to know and the Ombudsman was asked to look at my case by my M.P.

    After a ‘whitewash’ report by the Ombudsman, I soon found that those regulating the CSA system began to close ranks and attempted to ignore my valid complaints, even to the point were my M.P. myseriously became disinterested. (fair enough I’ll wave him goodbye when he gets thrown out at the next election).

    My point being, is that this ‘shambolic’ agency and its’ staff have become an over-powerful monstrosity, where they ‘bulldoze’ everyone in their way, as the political agenda is to ‘screw’ non residents parents for everything that they have, in order that they can boast about how well their project is doing, how well their collection rates are improving, and how they are raising children out of poverty. Absolute bullshit!

    The truth is that £3.8 billion rermains uncollected. There are people over-paying, people under-paying and people not paying at all. Maria Miller DWP has just written off £300 million pounds of uncollected maintenance. (so it’s okay if you don’t pay and we can’t find you? we will just concentrate on the easy targets and those who are trapped in the system!)

    My advice. Complain and keep complaining about everything and anything where the useless CSA satff make errors, until they are exposed as shambolic and not fit for purpose and shut down!

  • chall says:

    In the main a good post John.

    Re; “Maria Miller DWP has just written off £300 million pounds of uncollected maintenance. (so it’s okay if you don’t pay and we can’t find you? we will just concentrate on the easy targets and those who are trapped in the system!)”

    But just to confirm…
    Currently there is no provision to write off arrears of child maintenance ie,
    1) The PWC makes clear that they no longer require the arrears to be collected (and the arrears are owed to the parent with care rather than the Secretary of State see *NB below);
    2) The PWC has died and there is no known next of kin;
    3) The NRP has died and the arrears cannot be recovered
    from their estate;
    4) Arrears accrued from an Interim Maintenance Assessment (IMA) which
    was calculated between April 1993 and April 1995; or
    5) The agency has advised the non-resident parent that recovery of the arrears has been permanently suspended; for example, where the arrears have accrued as a result of delay in establishing the maintenance liability (which was not the fault of the non-resident parent).

    The proposed write off power is limited, so that the agency may only exercise it in respect of certain prescribed types of arrears, as above.

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • John says:

    Nevertheless. Written off!

  • chall says:

    Yes, but in the such instances and the rules are tight, just what is the problem?

    1) Is the PWC not allowed the choice?
    2) If the PWC dies, the NRP may become the new PWC, who will pay them CS?
    3) The deceased has no estate, how could any arrears be recovered?
    4) Do you think a NRP’s that was on CS1should pay an IMA that was set at a much higher rate than the calculated amount?
    5) If arrears are fault of the agency, should the NRP really have to pay?

    Under the above circumstances, if the agency remained unable to write such off, what do you suggest should happen if they are unable to collect the arrears?

    Yes, I agree the agency concentrate on the easy targets. But it’s misleading to insinuate the write off will be a blanket benefit for those don’t pay.

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • John says:

    I am not misleading anybody, I am merely putting my view and my side of the story!

    You may want to play the ‘CSA game’, but there are many including me that do not! hence the name CSA Hell!

    £3.8 billion uncollected. There are people over-paying, people under-paying and people not paying at all.

    In essence those who are paying and involved in ths shambolic system are being, victimised and discriminated against. Instead of repeatedly targeting those who are compliant, the CSA should be forced by Parliament to produce evidence of their strategy with regard to uncollected maintenance! That evidence a should be put in the public domain and the Executives made answerable for their abject failure, and an explanation given to those who do pay, as to why the CSA are targeting them, whilst failing to collect from those who don’t pay!

    If the system is a level playing field, why are so many not paying, whilst others are?

    All of the above breaches Human Rights and is Discriminatory!

  • chall says:


    The question is simple enough, and one I have asked before, you respond with a lot of waffle, but fail to answer what has been asked!

    In such instances and the rules are tight, just what is the problem you have with the new write off powers?

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • Brett says:

    Chall.. My reply to the letter was the second response and you told the complainant to ignore it. I should have added that if the complainant can get his MP remotely interested, he may get the bog standard letter of an appology sent to him, which the CSA send out to everyone else that complains. Nothing will happen to the rude member of staff and if your PAYE and a decent honest working person, the CSA will be smiling and rubbing their hands with joy over ruining yet another persons life.

  • chall says:


    Everybody should complain when the service they have received is unacceptable.
    I can’t state whether anything will or won’t happen to the members of staff concerned, but the complaint will be included in their annual figures. If nobody bothered to complain, it would appear the agency were functioning exceptionally well.

    The OP may indeed receive a letter of apology, but they may also have the satisfaction of the agency finally doing their job.

    chall ~ afairercsaforall

  • >