CSA allows the father to lie about his earnings

March 19, 2011

My childrens Father told me in April 2010 that he could no longer afford to pay the £200 per month private arrangement we had set up as he was only earning £500 per month so with no notice he stopped the payments completely. As his mortgage was £900pm and he still had his car which was taxed, MOT’d and insured, still smoked, still lived a rather comfortable life style I knew this was a lie.

I contacted CSA and in time payment arrangements were set up but as my ex-partner has a big say in the company he is employed by (previously director, now best friends with the current director) his wage slips conveniently also showed his income as being only £500pm, therefore the child maintenance payments nowhere near reflected how much it costs to provide for 2 children. On a regular basis I have asked my childrens Father if he is still only earning “£500pm” he has always stuck by this until January this year when he informed me that his income has gone up to £850pm. This was only said after I pointed out that £500pm would not even be the national minimal wage for the amount of hours he works.

I now have it in an email from him that his income changed in August 2010. I contacted CSA but because I did not contact them until January 2011 the arrears will only be backdated from that date! Surely CSA are allowing him to get away with lieing about his income and showing that as long as he keeps quiet about his earnings nothing will be done.

I would like to add that I have never not allowed him to have contact with his children and he still leads the same lifestyle with the same house and same mortgage. I cannot understand why when it is as obvious as it is in some cases the CSA do not investigate further.

I have tried to discuss this with them but was advised it is down to me to provide proof of his income. Obviously I have no way of doing this and even if I did they have shown he would not be penalised for all the time he has lied about his income.


  • Karen B says:

    Sue sounds like you need the criminal compliance unit to investigate this, Or Departure on the grounds of lifestyle inconsistent with earnings, good luck

  • hg says:

    do you work? sounds like he can afford nice things because he works hard for them, and sounds like he has always provided for his kids…why dont you just STOP being greedy and get on with your life….earn your own money and stop using the kids as a nice easy way to afford the things everyone has to work for!!!!

    N0one should be intitled to a % of earnings…the cost of raising a child should always be the same……………… let him have the kids of they cost you too much! ha ha ha but then you wouldn’t have the power to make his life hell for ever…which sounds like your intention.

  • lyn says:

    I agree with hg

    Get a job so you can also have nice things. Not saying he should not be paying yes he should but why would you want to take all he has.

    He has admitted he is earning more so you be getting more. I am very surprised they are not backdating this amount as they back dated the amount against my ex partner. Yes they backdated his money 5 years but Mammy is not happy and wants more and more and more and until he is in a pine box she will not leave him alone and let him get on with his life.

  • Sue says:

    Wow! So many assumptions!
    Thank you Karen B, the reason I joined this site was to try and find out if there is anything I can do about the payments being backdated as I do not believe someone should be allowed to lie like this, I shall look in to what you have suggested.

  • gambit says:

    Did she say she’s not working??? No, she didn’t, she came here for support, and to get what her kids are entitled to! Sorry, but I’m so sick of people assuming just because we, as PWC want our ex’s to provide financial support for our kids we must be greedy no hopers!!! I work, and study to eventually get a better career, and better money for me and my kids, I provide them everything they want and need, but it’s a bloody struggle every week, does that mean my ex can get away with not paying a penny? Sorry, he brought them into this world too, it’s not about revenge, or making people’s lives hell, it’s about justice!

  • Terry says:

    I do think that maybe they are being a bit harsh towards the op but in my experience with my ex she is just hounding for money. I offered her £60 a week plus a £300 lump sum in december to help with christmas. She refused because she saw the £ signs with the CSA. I am stuck with £127 a week when i am also paying a morgage of £115 a week. I have been assesed on the old rules. New rules would put me at £60 a week. Where is the fairness in that. I believe both parents shoould act fairly.

  • Sue says:

    Obviously cases are so different from each other and I think without people knowing all the facts it is very difficult to judge (although some people seem to do this with ease!) I did put my story in the hope that someone else may have had a similar experience and may be able to show me some direction to take, hopefully I have this now so thank you again. Terry I do see where you are coming from, some people do just get greedy, however, as gambit said in her post the other parent should also pay (as you have said you do). Many things should be taken in to consideration in all these cases and I appreciate it is not always easy for that to be done. The reason I am so frustrated about my case with the CSA is because my ex partner pays £5.50 a week per child (I have 2) because he supposedly earns £850 per month yet his lifestyle does not reflect that, how can someone have a £900pm mortgage yet earn less than that a month and still not have had their house taken away from them in over a year? People may see me as being greedy and that is up to them I do not feel the need to justify my actions on that I purely hoped for some advice. I work extremely hard, this is to provide for my two children and myself. Again as Gambit said, it takes two people to make a child, both of my children were planned. I mentioned I have never not allowed my childrens Father to see them, I did not previously bother to mention that he regularly does not bother to and this includes Birthdays and Christmas, yet for some reason hg seems to think I should hand my children over to this man. I did not say my children cost me too much, my children are my world and if that meant me going without things then I would walk barefoot in the snow so long as my children have what they need. As I have now said many times I came here for advice and I now have that so I am grateful to the people that have taken their time to offer that. Well done to all the responsible parents out there who do the best they can to provide and be there for their childrens futures.

  • Ainsley says:

    Hi, I just wanted to say to hg and lyn, what gives you the right to judge someone else’s motives, you assume the worst of the poster without knowledge of the situation, assumedly because of your own situations. In my opinion, and its only my opinion, desperation is usually what drives someone to post on forums such as this, not greed.

    I agree that there are many NRP who are being chased for money they don’t have or shouldn’t be paying and many PWC’s who use custody as a bargaining chip. But there are also many others who deal with NRP’s who will do anything to get out of paying for their share of their childrens expenses. If everyone was happy to pay their fair share where would the need for the CSA be?

    Many of us are at our wits end because of equally inefficient processes to tackle NRPs who fiddle the system and do anything to stop paying/ never pay. I work, I pay my taxes, my rent, my bills, my childcare. I feed, clothe and look after our child, I do everything in my power to ensure that my daughter still has a relationship with her dad, even when he lets her down again and again. I have tried personal agreements, direct payments, payments through the CSA. I have permitted them to cancel arrears, reassess, reshedule and the rest and have only ever received one payment in three years. I have now been told that he is a live benefits claimant and he will only pay £5 a week, despite him owning his own company and still working 60 hours a week. All arrears will also be suspended while he is on benefits.

    I have been given two choices go with this, accept the five pounds and let them chase the arrears some time in the future when he comes off benefits (if ever) or to report him to the benefit fraud line, thus suspending the current £5 payment and waiting for the outcome of a fraud investigation that could take months/ years. Either way he doesn’t pay.

    As he would know it was me reporting this it would destroy everything I have done to try to keep the relationship with my daughter.

  • Terry says:

    Again i agree that nrp should pay towards their child. I have never had a problem with that and i feel that the nrps that dont try to pay towards their child are not being good parents.
    My problem is fully with the csa and it being used as a weapon by some pwc.
    When i was unemployd i was still giving my ex £15 a week. I started working part time in a night club so i upped it to £25 a week. When my pay day changed by 1 day i was late giving her the money (by 1 day) She kicked off stating she didnt want any money off me and i was not seeing my daughter anymore. Then ontop of me not being able to see her and having to go through court just to get visitation rights i got the letter from the csa.
    She was just trying to get me out of my daughters life but still wanting money off me. Since then i have got a full time job and as i stated previously i now pay £127 a week through the CSA because she refuses to accept what i believe to be a reasonable amount of £60 that the current system would ask me for. All she sees are the £ signs though. She doesnt work so gets all her benefits, rent payed, council tax payed and the £127 off me so she is clearing if you add that up over £300 a week. My take home is just over 300 but them i have the csa, morgage, council tax ect to pay. I am being left with £25 a week for myself to get food ect if i am lucky.

  • Staki says:

    So sorry to hear the grief given here. I’m a single working mum with an ex who thinks £350 is enough for my son to live on. He earns £50000 a year has 5 holidays abroad and drives a BMW. He openly admits not declaring his income to avoid paying £500 a month . He agreed to pay this in court but stopped after a year and contacted csa to pay me less, I’ve only just found out he shouldn’t have done this. I’m struggling like a lot of single mums to make ends meet. Any educated person would understand it’s not greed wanting the best for your child’s future. I’m hoping to resolve this with my ex amicably but if the past is anything to go by he will try to make my life difficult but I’m determined and feel I need to resolve this for my sons sake

  • >