CSA always sides with the absent parent
I have two cases with the csa one absent parent used to pay by standing order now its by deduction of wages.I get told im a month behind with the payment but by the time i get my next payment i will be 2 months behind.I get told every time i phone them.They tell me different stories every time i phone them.The other absent parent has paid 3 payments in 6 years.Its been to enforcement 3 times to be thrown out as the csa didnt do it correctly.
I have had loads of complaints in they just throw them out telling me they wont accept it.I have even wrote to the director of csa and they told me they were putting the complaint away as they were dealing with it and guess what they just left me without completeing the case.The csa has even told my expartner all my data protection details etc. He has worked and claimed benefits and now he is getting married next week end.but guesss who paid for the wedding (him).but cant pay for his kids. Now we get told the dwp dont have to give me the £1.67 a week off his benefits.i have even had my claim left so nobody picks it up.then when i say its been over 14 weeks they look into it to say its been escalated but it can take another 20 weeks.and i got told i shouldnt rely on the money as its not a wage.
I have phoned them before 3 times in 1 day to be told a different story every time. The csa is on the absent parent’s side NOT the child and parent with care.The csa has even ignored my solicitor.
NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING.WHY CANT THEY?
25 thoughts on “CSA always sides with the absent parent”
Leave a Reply
The CSA are not on the side of the absent parent at all!!!
You only have to read the horror stories on this website that show that they don’t.
The CSA are just a bunch of incompetent, useless, self righteous, egotistical idiots that couldn’t organise a booze-up in a brewery!!
Believe me, there are many “Absent” parents that willingly pay maintenance for their child(ren) and are still hounded, lied to, threatened etc. just to keep the CSA “Advisors” in bonus payments!!
So please, before making a sweeping statement about who the CSA sides with, be fully informed.
From my point of view, I would say the only side the CSA is on…….is their own!!
In a csa nightmare well said! the csa are most definitely not on the absent parents side, it angers me when some people think that they are.
do they hell, have you ever experienced the "other side" – I suspect not. I can't even afford to get to flippin work, let alone see my kids 🙁
When it comes to the self employed they do sadly!
Fair point.
I go to work for morless nothing end of the day tho i provide 4 my kids and can hold my head up high. And not take the easy option going on benifits
They certainly do not side with the absent father i am a wife of a father who has been paying direct from his wages and has now been told CSA have messed up and because of it want 2000 in arrears that dont actually exisit but until they work out what has gone wrong we have got to pay up. We have CSA on our backs constantly. XX
Def when they r self employed cos they have to take their word that the figures they provide r truthful and unfortunately alot of absent parents go self employed to avoid paying. And b4 some1 goes out I said some not all! But in my experience thats the case
iF YOU THINK THAT THEY SIDE WITH THE ABSENT PARENT HOW WRONG YOU ARE.My husband and I Have had nothing but trouble with them THEY ARE against fathers fullstop. I mean come on the pwc can afford to go out 3 or 4 times a week,poor things they don't get hassled by the csa and they can work overtime and not tell the csa, try being the nrp and see how they really work.
They are not against fathers what a stupid thing to say, they simply don't follow up any calls or leads, to actually work out what is owed to the child full stop. The money isnt for the resident parent its for the child, and its 15 percent of of the non residents net pay. So it should be anyones business what the resident parent does with their own money, and what their income is at all. So basically what your saying is that, if the resident parent has a well paid job, that gets the non resident parent out of paying a thing of their own child. Get real, it takes two to make a child and it should take two to financially pay for them.
If a non resident parent earns just twenty quid a month, then its 15 percent of that, its not like a fixed amount like council tax, so I really dont get why nrp say they cannot afford that, unless they are not updating CSA with their true wage figures?
I’ve been on both sides at the same time, as a PWC and as an NRP. I paid straight away for my non-resident children. My ex was allowed not to pay for 2 years,
Can’t wait to see them closed down and suffer in the same way that we have all suffered at their hands.
Tinpot Hitlers!
Unless you are or part of the non resident parent household i don't think you can speak on their behalf. You will never understand how it feels to pay up like you should which i totally agree with that part but still have them on your case asking for more money because they cant trace all your previous payments. We have hubbie daughter stay over we dont get extra money or pay less for those weekends. When we take her on two week family holidays we dont ask for a penny back we still have to pay those weeks. I totally agree with paying for the kids, i love um to bits and want them to have the best of what we can ALL give them. I just feel maybe the dads that dont pay should get the hastle not the dads that do take the time to pay. XX
I am a PWC and the CSA do sod all to help me…………….. I have had no money in 3 years and my case goes from one dept to another………… The case went to court in June 2008 and a LO was granted for £6,000 but I still have not had a penny but the debt as risen to about £9,000……….. The reason being, is that the “absent” parent is self employed and these cases are far to much like hard work for the CSA to be bothered with…… So in my case the CSA do side with the “absent” parent…. HOWEVER if you flip the coin and the “NRP” is in full time employment they become an easy target for the CSA to screw them over with DOE’s for 40% of their wages for arrears that can’t be proven…… So in these cases it’s the NRP that gets the raw deal and the PWC comes out the winner.
Many thanks for reading
Meg x x x
Anouska, what the NRP earns is none of anyone elses business! It is 15% for 1 child if Net Pay is over £200! If NRP earns £20 a month then assessment is NIL!!! As for the child, the CSA takes money from one ADULT and gives it to another ADULT with no mechanism to ensure it is spent on the child! The main purpose of the CSA was to recover the costs of benefits (now removed), not to help with the welfare of children!Gill, do us a favour and stop using the word ABSENT… why not NRP or use DEADBEAT if you mean someone who intends to avoid contributing towards the cost of raising their kids by any means necessary!In general, too many people posting here have a biased view and a lack of knowledge of the CSA, the way it works and the relevant legislation regarding maintenance!I have no problem contributing towards the cost of raising my children BUT not through the CSA… they've already cost me a job and left me with virtually nothing to live on through their incompetence! I will therefore do anything necessary to avoid the CSA screwing around with my life!95% of PWC's are Women, the law gives the PWC the backing to screw around with NRP's life!
I wish my husband was paying 15%. In actual fact his assessment on old rules is nearer 40%…
The NRP and the child suffers in my case, fortunately I am disabled with shared care and altho I have a considerable build up of arrears counted by a 6 month period my assessment is nil, however the assessment has not been made accurately.I provide for my son out of my benefits and make sure my son is supplied with new clothing while the PWC who has 2 working incomes, Working family Tax Credits plus Child credits and only purchases second hand charity shop clothesfor him considering I'm on benefits.I am a compliant NRP who provides for his child so that my child benefits from me rather than his mother the PWC benefiting at my expense, funny how she is able to spend those monies on wotever she wants.Why is it my child has never benefited from the monies I'v paid to date via CSA where as he now benefits adequately when CSA are not taking deductions, My child suffers when CSA deduct monies for CSA payments but benefits when CSA are not taking deductions.The CSA should persue non compliant NRP's instead of harrassing Compliant NRP's like myself!
my husband has to pay 40% on old rules they take £700 a month of us to give to his ex for 2 children, she has never worked a day in her life, and why would she when she gets £700 off us and all those benefits, we are then left with the other 700 to feed our 3 children and pay all the bills, i cant even claim tax credits for my children because they take all that as well, think the c.s.a just target nrp,s that are paying instead of the arseholes that wont pay because that would be too much like hard work for them.
MMMM.. CSA siding with the absent parent…. I dont think so at all… in fact that is totally untrue.
If that were the case they would have done a fair assessment on me, not put me in total £9,000 in arrears, which I have now nearly paid off, through sheer hard work, diligience, and foregoing the nicer things in life like a holiday.. which my ex seems to take 2 or 3 times per year.. always foreign, not put a DEO against me forcing me almost onto the poverty line, would have transferred me to CS2 when I asked them, not taken all my holiday pay from me, not taken my military pension into their assessment…
so overall i dont think the CSA side with the absent parent… the NRP is a soft target for them.
My thoughts only
Graeme
so if the csa aint on the absent parent side.how come they have told them all my details and have told him how they wont be able to get a payment then
PLEASE SOMEONE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE CSA i have had the run around for three weeks now and just lost it down the phone sick to death of the staff at the csa getting it wrong and now i have done their work for them and still can not get old of them 🙁
the CSA do not favour the NRP more than PWC, in fact the CSA only favour their results of obtaining money, not even favouring the PWC in some cases and in most cases CSA do not favour the child….
I think the NRP is a soft target especially if there self employed. I have lost two uppercase tribunal hearings appeals due to the fact that my ex hires top solicitors for these hearings and i cannot simply afford these. It is a common fact that it swings 60/ 40 in the appellants favour when these cases go to the tribunals , they made out i was earning 40,000 pounds per year when my tax returns that had been accepted by the revenue of earning £15,000 pounds per year. Every year when my tax return goes in my ex appeals through the tribunal system and wins so i get hit with another £5,000 pounds in arrears . I owe £23,000 in total although i have been paying regular maintenance of £230.00 a month plus £80.00 a month off the arrears, so i guess its a good idea for the NRP to hire top briefs when they know there going to get a golden pay out every time they win an appeal. I am sick to death of it all with all the stress involved even my accountants are sick of the whole thing and have basically informed me to get a full time job
the Corrupt Suppresive Authority needs caving inwards… it needs implosion!!!!!!Cant wait till the CSA employees have lost their jobs and end up on the jsa queues…. In fact.. I hope several become NRPs…. and are hounded by the next bady replacing the CSA…!!!!!
no i can say i know of at least 3 csa workers who are fantastic
not all bad but i noticed u upset 1 they all follow suit despite they breaking csa law etc
and they do make up the law as they go along if they dont wana deal with you