CSA has little interest in our case

February 4, 2013

NRP was given a chance to pay a small amount for his 2 kids direct as he had loans, etc to take care of, but he never once made the £10 a week payment. He gave excuse after excuse and in the end, it was explained to him that if he didn’t start paying the matter would have to go to the CSA.

Needless to say he didn’t pay and the matter went to the CSA. After trying to evade them and not pay when they did catch up with him, he ended up with money coming directly out of his wage from his employer.

After a few years of this, and with no end of hassles, he then did a runner with a new partner 18 months ago. He has not given the CSA his new address, stated what he earns or who he works for, etc.

CSA seem to have very little interest in the matter and every time there appears that someone has taken the case on and wants to make something happen, case workers are switched. All that seems to happen is they do a search for him through DWP for any earnings and look to see if he is in prison if they get pushed.

He has been tracked down and it has been proven where he lives (used a PI), which the CSA promised that once they had that information, they would be able to proceed with the matter and escalate it to the Criminal Compliance Team. Funnily enough, they now cannot do that for whatever reason is picked that day. So a little stumped at what to do now as the CSA “cannot” do anything, but also don’t seem to know what they need in order to do anything. Complains have been made a number of times, but the complaints team also don’t seem interested in getting this moving.

Have been promised a call with an update within 14 days, but not holding breath for this to happen or for anything to have been done. So now preparing to take this further with ICE, MP and Ombudsman. Will try DWP too. Any further advice would be welcome.

The bottom line is that he wants nothing to do with his kids, to see them or to provide for them in anyway at all and will do everything possible in order to avoid it. But this does not absolve him from his responsibilities to his children.

Comments

  • carol says:

    I am sorry you have tried to give this man a chance to pay £10 per week. That really is not much at all and he should have paid you. You do not state whether you gave him the chance to have a relationship with his children though. Was he not Dad material?

    Getting the CSA does not help. Sure they can get money from people, but they take too much so NRPs either quit, or are sacked from work due to being unable to afford to work and live. So no money comes to you because they are now on dole. Catch 22, so you, and your children still dont get help. And NRP keeps his distance and avoids the situation. Depends on his circumstances whether they can go in and do anything.

    The system needs yet another review

  • carol says:

    sorry sorry sorry…misread a sentence. Ok so he doesnt want anything to do with kids…shame

    Hate to say this again today, but maybe just write it off??

    I learnt to do that the hard way, though I didnt get CSA involved, and you know what, I was fine and it was like weight had been lifted when I just went “fuck it”

  • Alice says:

    If the NRP left his last job and did not inform the CSA the last MC would rem

  • Alice says:

    sorry – hit send too soon

    If the NRP left his last job and did not inform CSA where he is living and working etc the csa will have trace action ongoing. If an address has been supplied they should send correspondence to the new address asking him to contact them with details of his current circs.

    They should also have checked if he is in receipt of benefits. , they can also check if he is named on his partner’s claim. If he is not in receipt of benefits the CSA should have submitted a request to HMRC for employer details – this will only be successful if he is working on the books with an employer, so if he is working cash in hand the HMRC will obviously have no record of this. An HMRC employer detail request will remain live for 6 months or until cancelled (it will be cancelled if HMRC supply current employer details). Contact the CSA and ask them if there has been a CSA724 request submitted within the last 6 months and if not ask them to re-submit it – they will need to ask for details of all employers from the date they know that the NRP left his last employer, if they do not know the date they can contact the employer for his info, if the employer fails to supply this they can submit the HMRC request for all employers back to the date of the last assessment.

    Unfortunately some NRPs will go to extraordinary lengths to avoid paying maintenance for their children. The Agency required details of employer and income before they re-assess a person’s liability – if they do not have this information they have the option to impose a DMD (default maintenance decision) the case would then be passed to CCT for them to take up trace action. In the past this would involve a CCT officer the address that you supplied, recently this changed and CCT trace action is desk based – so in a situation such as your’s where you have supplied an address they will send further letter(s) to that address.

    If the NRP has not informed the CSA of a change of circumstances (new job etc) the last MC would remain in place and this will continue to charge weekly and the NRP will be running up arrears. The problem being if they do not have a current employer and the NRP is ignoring all communications the CSA do not have a direct line of collection. There are other enforcement actions that the agency can take to collect your maintenance if NRP is not paying via DD or they do not know an employer for a DEO to be issued. A Liability Order may be considered as a viable option – being realistic the NRP would need to have assets that could be taken under a LO. In order for a LO to be considered the agency must have a ‘confident’ address – they would do checks to see if the NRP is registered as being on the council tax register for that address or if he has applied for any credit at that address etc.

  • j says:

    “Alice on February 4th, 2013 5:37 pm

    If the NRP left his last job and did not inform the CSA the last MC would rem”

    Not strictly accurate that is it ‘alice’, remember the rule in Kerr 2004, (csa has a duty to act on information received from another government agency) if the chap signed on then it may well be that the jobcentre advised the csa, (remember our last conversation about the sharing of information by your ‘state of the art’ computer system) in my case they did so as a matter of procedure, no input from me at all.

    Then they took the £5pw from my benefit (which is supposed to be a minimum by law that you are allowed to live on) therby placing me in legal poverty, and gave the money to the csa who passed it on to the secretary of state! (so much for the kids eh)

    Are you getting an idea of how this organisation works Averagebloke? If they do manage to get arrears the chances of it being passed on are remote as the secretary of state comes first to reimburse any benefits you may have had. (which you have already paid for in taxes anyway)

    Sorry that the ex is a pathetic person who wont take any responsibilty but the csa dont care about your case, they just collect money.

    Try making a formal complaint and see if there is a data file on your case.

    Good luck.

  • chall says:

    Averagebloke,

    A NRP is legally obligated to notify the CSA within 7 days of a change of address and also a change in their employment if a DEO is in place – the CSA can take action when NRP’s that fail to give notification as required.

    Have you involved in your local MP in complaints you have made to the CSA?
    If not, it may be worth making a further clearly marked complaint and copying in your MP, they do tend to get a faster response. Keep copies of everything and post signed for.
    You will possibly have to wait until you have received a final response from the CSA in respect of your complaint before you can escalate such to ICE.

    chall

  • Averagebloke says:

    Thanks to all for the replies.

    @Carol. No intention of letting it go, but not going to get stressed about it either. Totally understand how frustrating it can be when the NRP has a certain attitude as above, no matter how you try and tackle it.

    @Alice, j and Chall. Many thanks for the advice and between all the different views, there some good ideas for the overall strategy for getting this sorted. While I do understand the mass frustration the CSA can cause for both sides of the family involved, but would like to think it does about right in the majority of cases, it just isn’t any good at thinking “outside of the box” with things or dealing with cases that are not as simple as we would all like. Be this through incompetence or nothing more than “hands tied behind backs” is irrelevant when no money is coming in or too much money is being taken out depending on your point of view; this forum gave a good place for venting frustration and getting advice. (Fair point Alice?) Keep up the advice you give on here.

    There has been some movement on the case over the past few days, so we shall see how it pans out and I’ll keep progress posted where I can.

  • Alice says:

    The benefits agency generally do not inform CSA that a person has signed on – they will inform the CSA of any DFB (deduction from benefits) that cannot be paid due to an NRP signing off. The NRP is responsible for advising the CSA that he has left his employment. If an NRP fails to advise the CSA at the time the last maintenance calculation will remain in place until the CSA are advised that there has been a change in circumstances – this could be by the NRP, the PWC or the NRP Employer if there is a DOE in place which is no longer enforceable. .

    If the NRP does not inform the CSA that their employment has ended at the time it happens but later provides this info – or the CSA see a benefit in payment, under Spring Regulations July 2011 the assessment will be changed to FRM (Flat Rate Maintenance) effective from the start of the benefit claim.
    If the NRP has left their employment and started new employment but fails to tell the CSA at the time the last MC will remain in place until such time as the CSA are notified of the change, again this can be by NRP, PWC or NRP employer – the change will then only be taken on from the date the agency were notified and not back to when the change occurred

  • Sally says:

    I’ll try to sum things up on behalf of Alice… Her ‘vocabulary’ is limited to conform, conform, conform…. Or die …

    The CSA have NO control over ‘absent parents’ and because of that … The CSA will ‘unfortunately’ be unable to help you. Their staff spend their time harassing PAYE NRPs who will guarantee financial targets are met…

    The agency that was set up to make ‘absent fathers’ pay has resulted in this… You (Averagebloke) have to struggle to make ends meet because the CSA are too lazy to investigate his movements to support your claim…

  • Alice says:

    I will try to explain for the benefit of those who feel that an individual should not be expected to take responsibility of informing any organisation when their circumstances change.

    If a person stops working – whether this is due to them making the decision to leave their job or they are made redundant – this person may require to claim benefits. It is that person’s responsibility to contact the benefits agency and tell them that they are unemployed and need to make a claim – that person will then be responsible for providing the relevant information to the benefits agency before they can have their claim assessed. If that person does not contact the benefits agency and tell them that they are no longer working they will not be awarded a benefit until such time as they do. If a person does not contact the benefits agency for a matter of weeks or months they will not have their benefits back dated – the benefits agency who were set up to support those who have no income are clearly too lazy to investigate the movements and circumstances of people who may have stopped working.

    If a person stops working and cannot pay their rent and council tax that person can contact their local council and apply for housing and council tax benefits. It is that person’s responsibility to contact the relevant office and submit the H&CC benefits claim form. If that person does not contact the local council for a matter of weeks or months they will not have their H&CC benefit back-dated – clearly the local councils across the UK are too lazy to contact their tenants to ask if they need some help paying their rent.

    If a person stops working and is unable to pay their bank loan or credit card, if that person has PPI insurance it is that person’s responsibility to contact the insurance company and submit the claim – if that person fails to contact the insurers when they stop work they will be expected to make the payments to the loan or credit card bill – clearly the insurance companies are too lazy to contact their customers to make sure they are all financially sound and don’t need help.

    If a person decides to dispose of their car it is that person’s responsibility to contact their insurance company and cancel their policy. If that person fails to contact the insurance company to cancel the policy for a matter of months they will be liable to pay the insurance premiums in those months. Clearly the insurance company’s are too lazy to contact their policy holders to check that they still need insurance cover.

    If a person stops working and starts to claim a benefit, it is that person’s responsibility to inform the CSA that they no longer have the same income and need to have their payments re-assessed, if that person fails to contact the agency with this information the agency will investigate that person’s circumstances when it is brought to their attention that their child support payments are not being paid. The agency will initially contact the employer held for that person, quite often this will take several phone calls to the employer who will then not confirm on the phone if the person still works for them so the agency have to request confirmation in writing, the company may fail to respond to the letter and the agency will then have to send further letters out to the company, the company may then inform the agency that the person left some months ago and the agency then have to investigate that person’s circumstances – this will involve (amongst other things) checking if that person is in receipt of a benefit – if it is found that the person is in receipt of a benefit the agency will re-assess that person’s case and reduce their weekly liability to £5 per week – this re-assessment will be back-dated to the time the person started claiming the benefit.

    Maybe the agency should stop being so lazy and they should monitor every case on a weekly basis to make sure that everyone is doing ok and they are still working in the same place, no-one has lost their job, check in case anyone has moved in with their partner and now have other children to support, no-one has been on the sick this week etc – staff at the agency really should take the job more seriously and take full responsibility for checking every client’s circumstances and stop expecting other people to take responsibility for their own lives.

    Whilst they are at it perhaps the agency should change the bit about when an NRP has stopped claiming benefits and has worked for 4 new employers in the last 10 months but fails to report any of this to the agency, and the agency do all the investigating and find the NRP’s employers and income details, perhaps they should just not bother to re-assess the case with the 4 changes and expect the NRP to pay the maintenance they should have been paying since they signed off – it’s not fair to expect that person to have to pay any ‘made up arrears’ just cos the agency have been too lazy to find out on day 1 after the NRP has signed off where they are working.

  • j says:

    Hello everybodypeeps,

    “Alice on February 8th, 2013 10:46 am

    I will try to explain for the benefit of those who feel that an individual should not be expected to take responsibility of informing any organisation when their circumstances change.

    If a person stops working and starts to claim a benefit, it is that person’s responsibility to inform the CSA that they no longer have the same income and need to have their payments re-assessed, if that person fails to contact the agency with this information the agency will investigate that person’s circumstances when it is brought to their attention that their child support payments are not being paid. ”

    Thank you ‘alice’ that is very helpful. Now I will try and explain for the benefit of those who feel that an individual should not be expected to take responsibility of informing any organisation when their circumstances change what the law says.

    First of all following the judgement in the Karoonian case (Court ruling leaves child maintenance authority ‘emasculated’ – November 1, 2012) mentioned elsewhere on this forum, the Court of Appeal made it quite clear that “the “muddled” methodology the CMEC used suggested to investigators that absent parents had to prove they were innocent” and “The procedures adopted do not comply with the rights to a fair trial and were flawed accordingly.” They stated that – “these breached Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”

    I mention this simply because the regulation the csa use placing the ‘burden’ or ‘onus’ on an NRP to inform the csa if they claim benefit, is now open to legal challenge. I hope to have some more info on that point soon and will keep everyone posted.

    The ruling from the Court of Appeal is not a moot point, the csa have NO discretion whether to follow it. They have to abide by the ruling.

    To be clear – Emasculate – to deprive of virility, to castrate, to deprive of strength and vigour; to weaken, make effeminate; to enfeeble etc etc (Shorter Oxford Dictionary, volume 1, A – M) In other words the C of A cut the csa’s balls off!

    In a previous post which I may find in due course you were extolling the virtues of your wonderful taxpayer funded computer system to another contributor and you made the point that it allowed departments to share information. (indeed this was positively encouraged which is the point of the system)

    Case law (which you are again bound to follow) clearly states in Kerr 2004 that you (the csa) have a duty to act on information it receives from another government department.

    I only suggested in my earlier post that the gentleman MAY have signed on and the jobcentre MAY have informed the csa (‘if the chap signed on then it may well be that the jobcentre advised the csa’) as was the case with me.

    On enquiry I found that a. the £5.50pw being taken from my benefit wasn’t going to my child but was a ‘clawback’ for the secretary of state for DWP, therby taking my benefit to below the legal limit allowed for a person to live on, AND b. they contacted the csa automatically in order to make it ‘legal’ by claiming the csa had asked them to deduct it.

    Its all in my data prints which I’ll be using in due course. (and will subsequently make available to anyone wanting to challenge the csa.)

    toodle pip

  • Sally says:

    @ Alice… just to follow on from J regarding your point below:

    “I will try to explain for the benefit of those who feel that an individual should not be expected to take responsibility of informing any organisation when their circumstances change”

    I think that individuals should be expected to take responsibility of informing any organisation when their circumstances change, and that includes the CSA, however, I would equally expect the CSA to record that they have received the information instead of lying or disposing of it…..

    You continually compare the CSA to other companies but the CSA is like NO OTHER COMPANY in this country (or the world for that matter)…. other companies who make mistakes and wrongly charge people fees usually refund the person the full amount, send them a letter of apology and more often than not give them a voucher as a good will gesture…. the CSA don’t even refund the client/customer let alone anything else!

    other companies have customer service rules that are reasonable… the CSA customer service rule is “the customer has 3 months from date of issue to raise an appeal” while, the CSA can dispute a claim assessment form YEARS ago!!!

    other companies train their staff speak to others with respect and professionalism… the CSA staff are ignorant and opinionated… they make decisions on a whim, without any evidence!!

    Hi J. I hope you are well today… great response as usual 🙂

  • Sally says:

    Ooops… got it wrong again…

    “You have to appeal within ONE month of the date of the letterthat tells you our decision”

    not 3 months… lol lol 🙂

    I don’t work for the CSA – honest….

  • Alice says:

    Sally – my response compared to other companies by way of comparison, as you will see the other examples all show that if you do not contact the companies/organisations they will not back-date the change – CSA will back-date the change if the NRP has failed to notified that they have been in receipt of benefits. many times on this site there are posts on this site from various people who feel that the responsibility lies with the CSA to make sure that everything is up to date and that it is the CSA’s responsibility to investigate or gather evidence with regards to clients circumstances when in fact it is the client’s responsibility to keep the agency informed of their circumstances, this is printed on the various letters that the agency send out to clients.
    Equally, there are several threads on this site where various people have stated, either on their own case or in response to someone else’s post that the CSA ‘make up arrears going back months/years’ – when in fact it is usually that the NRP has failed to inform the agency of a change (or several) from them coming off benefit – I personally have worked a case where the NRP kept jumping from benefit to employment and back to benefit then into another job and so on and so on – that case had 13 jobs/benefits over a long period of time, the NRP quit every job as soon as he knew the agency were looking into his employment – when this happens the changes will go back to when the change occurred and as such arrears will be accrued on the case – in the 13 change case the employments were highly paid jobs and as such the end result was once the case was up to date the arrears were into thousands of pounds, they were genuine arrears not ‘made up random amount the agency just pulled out of thin air. Had the NRP kept the agency up to date with his change of circumstances at the time and paid his maintenance when he should have been doing so he would not have had arrears dating back over 3 years.

    For someone to suggest that the agency are ‘just too lazy to investigate’ someone’s movements I think is an unfair statement.

  • j says:

    Hi ‘alice’

    I’m so ‘not having a go’ but surely this statement –

    “If a person stops working and starts to claim a benefit, it is that person’s responsibility to inform the CSA that they no longer have the same income and need to have their payments re-assessed, if that person fails to contact the agency with this information the agency will investigate that person’s circumstances when it is brought to their attention that their child support payments are not being paid. The agency will initially contact the employer held for that person, quite often this will take several phone calls to the employer who will then not confirm on the phone if the person still works for them so the agency have to request confirmation in writing, the company may fail to respond to the letter and the agency will then have to send further letters out to the company, the company may then inform the agency that the person left some months ago and the agency then have to investigate that person’s circumstances – this will involve (amongst other things) checking if that person is in receipt of a benefit – if it is found that the person is in receipt of a benefit the agency will re-assess that person’s case and reduce their weekly liability to £5 per week – this re-assessment will be back-dated to the time the person started claiming the benefit. ”

    – defeats or at least detracts from your previous comment –

    “The benefits agency generally do not inform CSA that a person has signed on – they will inform the CSA of any DFB (deduction from benefits) that cannot be paid due to an NRP signing off.”

    Point I’m trying to make (poorly obviously) is that in the case of ‘averagebloke’ stated above, either the benefits agency did or didnt inform the csa (subject to the NRP making a claim of course) and while I don’t dispute the position vis a vis the NRP ‘responsibility’ (now open to challenge or will be soon) the fact remains the agency would find out anyway and should act in compliance with legal precedent.

    Anyway what regulation ‘instructs’ the agency as you state –

    “this will involve (amongst other things) checking if that person is in receipt of a benefit – if it is found that the person is in receipt of a benefit the agency will re-assess that person’s case and reduce their weekly liability to £5 per week – this re-assessment will be back-dated to the time the person started claiming the benefit.”

    I cant find it anywhere?

    Ps you forgot the official forms – csa191 (old rules) thanks chall, and whatever it is for new rules cases.

  • Sally says:

    @ Alice …

    I’ll take your point and justify my words “the CSA staff are too lazy to investigate”.

    My partner has been re-assessed 3 times in as many years because the PWC was trying to cause trouble and upset (and thanks to the CSA) it worked.

    The first time he was re-assessed it was based on information the PWC gave the CSA. She told them that he had a large pay rise, the CSA did NOT contact him to verify this, they just told him what his new rate was going to be based on the information provided by the PWC!! It was an extra £32 per week!!! He paid the higher amount until it was proven she had lied, the CSA acted on the word of the PWC but my partner (the innocent victim) had to prove he was telling the truth!

    the second time happened she told the CSA that he had a new job and had a substantial pay increase… The CSA did NOT contact my partner to verify this either (if they had he would have told them that he was still in the same job) however, he did receive a letter telling him that the re-assessment was backdated to the time they were notified, this resulted in arrears!!! We contacted our MP, who was, to be fair very sympathetic and did what he could to get the arrears amount reduced… But my partner should have had them cancelled and refunded because… NOTHING had changed!!

    The last time was the exact same as the first time and its needless to say my partner and I were stressed to the hilt and pulling our hair out with frustration…. This time it resulted in the owner of the company he worked for writing a letter to the CSA on behalf of my partner, he provided them with 3 years worth of data re to his salary, he confirmed that my partner had worked for the company for 12 years without a break in employment. He also provided a character reference… My partner included copies of 12 months worth of payslips to support his argument…

    The CSA staff should NEVER implement changes instigated by the PWC that relates to the NRP without having evidence!!!! And before Alice says ‘it shouldn’t happen’ she is right, but it did… It happened 3 TIMES….

    We have both gone through hell trying to get information, trying to sort a mess the CSA and his ex caused.. Trying to prove that my partner is a decent man who has NEVER missed a payment for his children and has NEVER messed them around!!! So in my opinion there can be only one reason why this was allowed to happen 3 times… Because the CSA staff were to lazy to investigate…. And get the HONEST facts that could have prevented ALL the heartache we (especially the kids) went through!!

    Oh and through this nightmare we found out that the CSA had sent letters for my partner to his ex’s address!!!

    I have absolutely no sympathy for CSA staff and will continue to remind people of its failings!!

  • Alice says:

    J – if – and it is a BIG IF – the benefits agency informs the CsA that a person is on benefit the case will be re-assessed to FRM, all cases on CS2 where the change is that the NRP starts or stops a benefit will be effective back to when the change occurred and not when the agency were notified. If there are multiple changes all re-assessments will be effective back to when the change occurred and not when the agency were notified. If there is only 1 change, ie employment to employment or change in shared care etc the effective date will be when the change occurred.

    CSA will investigate an NRP’s circumstances – employment and address etc using the tracing tools available to them – employer requests to HMRC, address verification through Local Authority etc , but they are not a detective agency and are limited in what information they can obtain.

  • >