CSA is sexist against male carers

Firstly, I understand the need for parents to take responsibility for their children and to include a financial contribution when things go wrong between the parents – I get it! The challenges for any government agency to deliver a fair service is as likely as that first decision about who is responsible for contraception!

For nearly three years after my former partner left the marital home, she continued to receive the child benefit for all three of our children despite the fact that they ALL lived with me BUT this is not resolved automatically as you might think because the government ASSUMES that the mother will be the likely carer – in other words they are sexist against lone male parents.

This is repeated in each manifestation of government department that has over the years, attempted to deal with maintenance matters. When I remarried and my new wife moved in the trials of amalgamating second families began and my second (of 3) children quickly felt my devoted attention to her had been lost and fed by some extremely loaded propaganda from my ex, decided that she wanted to live with mother – the propaganda soon turned to accusation of abuse that were never up-held by social services but arguably the damage has been done!

Months passed before my ex, presumably under encouragement from a solicitor she had engaged to leverage the other two children from my care, recommended that she would benefit from a claim through the CSA. This is now over four years since she left the marital home but the assessment by the CSA resulted in her having to pay a nominal amount that we agreed would be paid direct as an off-set (the difference of what she pays for the two children v what I pay for one).

In the meantime, my ex began a legal campaign to secure the residence of the other two children which again back-fired but nonetheless cost me over £24K in legal fees over 30 months – can only imagine that her costs must have been the same but she had also formed a new relationship where both were working and earning reasonable salaries.

Last year, she lost her job and informed the CSA almost immediately. I believe that she found work again within weeks but only informed the CSA when she had completed her 3 months probationary period! This year the same thing has happened and the CSA duly wrote AND phoned 3 times to tell me that they had reassessed her payments to “nil”.

In June I had a heart attack. I am self employed and whilst some of my income does continue it will be affected. But despite this the CSA will only reassess my payments for maintenance when I complete my self assessment return for this tax year (not even due to HMRC till the end of this month earliest) or when I can prove I am ineligible for benefits. How often did you hear about a self employed person getting benefits???

Now aside for all the reasons you read above that most certainly contributed to my having a heart attack, other reasons included my ex telling HMRC that I was fiddling my taxes – despite an 18 month audit they ended up refunding over £3.5K BUT the CSA WILL NOT reassess these tax years!!!

Furthermore, because our payments are made direct, IF when my tax return is completed for this year and it were found that I had over-paid, the CSA will take no responsibility for reclaiming the over-payment!!!

And whilst on the subject of benefits, I am still repaying the child tax credits from 2011 ceased because I married a foreign national (apparently it would have been okay if she were British). This situation has not changed so why would I waste tax payers money on claiming benefits I know I will not be eligible for?

I would love to think that the newest chimera to undertake the maintenance roll would have evolved, learned by the errors of past and actually looked at the validity of the outcomes it delivers but by all accounts, this new incarnation is ashamedly no better than before!