CSA ruling was based on a lie

December 7, 2014

The contact bands my payment for my two children were based upon, were told to the CSA by their mother in Feb 2012. She lied about contact saying I never saw my daughter but did see my son but less than I actually did.

Even though I had diary evidence the CSA would not accept it and made the ruling on the mother’s information only (she had kept my daughter from seeing me for the month before contacting the CSA justifying their ruling, even though immediatley before that month my daughter spent the whole of Christmas break with me). My kids had stayed eight nights per month on average and holidays for three weeks a year since 2007 before she claimed via the CSA in 2012.

So I’ve been overpaying since Feb 2012 all that time up until today, but back in May 2014 I complained again to the CSA about this noting my daughter stayed with me 52 nights and son 192 nights. When questioned by the CSA my ex partner finally agreed to correct bands for both my daughter and son.

However the CSA say I can only recover over payment from the date I reported this which was May 2014!!

On the flip side, I should have declared that I had no full time children in the house from May 2013, so the CSA now say I’m in arrears from that date having underpaid.

I actually did declare it in May 2014, but they did nothing about it. But today have decided to when my ex has complained.

So in summary, they are happy to take extra from me due to miss calculation from May 2013 for not having a child permanently at home, but even though my contact banding was wrong the whole time doesn’t allow me to claim back any over payment as it’s said to be irrelevant?

Also they say I could have contested the Feb 2012 ruling a month later, but I was never told that, I was told to go and keep a diary for the rest of the year. I told them their ruling was based upon a lie the whole time but they just ignored me.

With my son in my care more than his mothers, I still have to pay her hundreds each month because I’m on the 2003 ruling not the 2012.

But they will not re-rule that, knowing I’m paying out for years to come when a 2012 ruling has advised that I should pay my ex nothing at all.

Is this legal? It seems totally incompetent, shocking, ignorant, and totally biased toward the mother.