Former employer didn’t pay CSA money it deducted from me – CSA wants it back from me!

37 thoughts on “Former employer didn’t pay CSA money it deducted from me – CSA wants it back from me!”

1. no no no who the hell does she think she is??? you need to post COPIES of your wageslips as they are PROOF you have paid!!! the csa should then chase the employer never talk to the csa on the phone always make sure everything is in writing and sent recorded delivery

2. Agreed never talk with them on the phone as they are just a bunch of low life scum. If you send this letter below to them by recorded delivery to the office that is dealing with your case then they will not be allowed to call you and is the first step in taking back some control on the situation. After that you then have date ordered record of what was sent and what was said from both side which you can use later against them or if you need to go to your MP it’s easier and quicker for them to get an idea of whats been going on.

   Reference Number : 0000000000

   Date : XX/XX/XX

   Dear Sir / Madam,

   I have recently received correspondence from the csa. I am requesting all contact is completed in writing and I do not wish to receive telephone contact from this point on.

   Yours sincerely

3. Steve, Sorry to hear about your CSA hell. Your dealing with a monster and the CSA case worker was correct on one thing, that the CSA can do what they like.
   Follow Rach’s and Smithy’s advice. See your MP and let him see your pay slips before sending them to this odious oganisation because even if you send by recorded delivery, they can still deny ever receiving them. Also keep photocopies of your pay slips.
   I did send a letter of complaint asking that they only contact me by letter. Guess what ? Yes they rang me a few days later. When I mentioned the letter I had sent, the case worker said the comments were on a different page on his screen and he didn’t see them.

4. Sorry to hear your situation. Rach is quite correct, NEVER deal with them by telephone, they can lie and deny it. I would follow the advice from Smithy as well and if they do ring you then don’t get involved in a conversation other than to confirm your instructions for written contact only.

   I cant agree with the comments by Brett on this point, the csa CANT do what they like, take a look at the post on here – ‘Court ruling leaves child maintenance authority ‘emasculated’, that should cheer you up. You can probably get the barristers details from the internet and may be allowed to contact him directly, cheaper than going through a solicitor.

   Always write to the csa, keep a copy and send all letters by recorded delivery keeping the receipts. Get a copy of your Data Protection Prints to see if the csa have followed procedure. It costs £10 but worth it. If there is a DEO te csa should be chasing your employer, if the money has been deducted from you then it should be up to the csa to recover it.
   Get your MP involved and copy them into all correspondence, ask them to advocate on your behalf.
   Make a formal complaint, do this now as there is a time limit on these things, it will be investigated (and rejected) internally, then you complain to the ‘independent’ case examiner, where it will also be rejected, (the csa and ice are both part of the DWP and the ice is a ‘front’ to cover for the csa) then you can go to an appeals tribunal which is independent from the csa so they will try and delay you as there is a time limit. (think its 13months)
   Meantime try and get your MP to progress the matter to the Parliamentry and Health Service Ombudsman for maladministration.

   Hope this helps and good luck.

   (is that the same rach that stood up for me against u no hoo? If so then hi rach and thanks)

5. the case worker you spoke to should not have spoken to you in such a manner, I would urge you to report this immediately and ask for a manager to listen to the call.

   In respect of the money that was deducted from your wages by your employer and not paid to the agency the information given is to an extent correct. Ultimately it is the NRP’s responsibility to ensure that the CM is paid and if your employer has deducted this from you and not paid it to the agency they have committed fraud. Not to put too fine a point on it they have stolen money from you that should have been paid for the benefit of your children. If the agency has not received the money then they can seek to collect the money from you and then it is up to you to get the money back from your employer. Now before anyone shoots me down, I personally think it is very unfair for this line of action to be taken. If the agency have a DEO in place and the NRP has this taken from their wages it is reasonable for them to assume that the employer is paying the money to the agency. Unfortunately this does not always happen – same as tax & ni does not always get paid to HMRC.

   Luckily you have the payslips to show the money was deducted, so if you do have to recover this from your employer then you have evidence at hand.

   You say the business went into administration – was it bought over? Do you know who the administrators were?

   If the company no longer exists then the CSA will most likely take the action to recover the outstanding payments from you. If the company is still in existence they may consider getting it from the company. This would mean that they would pass the case to the criminal compliance team who would make contact with the employer and ask them to make payment, if the company do not do this they can then prosecute the employer – the employer can face fines per missed payment (no more than £500 per missed payment) or ultimately the person responsible for making the payments could be imprisoned under the Fraud Act.

   The agency cannot write off the debt as un-collectible, this would breach the legislation.

   I would urge you to contact the agency tomorrow morning and ask them to consider a CCT referral in respect of the employer failing to comply with the DEO. I would also ask them to re-negotiate the amount they are currently proposing to collect.

   good luck

6. ps I would take what ‘alice’ says with just a pinch of salt, he works for the csa so is much better acquainted with their procedures than me but also has a vested interest in the outcome. The operation of a DEO is clearly defined in law and the csa have to comply with the law whatever they say. (as the court of appeal have just reminded them) If the money was taken from your pay at source then you have in fact paid the csa. The employer going bust is not your business and the csa should put in their claim to the administrators the same as any other creditor, I dont know if the csa are a preferential creditor over the banks etc but it just sounds as though they are being too lazy to do their jobs and claim the money, easier to chase you for it again. Dont let ‘alice’ scare you with threats about the person owing the money being put in prison, you have paid and I dont think the csa are going to put the administrators in prison. Dont phone, its a delaying tactic, they will fob you off and in any future complaint they can deny having the call. Look at the many threads on here and you will get the picture. Complain as we have suggested and you may get a result, after all what do you have to lose. If you decide to give up your job and sign on at any stage to get rid of this horrid organisation, tell them in writing and send it recorded. Dont trust them at all.

7. steve,

   Alice is correct when she state’s that, under CS legislation, it is a NRP’s responsibility to ensure payments are made.

   However, once an employer has deducted a DEO from an employee, they have until the 19th of the following after the deduction was made, to send it to the CSA.
   Obviously, after an employer has made a deduction, what happens and when is completely beyond the control of the NRP, but the CSA can and should chase and prosecute an employer if they do not conform to the DEO instruction and make the payments they have deducted.

   Have you requested a complete account breakdown?

   If you have not done so already, escalate your case to a clearly marked complaint. Enclose copies of your wage slips showing the deductions, question why the CSA ;
   1) omitted to inform you at the time that payments were not being received and
   2) why when a DEO was in place did they not chase the non payments from the employer.

   Keep copies of everything you send, post signed for and copy in your local MP.

   chall

8. To j
   So this Alice works for the csa ? How do you know? I must say ,I read his comments on here daily and never get the impression he or she ( sorry I thought by the name they are female and no offence Alice ) is on any ones side or agree or offer help or even give advise,but only point out the rules and regs of the csa legislated. If its true then I fully understand now
   Alice ,maybe you could confirm? Do you work for this scum ? I don’t quite believe it since this site is not the csa and can’t believe administrators would let anyone who works for them offer anything to people getting so much grief from the csa….it’s not in the csa’s interest. Pretty scary to think someone working with them is on this site trying to offer advise ???
   Can anyone confirm or deny ????
   It’s sooo scary to think that this organisation thinks it above any law judging by what I read about the way they treat people.god damm…when are we going to get together as a whole and get rid of this filth.

9. If there is a DEO in place and the CSA have not received the money, why haven’t they taken this up with the employer. Typical CSA they always claim that it is not their fault and not their responsibility.

10. Here here browned off,my sentiment axactly
    Gonk

11. Browned off
    The csa take no responsibity what so ever and they get away with it because no one can touch them and they know it.
    They laugh at us….we are just cash machines for them that they can use at will and take whatever they want……easy money for the treasury disguised as child support…pmsl
    Gonk

12. Disagree with you J. The CSA are totally out of control and can do what they like.
    Gonk’s last comment sums them up.

13. I can support what j. says, Alice does work for the CSA and has admitted it on this very website….

14. hi j yes it is the same rach 🙂 . at gonk yes alice does work for the csa!.

    To alice sadly the way this caseofficer spoke over the phone to the op is a common occurrence for all NRPs manners always seem to be lacking with this government agency . and they should not chase the nrp regardless of whether the company has folded for he has paid and can prove it

15. to the op i suggest you appeal the latest correspondence from these imbeciles about these arrears then at the tribunal you wil produce your payslips and get the arrears wiped from your account

16. “Gonk on January 22nd, 2013 10:55 am

    To j
    So this Alice works for the csa ? How do you know? ”

    I know because ‘alice’ confirmed it in another post before xmas and others also saw it. (Sally on January 22nd, 2013 3:35 pm – I can support what j. says, Alice does work for the CSA and has admitted it on this very website….)

    As I think the csa is a disgusting organisation its unlikely that anyone would ‘pretend’ to work for them so I believe him (or her). I think ‘alice’ wants to keep his/her identity ‘secret’ for obvious reasons, if he/she is giving general ‘advice’ that isnt doing the csa any favours then he/she could get into trouble so we should respect that.

    It could be that ‘alice’ is a ‘fifth column plant’ and is giving ‘weighted’ advice which ultimately leads to the csa getting a result. I think you can buy the rule book they work from in most good bookshops and decide for yourself.

    I’ve generally found the ‘advice’ to be ok though incomplete at times as in my own case (3rd party notification alice?) which he/she perhaps should have known as old rules cases are still being contested.

    “brett on January 22nd, 2013 1:27 pm

    Disagree with you J. The CSA are totally out of control and can do what they like.
    Gonk’s last comment sums them up.”

    Hi brett, feel free to disagree but Gonk’s last comment doesn’t say the csa can do what they like, only that they think they can – ‘It’s sooo scary to think that this organisation thinks it above any law judging by what I read about the way they treat people.’

    Once again I would ask that you look at the ruling in the Karoonian case – “Court ruling leaves child maintenance authority ‘emasculated’
    November 1, 2012” which is posted elswhere on this website. Two things stand out from this, first the confirmation that the csa are NOT above the law, and have to comply with the law at all times and in all cases – “Ward added that the “muddled” methodology the CMEC used suggested to investigators that absent parents had to prove they were innocent.
    Ward, along with two other judges, Lords Justice Patten and Richard, concluded the fathers were not given the chance of a fair hearing, which breached Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
    The judges concluded:
    “The procedures adopted do not comply with the rights to a fair trial and were flawed accordingly.”
    One father involved was Kambiz Karoonian, 44 years, from Ormskirk.
    In February 2011, magistrates handed Karoonian a suspended jail sentence. He was told to make monthly payments of £1,000 or be imprisoned.
    Karoonian, a father of five, has insisted he owes nothing and added that he regularly sees his three daughters from previous relationships, as well as his two sons from his current relationship.
    Lord Justice Ward summed up that the letters Karoonian received incorrectly implied he and another parent in a related case had to prove they owed no child maintenance.
    The fact that the CMEC had no evidence and had not followed the law relating to both fathers’ income meant that all three judges agreed the fathers had not received a fair hearing.” YOU dont have to prove that you dont owe the money, the csa have to PROVE that you do. (innocent until proven guilty)
    The second thing that stands out (for me) is both the arrogance and weakness of the csa – “Shortly after the judgement was made, a spokesman announced:
    “It is extremely disappointing that parents who have flouted their legal responsibility to financially support their children have invoked the Human Rights Act to seek to continue to do so.
    “Regrettably, we need every enforcement measure at our disposal to ensure the minority of irresponsible parents pay for their children.
    “It is important to stress that this judgement does not question the legality of bringing parents who repeatedly refuse to pay for their children to the attention of magistrates, who can then decide whether to send them to prison. We will of course consider any other implications of this judgement carefully and take the appropriate action.” – arrogant because they thought the Human Rights Act didn’t apply to them, (are they filthy evil NAZIS?) and weak because there is nothing they can do about it.

    Previously I felt ‘alice’ had made comments that sounded a little like a threat to another contributor (not a direct threat, but a ‘scare’ tactic to try and influence a particular situation) and I feel that this has happened again in a small way thats why I commented. Yes their is a ‘duty’ on you to make payments but in the case of Steve (the original contributor on this thread) he made the payment, it remains a moot point whether he should make it again and claim it from the administrator, or whether the csa have to claim it from the administrator, unless specifically legislated for in the rule book (which section ‘alice’, Steve would love to know) it remains a developing area of law and Steve should not give up but should get proper legal advice from someone qualified to give it. (try Richard Gordon QC Steve, he seems quite competent in dealing with the csa)

    The csa will try and tell you that you cant have appeals ‘heard out of time’ but there are others on here who will explain why you can and still others who will confirm they have had appeals heard not just months but even years out of time. My point is that ‘alice’ may have a vested interest in the outcomes and never believe a word the csa say without challenging it and getting advice. If it smells fishy its probably fish!

    Sorry this response is so long. Hope it helps.

17. I wasn’t aware of the Karoonian case, so thanks for the info. Very rarely hear any success stories against the CSA, so its great to read the two judges state NRP’s are entitled to a fair hearing and barristers are prepared to take them on.
    I still think were a long way off the system being fair to everyone and Im sure the CSA will stitch up the NRP (PAYE earners), with ficticious arrears etc, but at least this case is a step in the right direction.

18. “brett on January 22nd, 2013 7:56 pm

    I wasn’t aware of the Karoonian case, so thanks for the info.”

    Thats ok, its why sites like this exist. Hope it has helped in some way, doubt if ‘alice’ would have told you, hope all our comments help Steve with his situation.

    I’ve had help on here from all sorts of people and even if you don’t agree with everything the info provided just adds to the database of information we can all use. (so thanks to the site organisers)

    By the way Gonk, I had a look and found the info about ‘alice’ in the earlier post –

    “I work at the CSA and have been filming my colleagues” – where ‘alice’ answered –

    “Alice on December 5th, 2012 6:58 pm Rach – I make no denial that I work for the CSA,”

    In another post he/she talked about the ‘ambiguity’ of his/her sex/name for privacy reasons. We should respect that but like I said, the info is ok but may be ‘weighted’. I did find it helpful but limited and other contributors (chall and others with more experience) filled the gaps that ‘alice’ left.

19. Chall had words at me about hiding behind an alias …..like I said to him/her I am not stupid enough to give my full name…even more so now knowing this Alice works for them.
    Makes me wander about chall now…..he/she always fails to answer or give a opinion on certain questions posed…….incase you are reading this chall…I will remind you…and incase you did reply and I have missed it? Then sorry but Maybe remind us with the answer again?
    Do you think it fair that a NRP’s living cost and outgoings should not be taken into account when being assessed for cs payments so that he may still be able to live some kind of normal life and be able to see his kid/kids ?

20. I do read “Alice’s” and Chall’s comments and although some people may object to them writing comments on here, at least it gives people in the dark a better understanding how the CSA operates. I for one do value their comments, even though I loathe the CSA with a passion the way they go after the easy targets who are already paying maintenance, in order to balance the books for the NRP’s who aren’t paying.
    J, regarding your comment on 22nd Jan. No doubt the Karoonian ‘stated case’ was a long drawn out affair before it eventually went before the Courts. I was wondering who actually paid for the barrister(s). Barristers don’t come cheap.Was the Karoonian case paid for under the legal aid system. Was Karoonian a wealthy man who was able to pay for a barrister. As the CSA lost, did they have to pay any court costs ?

21. The CSA aren’t here to give an answer on what is fair Gonk. It is the least of their worries. I would go as far as to opine, that unless the PWC is actually claiming benefits then the State has no right whatsoever to dictate what one parent has to pay the other, particularly when there is a shared residence order in place. In many cases despite shared residency, the lower earner ‘owes’ the higher earner. Nothing fair about that!

22. I too read both Alice and Challs post and believe what chall says long before I believe what Alice says and the reason for that is Alice consistently says “the CSA wouldn’t say/do that”… it’s predominantly the person who’s posting a queries fault or responsibility to do something… when in actual fact the rules of the CSA are not even followed by their own staff…. the staff can (and do) say what the like and get away with it…

    Both NRP’s and PWCs are victims of the CSA but I genuinely believe that the NRP’s are tranished unfairly and the CSA (or the government) don’t care what happens to them. No matter how often NRP’s try to explain their situation and the truth, the CSA ‘choose’ to lose the information or ignore it….

    Alice could use her time more effectively by printing out the lists of complaints and taking them to her bosses to see if the CSA could at least teach/train the staff the ‘CSA rules’, to allow them to give the correct information and hopefully staff will learn what ethics and morals are when dealing with another human being. The CSA will be here for a while yet but the staff could help us so much more than they do!!! Alice NEVER answers a post she cannot dictate the CSA rules to…. NRP’s follow the rules, it’s the CSA staff who don’t and then make up their own rules to the detriment of the NRP!!!

23. “Gonk on January 23rd, 2013 12:22 pm

    Chall had words at me about hiding behind an alias …..like I said to him/her I am not stupid enough to give my full name…even more so now knowing this Alice works for them.”

    Hi Gonk, don’t worry, chall has a tendency to believe their own importance, he/she has followed me around like a ‘stalker’ (thankfully now stopped) and can be quite rude at times (ask rach and a few others) simply because he/she doesnt like my comments or opinion. (I thought thats what this site was for)

    chall also operates a website giving general advice but spends lots of time on here, sometimes giving advice, sometimes antagonising people like you or me.

    chall doesn’t seem able to respectfully disagree but seems hell bent on being rude and proving how clever he/she is. Anyone can read from a rule book but only a trained professional can reliably interpret the law and only a qualified soicitor/barrister can give legal advice.

    chall has often given advice that is accurate and useful, at the same time chall has apparantly been arguing with people on this site since 2009. Some people think chall used to work for the csa, I don’t know or care. I mention this to be polite, balanced and fair.

    I am quite ill and try to ignore it but the rudeness doesn’t help so you have my sympathy. I think ‘Gonk’ is quite funny and I wouldn’t advise anyone putting their real name or details on this site which is obviously ‘monitored’ by the csa. After all, chall doesn’t give any details, just chall.

    “brett on January 23rd, 2013
    J, regarding your comment on 22nd Jan. Was the Karoonian case paid for under the legal aid system. Was Karoonian a wealthy man who was able to pay for a barrister. As the CSA lost, did they have to pay any court costs ?”

    Sorry Brett I really don’t know, don’t think a public funding certificate will get a csa appeal but an ECHR issue might if there is sufficient credibility to the case. The csa often ‘break the rules’ (or at least bend them) as we all know or sites like this would be redundant and they rely on the fact that solicitors are expensive and people cant afford to fight them as they are funded by the taxpayer.

    A situation we should all consider, a landmark ruling may one day lead to claims for compensation and that would shut them down. Anyone who thinks that can’t happen should pay attention to Hillsborough. I’ve said before that I think the csa is just a scam to provide work for low grade civil servants in areas of high unemployment, a local (labour) politician recently confirmed that to me but you don’t have to agree.

    “browned off on January 23rd, 2013
    I would go as far as to opine, that unless the PWC is actually claiming benefits then the State has no right whatsoever to dictate what one parent has to pay the other, particularly when there is a shared residence order in place.”

    Hi, I’ve also previously stated that the issue about ‘clawing back benefits is a ‘red herring’ and may be the way the csa are finally taken down. In its various guises (including registration at companies house as a business entity) the csa has always been government sponsored/ controlled, hence the taxpayer funding. To clawback benefits that you have already paid for in taxation (paye/NI) seems fairly ‘dodgy’ to me and I see an ECHR case being brought as soon as one of us has the money to do it.

    “Sally on January 23rd, 2013
    Both NRP’s and PWCs are victims of the CSA but I genuinely believe that the NRP’s are tranished unfairly and the CSA (or the government) don’t care what happens to them. No matter how often NRP’s try to explain their situation and the truth, the CSA ‘choose’ to lose the information or ignore it…. ”

    Couldn’t agree more Sally, this is probably the most balanced comment on this whole thread. When I was a pwc I got nothing from them, now I’m an nrp I’m being hammered through a devious manipulation of the rules even though I don’t actually owe anything.

    “S.CARTER, January 21, 2013”
    Hey Steve, you really started one on your very first post on this site although I do think you have an interesting case. (even if its a demoralising situation)
    Get ‘proper’ legal advice, whatever ‘alice’ says I have alarm bells ringing in my head about it, you have paid and I just feel the csa should be chasing the administrator whatever ‘alice’ says, there must be a rule about it somewhere. If there isn’t a rule in the csa rulebook then common law/statute apply and you are in the clear, if there is a rule in the csa rulebook then you should ask to see it.

    Hope all our experiences help in some small way and good luck to you.

24. Awesome reading guys with much interest an I’m learning more and more with each comment…shame Alice has not reared his/her head yet and said anything to defend her/hisself …..I will learn now to take whatever he she says like the pinch of salt
    And yes challs comments can be very sarky ….particularly if he don’t have an answer or don’t like your comments
    Gonk

25. @ j. it would help if I read my comments before I posted them… lots of typos but you all know what I meant lol lol I don’t know much about chall and while you (j.) are quite possibly correct about him/her, I still feel that Alice is worse… lol lol I have appreciated your comments along with others who see the CSA for what it is! Diabolical…

    It’s good to share experiences with other to help us keep our sanity. For me this site has been useful because at one point I was a walking wreck due the CSA idiots and my partners ex playing the system. 3 years on and the mother (PWC) gets more money (the kids have gone from lots of overnight stays with their Dad) than she ever did and the end result is that the kids have lost the fantastic relationship they had with their Dad before the CSA got involved…..

    Alice has made comments to NRP’s along the lines of “the CSA will only get involved if the PWC ask them to”, but in response to that, I would say that the incentive for the PWC to get the CSA involved is MONEY!!! I see very few complaints from PWC about NRPs not wanting to see their kids, it’s (99% of the time) about the money THEY (the PWC) think they are entitled to but are not getting from the NRP… staff like Alice probably get a bonus based on £ turnover each year…. they whole system and CSA staff make me sick….

    j – please keep up your posts and good luck with your health… x

26. Sally,

    This is the trouble, the csa breeds resentment and encourages divide between parents as money becomes the greater incentive, not the emotional interests of the child and their bonding with the nrp. (I feel prompted to mention unless they are abusive yadda yadda, but some pwc say nrp is unhealthy/abusive and exaggerate in order to stop contact and claim the extra money) So perspective needed here.

    Seeing and feeling very vindictive and spiteful posts from some ‘entitled’ parents is what does it for me. Well done CSA, youve helped embittered people take out their emotions in a destructive way, whilst failing the parents that genuinely do need assistance, not only to obtain maintenance, but also by obstructing genuine parents from seeing their children regardless of how much they pay.

27. the whole point is the csa dont do it right there corrupt as is the banks but they have to asses you every 2years how many of you have when you end up in court you can call witneses and the one you call is the secertery of state do you think this muppet will turn up never so adjurn it its the law the majestratesnever give there name or oath why coz its not a proper court ive done csa cases its an administration court

28. Dear All

    We are all on here because of the problems we have faced, the opinions we have and the experiences and tacit knowledge we can share.

    I’d like to be clear that I am NOT having a ‘swipe’ at chall or ‘alice’. I am happy to share my opinions and if people don’t agree thats fine, I can respect that. All I ask is that they are also respectful, its just the right way to behave.

    We can all get upset and say some nasty things, that doesn’t make us bad people and if someone asks you to leave them alone you should.

    The people who work for the csa do it for different reasons, some of them are really stupid and swallow the wrong ideology, that all nrp’s are bad, they usually think of nrp’s as men (but not always) which may explain where they are coming from.

    Some of them do it for the money which is worse in my view. (just my opinion)

    Some might just be ‘doing my job’ which was the same excuse the Nazis at Auschwitz gave. As people have killed themselves as a result of the csa I think the ‘just doing my job’ excuse is disgusting and I’d rather sell the Big Issue than do such a disgusting job, (just my opinion) but they obviously think that they are ‘decent’ people doing a good public service. I fully support anyone in the csa who films what goes on and blows the whistle, you have my respect.

    They may even have a whole section whose job is to monitor or infiltrate sites like this (hope they choke on their own putrid vomit the disgusting scum) (just my opinion) and even pretend to be ‘helpful’ to get more info and to manipulate the advice given. Thats why I tend to always ‘question’ the advice given. (hope thats the right word, meant it in a positive context)

    We should all bear this in mind and when ‘new’ posts are listed where the person gives too much detail we should inform them of the basics: –

    This isnt the csa its an open forum so don’t give names/details etc especially of children.

    Don’t deal with the csa by phone, everything in writing, sent recorded, keep the receipts.

    Copy your MP into everything and try and get them involved as your advocate. (thats what they get paid for after all)

    Make a formal complaint about any decision you are unhappy with from the outset as time limits are involved. (people like chall probably know more about the complaints process than any of us so don’t be afraid to ask) (always go for an appeal tribunal asap following the internal process)

    Get a copy of your Data Protection prints from the outset so you know what you are dealing with, again follow the correct procedure in wording your request to get ALL information, send it to the right department, send the correct fee.

    Don’t be afraid to complain about any csa staff, or their superiors if you feel you have just cause, the more complaints there are the more the press will start ‘sniffing’ around.

    Remember the process, internal complaint, ‘independent’ case examiner (the csa protection department), appeals tribunal, parliamentry and health service ombudsman (through your mp for maladministration, which can put a public servant in prison, maladministration in public office is VERY serious)

    If we can all remember these basics and pass them on in every blog it may save time, money and misery for those involved.

    Hope all that helps.

    By the way – ‘sew on January 23rd, 2013 4:57 pm’ start looking at the ‘lawful rebelion’/’freeman’ situation, I stumbled upon iy with the ‘arrest & rescue of judge peake’, hilarious stuff and god luck to them, how to upset the ‘administrative courts’ as you correctly call them.

    ps thanks Sally

29. Quote Gonk on January 23rd, 2013 12:22 pm
    Makes me wander about chall now……he/she always fails to answer or give a opinion on certain questions posed…….incase you are reading this chall…I will remind you…and incase you did reply and I have missed it? Then sorry but Maybe remind us with the answer again?

    I did indeed ‘answer’ your question on December 21st!

    https://www.csahell.com/my-son-has-skin-problems-so-the-csa-should-keep-paying-for-him-12049.html

    Just out of interest, CSCS (CS1) took such into consideration, would you wish CS to return to that set of rules?

30. Sally,carol,sew
    Again love reading your comments….I wish I could express myself as you guys do.and Sally love your mention about incentives…so so true what said..indeed the PWC and csa rub their hands together as the dollar sign rolls in their eyes like those old fruit machines ( one armed bandits)
    Plenty of incentive there for them.thank you so much PWC for bringing your ex to our attention,now we have him and we can both become rich out of his misery ….serves him right for having kids…..sadly this is how I see the csa’s attitude towards fathers.
    Gonk

31. Like many others, I am a PWC (mother) and a NRPP (wife of a NRP).
    My OH and I have , over the years, have had our fair share of crap because of the CSA – maladministration, errors, delays, arrears, contact issues etc.
    Initially having looked for info, I soon realised there was very little and hundreds of other parents in the same situation. All that spurred me on, to get off my butt, 6 years ago to learn leglislation and jointly create ‘afairercsaforall’.

    I do NOT work for the CSA or any other Government department and I give my time and knowledge FOC to help other parents (NRP & PWC) with their issues.
    Like anyone else, I am certainly not obligated to sit back and accept false accusations, abuse OR demands from any other poster and I do not feel the need to humour such.

    I do not confuse CSA issues with what I think – it wouldn’t change or deal with the situation a parent is in. Most people, I find, not only need to vent, but also need facts that will effectively resolve their issues.

    Re the posts above,
    Im not sure what those giving Alice, myself or other’s who try to advise, a hard time actually hope to achieve?
    Personally I think, if some of the more knowledgable members decided not to post anymore, although it may be a satisfactory outcome for select few, it may be seriously at the detriment of many other parents, who need to understand actual CSA procedure to enable them to deal with the agency and/or source errors on their case.

    The CSA is an emotive subject, it’s good for people to share experiences, but also remember their own situation is out of the control of anybody else on here.
    Using one’s own experiance or circumstances as an excuse for the way they address others, is neither respectful or acceptable.
    Afford each other with a bit of grace and stay focused. We ALL have been/are victims, to a more or lesser extent, of the CSA. A lot of us have health/illness issues and/or have been in abusive past relationships.

    With all due respect , I will not be drawn further on this.

    chall

32. @ chall – with regards to your post below * The only person I have given a hard time is Alice and that is because unlike the rest of us he/she is on this website with alterior motives!! You have also questioned her or corrected her ‘advice’ and this is because he/she (like the other CSA staff) are not interested in the wellbeing of the child…. she dictates what the CSA does/does not do… regardless of how ofter people have proven that the CSA staff lie are a law unto themselves…. regardless of the fact that the rules that govern the CSA are bias towards the PWC…

    *The CSA is an emotive subject, it’s good for people to share experiences, but also remember their own situation is out of the control of anybody else on here.
    Using one’s own experiance or circumstances as an excuse for the way they address others, is neither respectful or acceptable.
    Afford each other with a bit of grace and stay focused. We ALL have been/are victims, to a more or lesser extent, of the CSA.

33. My partner is paying by DEO which we complained about. It was put in place because he didn’t answer his phone!! We were in process of complaint procedure and were trying to get info on arrears as they are incorrect. CSA said non compliance (because of missed call) and DEO in place.

    When I read the document and argued with CSA they said its ultimately his responsibility to make sure it is paid. I argued about DEO so any money employer deducts CSA responsible to get it and my partner shouldn’t have to pay twice if employer doesn’t pass it on. Their reply was my partner should make sure his employer pays it over and could be held liable to pay twice.

    I’ve not posted here for a wee while so good to see alot of regular names are helping people. I’ll try to keep checking in to try and help.

34. I feel we should try and give people the benefit of the doubt, we have all in some way been failed by the CSA and the system, Ive never been a fan of them but I would like to think that any help and co-operation to help others is valuable. I wish we would try and stop judging people so badly.

35. The CSA are an absolute disgrace, no wonder people kill themselves as they can see no way out especially when you have a member of staff telling you they are the CSA and they can do what they want, that is an abuse of position. The staff have no right to behave in this manner you must make a complaint but first of all, you need to get your data prints which will have the recording if it does not have the recording they will have deleted it as they have to keep the recordings for 14 months. More like if there is something which could get them into trouble they will delete it, if they have deleted it make a complaint to ICO and ICE and the ombudsman. If the recording is still there then make a complaint about that member of staff. No doubt she will only get a little telling off for the record but then a pat on the back and a well done. No wonder these rats got named and shamed a couple of years ago, they did not like it. It is about time they got a taste of their own medicine and they were harassed and bothered and made aware that if they treat people in this manner then expect to be treated just as they have treated others. They need letters sent to their residential homes and called on their mobiles make them think about the pain and misery they cause. They are scum!!!

36. Interesting reading.

37. A few weeks ago “Alice” put a comment on that all CSA staff should be treated with respect as they’re only working with the legislation given to them
    by the government, (The Labour government gave the CSA the additional powers and the Tories have allowed it to continue).

    Im all for the CSA going after the NRP’s who have played the system and avoided paying, I thought thats what the CSA was set up for. However its very clear they have targetted the good guys out there who are already paying maintenance.

    When CSA staff realise the disgraceful way the organistaion operates, they should get out and find themselves a new job.Thats the only way CSA staff will get any respect from me.