How can the CSA take money with no evidence?

December 2, 2012

How is it when the CSA cause arrears due to maladministration, they can take your money with no negotiation or evidence of debt, you are proven guilty untill such a time as you can prove your innocence?

How does the government allow this clear breach of Human rights?

Surely you are entitled before they take a penny in arrears to a hearing to establish the facts.

Comments

  • Alice says:

    if you have had a maintenance calculation – initial or supersession due to a change in circumstances – you will have received a maintenance calculation letter stating the amount you are liable to pay and the date that this liability is effective from, this should explain where any arrears have accrued from. If you are in arrears the CSA will look to recover these arrears along with your regular maintenance.

    your post gives very little detail so it’s difficult to offer anything other then general advice

  • stuart mitchell says:

    The arrears were due to maladministration, but before they admitted this they can take via DEO whatever they deem fit, they do not seek ability to pay and you have no way to appeal the DEO as judges have no juristiction over the amount. This is the CSA presuming guilt on arrears with no proof provided, contrary to british law which states innocent untill proven guilty, the CSA clearly do not abide by this, thus breaching human rights.

  • j says:

    As stated by ‘Alice’ (above) you have not given details so its hard to say much.
    As a general response, my understanding is that the CSA cant take money without evidence, this would be a decision that is ‘wrong in law’ and you would be able to defend this. Also there is no ‘onus’ on you to prove your ‘innocence’ and you should look at the post on this site about the court of appeal leaving the csa emasculated.
    Look up – error in law and wrong in law and you should find some info.
    Meantime you have not said what info the csa had, what they asked you for, what you provided etc.

  • stuart mitchell says:

    if you have had a maintenance calculation – initial or supersession due to a change in circumstances – you will have received a maintenance calculation letter stating the amount you are liable to pay and the date that this liability is effective from, this should explain where any arrears have accrued from. If you are in arrears the CSA will look to recover these arrears along with your regular maintenance.

    There was no change in circumstances, had paid all that was asked since 2003. Then get a letter saying I had not paid enough and now had to pay £800 a month on a salary of 1400 a month, Rent £590. No negotiation and has taken 2 years for them to investigate and explain how it happened, Yes agency maladministration. So Alice…………this is surely a breach of my human rights by not allowing me a chance to defend myself and placing me in debt.

  • wilf says:

    Stuart:- The CSA cannot ask your employer to deduct more than 40% of your net income.
    Your employer should have received instructions to leave you with 60% of your net earnings as protected income.
    Check with your payroll and confirm the amounts.

  • stuart says:

    Wilf

    Yourself and Alice appear to fall into the same trap. What should happen and what does happen are never the same with the CSA, hence this site is full of issues created by the CSA. My case is at ICE a DWP operation to put right DWP cock-ups. All what I post has happened to me, my case handling by the CSA is appalling. My question is now regarding the breaches of human rights that have been allowed to happen, I know what they should be doing but seem incapable of doing ANYTHING right in my cases.

    The CSA have admitted all the failings on my case, yet will not discuss the human rights issue, i mentioned 2 years ago to them. they also fail to provide redress as per the Ombudsman guidelines. so still getting it wrong.

  • wilf says:

    Stuart:- I was speaking specifically about your deduction from earnings situation.
    You are already aware that getting mistakes and errors rectified by the CSA can be prolonged and tedious.
    With regard to you DOE being greater than 40% you can deal with your employer’s payroll and point out to them that by law they cannot deduct greater than 40% of your net income for child maintenance payments.
    They should be easier to deal with than the CSA.
    If they give you an argument ask them to examine the paperwork sent from the CSA more closely.

  • Alice says:

    When a DEO is issued to the NRP Emp they are advised of what the protected earnings are, if they take more and breach the protected earnings then it is the employer that is at fault and not the CSA. If an employer is unsure of how much they should take, or how much the employee must be left with they can phone the employer helpline for advice.

  • stuart mitchell says:

    Yes Alice in your world the CSA does nothing wrong, on several comments I have asked for your CSA biased opinion on how you work for a company that clearly breaches human right, you refuse to answer!!!! untill you do then please stop your pointless comments on my posts as you will like the CSA never be wrong untill some poor sod has spent a large chunk of their life ruined and proved you wrong. which I have on many instances at my cost.

    Why is there a year waiting list at ICE and Ombudsman?
    Why has a court ruled your practices Illegal on human rights?
    Why are your complaints teams over worked and snowed under each day with complaints?

    Please open your eyes and God only knows how you sleep at night.

    Answers to the above or please keep your nose out of my post’s going forward.

    Thank you

  • stuart says:

    Wilf

    With regard to you DOE being greater than 40% you can deal with your employer’s payroll and point out to them that by law they cannot deduct greater than 40% of your net income for child maintenance payments.

    I sorted that. point is why the hell when the CSA have all your details do they set an amount, with no consideration as to what your outgoings look like? How can they make up a figure? bearing in mind the arrears were, when they finally looked 2 years on, caused by their errors NOT by me not paying what was asked.

    Guilty for 2 years, then innocent. How can they presume and act before evidencing and investigating these bogus arrears? it is criminal.

  • >