How to make the CSA a fair system
After reading so many posts from all sides of this shambles of a system it has prompted me to come up with some ideas of my own as to what I think would be a fair system for all concerned.
I would welcome any comments from either side as to whether you think it a workable and fair system. I have also sent a copy of this to my MP
Firstly all DEOs involving arrears should be suspended with immediate effect and only reinstated ONCE the debt has been proven in a court of law….. My ex is self employed and I am told the debt has to be proven (involving umpteen breakdowns) before a LO is granted (LO granted but still more breakdowns to progress the case further)….. So should this not be the case for the employed… There are far too many NRP’s who are being fleeced for up to 40% of the wages, for so called arrears without any account breakdown given to them let alone been proven in court… IF the debt IS proven, then the NRP should be allowed to pay back the arrears at an affordable rate of up to 10 years for the most extreme cases (£20,000 upwards) and if the qualifying child has finished full time education the arrears should be paid direct to them and NOT the PWC
I also propose that an UPPER limit of child support is put in place based on the current child benefit rates…. £20 for the first child and £15 for any other children involved in the case……. A level of protected income would have to be set, in order to protect the low paid, especially those that have of gone on to have second families…… WTC should be used in this calculation BUT NOT CTC as this is normally paid to the mother and IMO you should NOT be able to take what is meant for one child in order to pay another. Benefits such as “Disability living allowance” should also NOT be included in calculating income as these benefits are paid to a specific person for THEIR everyday care and needs…….. I also believe that by setting an upper limit on child support, it would stop the PWC making constant demands for reassessments just because their ex’s may have a better lifestyle then themselves……. If they were married to the NRP they would have received a divorce settlement that would have reflected their lifestyle at that time and any responsibilities that the NRP has after this, is for their children and NOT the PWC. Many PWC may argue that this amount is too low but if you consider the following I believe it would be a fair amount. The NRP contributes £20, the PWC also contributes £20 and with a further £20 received in Child benefit that gives a total of £60pw, which is plenty for the needs of one child.
The self employed problem…… This is the biggest problem that the CSA face, as these are the people who under the current system are able to escape paying altogether if they so wish…… They should be assessed at the same rate as the employed (£20 for the first child and £15 for any others involved)….. They should be given the chance to pay in the same way as the employed, however if they choose not to comply then their assessment should be passed onto the Inland Revenue for the taxman to collect…… I also believe that with an upper limit of child support in place there would be far less “Non compliance” by these people as they would be safe in the knowledge that their ex’s would not be able to fleece them or their business’s dry, NOR would it be worth them trying to fiddle their earnings to pay less.
The job hoppers…….. Again with an upper level of child support in place I would hope it would encourage those who try and escape the system via job hopping to comply and support their children……. However those that decide otherwise should be passed on to the Inland Revenue and have their liability taken at source.
Redundancy…… In today’s economic climate there are many NRP’s who face the prospect of losing their jobs through no fault of their own…… These people face a harder enough battle to pay their rent, mortgage, bills etc, without having the CSA on their backs……These people should be treated with the utmost sympathy and should not be hounded until they are back in employment….. I also think it would be fair to allow these people a 3 month grace after returning to work in order to get themselves back on their feet before resuming their child support responsibilities.
The serial shagger….. This refers to those who think it ok to have one night stands, not use a condom and then say ” WHY should I pay for a child I didn’t want”……. The easy answer is…. If you don’t want a child then wear a condom….. Don’t listen to the “I’m on the pill” or “I can’t have kids” scenario…. If YOU DON’T want kids then protect yourself…… These people should pay the same rate if more than 1 child is born to the same mother but if more than 1 PWC is involved then the same rate should apply to them….. “1 child 1 mother” £20 pw “2 children 1 mother” £35 pw, “2 children 2 mothers” £40 pw etc. In cases where there is 1 mother but more than 1 father… The mother should receive no more than if 1 father was involved. This would mean that a mother who had 2 children by 2 different fathers would still only receive £35 pw with the liability being split between the 2 fathers……. Hopefully this would encourage these type of people to take nece!
ssary measures in preventing unwanted pregnancies….
Those who choose unemployment as a lifestyle choice…… This is the hardest group of all to target as they have no intention of working to support themselves let alone their children….. At present a small amount of their benefit is taken towards child support BUT unfortunately the biggest part of their responsibility is paid by the tax payer and until the benefit system is overhauled, these people will be able to avoid their duties as parents.
Many thanks for reading
Meg x x x
29 thoughts on “How to make the CSA a fair system”
Leave a Reply
MEG…
YOU WOULD DEFINATELY GET MY VOTE TO BE HEAD OF THE CSA/CEMC/PRIME MINISTER/ MINISTER FOR WORKS AND PENSIONS / GOD (GODDESS)
Finally somebody who can talk sense.
Regards
Graeme
I have to agree – this is one of (if not the) best posts we’ve had. Your ideas, every one of them, are first class.
It all seems so simple the way you’ve put it, and it would work. If only you were running the system (if not the country). Hope your MP reads this, but I sadly doubt he will.
WELL DONE a literate , researched, and argued piece of work. Now get it published in one of the major Newspapers eg The Gaurdian ie in response to wots his face recent article (refer on this website under News) it is like minded people like us ( graeme and michael ) who agree based on an unbiased opinion taking into consideration all parties involved and just so sublimely simple (NOT) Also ,cos I”m thick, can anyone help to get your letter, above , out in the media worldwide cos I”ve seen people on sites as far away as Australia having problems with their CSA offices. WOOHOO just think worldwide united. BRING IT ON PS . Apologies foir grammer, typing, spelling etc but I”m a silver surfer,dinotech but a very proud single, divorcee, mother (2 children) bringing them up on my own who just wants to see someone achieve justice for ultimately the child/ren. Go for it and good luck as I for one will be watching this space………..Closely
The taxman collecting child support…. I'm leaving the day they do that!
I don't think that this will ensure that the childrens life styles are unaffected. Why should new families take priority over previous families. It's both parents responsibility 2 support the children & if u want a 2nd family b prepared 2 cover the costs of ur 1st family. A flat percentage against net salary is a fair way of collecting maintenance making sure that the children are supported
Dawn that is absolutely true, if you want a second family then make sure you are prepared and able to support the first. I just wish there were more PWCs following that philosophy too 😉
I would support any system that brings about shared responsibility. The current one encourages the PWC to deny access to maximise their financial benefit. An upper limit or "fixed fine" might just open up the possiblility that the PWC would consider access as a good thing. I want to provide for my first children not fund a black hole at the expense of my second family. The flat salary percentage is unfair as it ignores essential costs.Why should I pay triple the unemployment allowance for child support?
I strongly believe that any maintenance should be linked to your rights for access, My ex partner has used the CSA simply as a means of extracting money from me whilst being able to keep my child away from me! why should my money be good enough yet I am not?? for the record I've always paid for my children but haven't seen my eldest in nearly 9 years thanks to my ex, I have since gotten married and had 2 other children whom i spend loads of my time with, In the US an access agreement would have to be agreed in court before any child maintenance is paid out, a father can exercise his right to see his children if the mother insists he pay for them!! we should adopt the same system in this country for those fathers who want to support their children and most importantly play a part in their lives!
Agreed Jamie – any fathers (or non resident mothers) expected to pay for their children should have the right to see them. Sadly the exact opposite is true in this country, and the CSA ensures that fathers have no access to their children by advising the mothers to withhold access, spurred on by the carrot of more money.
the access is totally different thing altogether. suppose the 'child' doesnt want to see the nrp? suppose the nrp is violent or causes emotional stress ? ppl make me sick. some parents just see their children as a soddin monetary unit or a bartering post. these children of ours are human beings for gods sake !!!"look . its bloody easy, pay for your children or put a flamin sock on it . end of !.
Dear Foxy fox,If the child doesnt want to see the NRP, that is the childs perogative, however, have you not also considered the child who does want to see their NRP?The fact is that families can be torn apart by stress, grief, bereavement, job opportunity or loss of job or the PWC being the cheat or deminishes moral or relationship duties ad respectfulness, how about approaching from all angles rather than blinkered, It is true that access is different but the CSA encourage PWC's to restrict access for more money, this only considers the PWC's wishes and not the child's wish… this is not to support the welfare of PWC but the welfare of the child. It is not about putting a sock on it but providing for the child, dont be so insensitive to the children who enjoy having a child & parent relationship with their NRP!!! You comments I feel are insensitive to my sons wishes, put a sock in it instead of disrespecting and abusing my child and his welfare!!!
MORRELL. HOW DARE YOU ACCUSE ME OF DISRESPECT AND ABUSING A CHILD?: ITS CLEAR TO ME,ANYBODY WHO HAS TO RESORT TO ABUSE (AS YOU PATENTLY JUST HAVE ) HAS ALREADY LOST THEIR CORNER. i could throw so many insults at you n pick what you spouted to bits. but feel that woul;d be unfair as you clearly have a HANDYCAP.
and for the record, although i have huge gripes about csa, i have never once ,even heard a suggestion that i stop access. , never been encouraged to try to gain more money either. lol ,why would ? it took bout 6 yr to get £30 pw. wouldnt dare ask for a review, we all know where that would lead
Meg
Please get this in a letter form to all the national newspapers.. especially the Guardian.
A copy should also be sent to David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Iain Duncan Smith, Steve Gerhaty, and to all the major players at the CSA/CEMC.
Can you also add to the bottom of it that CS1 should be scrapped immediately and all cases currently on CS1 transferred to CS2 assessment.
Graeme
i totally agree foxy….there will always be a sad few who twist the system but its a percentage system they still have eighty percent coming in!, if you have a big bill its because of backpay!i couldnt imagine not seeing my children 6 days a week or even more if i didnt no amount of money would be too much.i chose the woman to have the child with!if shes being unreasonable then its best for all parties to have things done above board it protects both sides!every dad has an obligation to see and pay for there child,if your paying your a reasonable person and theres no reason you cannot demand access with the law on your side.im sure this is stressfull but theres far to many people on here with emotional attatchment to there ex and feel ripped off due to how much they have coming in etc it shouldnt matter you have to provide for your child.the csa isnt doing a great job and mistakes have been made on both sides.personally i get 10 pounds a week which im sure youll agree wouldnt feed a cat,i get so angry when i see men calling women money grabbers and that there using it for revenge!!!! some revenge,if they paid up all along and paid the right amount the csa would be no threat.life is unfair and there are alot of children getting hurt
Very true, a big bill usually does mean you have arrears..but you must understand that the majority of clients have arrears from the offset because it takes the CSA so song to work out an assessment. You will find that most clients on the old rules had to wait 6 months+ for the CSA to do a proper assessment.In the meantime, it really isn't conducive to pay any maintenance as it can 'cock-up' their assessments, and any voluntary payments can often be seen as gifts and not maintenance at all..as the CSA have admitted!
There is only one thing to do with the CSA. CLOSE IT DOWN and all money taken from fathers that has not been given to our children or their mother MUST BE RETURNED! If the CSA won't return it then the Inland Revenue becomes liable and must return it!Both parents are responsible for looking after and providing for their children – that means looking after them and buying them the things they need. Not the CSA taking 50% of our salary and preventing us from looking after and providing for our children. That means a presumption of SHARED RESIDENCE and an end to the CSA. Sort out the totally corrupt legal system that promotes the abuse of our children, split the time that the children spend with each parent and the need for a CSA ceases. Get writing to and seeing your MP's now!
We want to provide for my partners children and my children but now the CSA are taking my child benefit and child tax credits into account with his wages, which now means my children are doing without as we have already had to cut back to pay CSA after rent, counil tax n household bills……what else do they want us 2 cut back on our rent??? n lose our house…….where is the justice in it all, that they take from my kids, when it should be equal……personally I have never took a penny from my kids dads n im proud 2 say I have brought them up myself n I have brought up 5 kids over 23yrs n done it myself!!!
Paying so called Child Support is funding the destruction of your OWN Family and empowering the State to do just that to others – Why do I think this? – See tabs **PMLetterJim** and **PMLetterJAVAN – @ http://www.rationshed.wordpress.com – Onward – Jim
On the issued of shared custody/residence, it should be presumptive!!! Only if it can be demonstrated to a court of law that it is clearly against the child interests should it be interfered with! (history of abuse/violent behaviour) It shouldn't be seperate from maintenance…it should mandatory when splittling up to have a legal agreement in place that covers all aspects relating to the child/ren.The best interests of the child come FIRST! The starting point should be all things EQUAL!!!
It appears to have worked pretty well in Australia!
Yes, but as the Australian CSA say, the Brits went out there and copied everything that was WRONG with the Australia CSA.
a bloody good idea would definitely get my vote! if payments were made through the tax office from the very beginning then arrears would also never be a problem as money would instantly be paid
Allan MORRELL, it may be the case in your circumstances that the resident parent should let you see them, BUT I agree with Foxy Fox, you don't know what our ex's did to our children and ourselves, my ex husband, is a convicted paedophile that seriously damaged my own foster daughter and tried with our own daughter…. IF YOU DONT KNOW PEOPLE CIRCUMSTANCES DON'T DARE JUDGE!!!
Eureka! This is brilliant… no wait its GENIUS!! I am a pwc & my son’s father avoids his responsibilities to him & 3 other children from a previous relationship. He’s planning on having more children & has told ppl he wont stop. He’s on benefits claiming he’s depressed & not fit for work. If this idea was to be put in place he would be the first in line to vote against it. I would love to get this in place. Im going back to work to support my son even if it kills me to make sure he NEVER goes without
@Lorraine and Peter – If you think things are working well in Australia you are reading Govt and/or FemiNazi Spin Doctor Mail – Onward – Together-4-FAMILY – http://www.rationshed.wordpress.com – Jim
@Hannah – Your claims may well be true – Tested in a real Court under real **Equal Parenting** would find you releif – However only from your XSpouse – YOUR Child will have a Paternal **Whole Natural Biological FAMILY** which they need to relate too – Onward – Together-4-FAMILY – http://www.rationshed.wordpress.com – Jim
Update….
I have now recieved a letter from my MP regarding my ideas for a fairer CSA….. He says that he has passed my ideas on to the Minister and he will write to me again as soon as he has had a response from him.
It is probably just a standard response letter but at least he bothered to read my letter and forward it on to the relevant person.
Kind regards
Meg x x x
Can anyone help me, my house requires a roof repairs and for that I will have to apply for a loan, this is still available to me through my mortgage provider, would the CSA take this into account when asessing my Child support liability and look for a lower monthly child support contribution?
Ta in advance.