I followed the children of my ex’s new partner to find where he lives
I am at a loss.
Several years ago now, I told my ex that after three years of paying nothing towards his daughter I must contact the CSA for their help.
At this point he saw his daughter once or twice a month, always on his terms.
As soon as I did that, he quit his job and ceased all contact. Four years later the CSA keep finding him, passing his details onto the bailifs but as soon as it gets that far he goes underground again.
I am told he has been working self employed and that on at least two occasions Bailiffs have entered his home and he has agreed a repayment scheme, only to go missing again.
The real killer in this story? I am the one who has found his address each time and passed it onto the CSA as I know where his new partners kids go to school and where his partner works, so it’s just been a matter of following them back home each time.
Oh, and his partner also claims single parents benefits and claims CSA from her two children’s biological father.
I feel like a complete mug.
87 thoughts on “I followed the children of my ex’s new partner to find where he lives”
Leave a Reply
Good for your EX, I hope he always manages to keep one step ahead of you
To be fair I.cant.blame your ex.for not wanting to have anything to do with you.or the CSA, what you are doing is stalking, maybe give your.kids chance to have a relatiinship with there dad instead.of being nagged about money, whats more important lining your pockets or your kids feelings, what your ex does in his life now has got nothing to do with you, leave the.poor guy alone, or is this going to be another dad who commits suicide because.of lies being told by the beitter ex amd the clutches of the CSA
Following children is against the law, it is a sad person that follows children just to get money out of their step father.
Access has nothing to do with money!
And as soon as you money grabbing PWC’S realise this then the better all children concerned will be.
Following someone else’s children is wrong how would you feel if someone done that to ur children.
Lol, Dolphin i totally agree, this bint must be a desperate for cash and desperate to see her ex to, sad lonely bitch, is it any wonder she is the ex,
Just to clarify you know his partner claims single parent benefits, you know this because???? Your ex,s partner and what she earns has got stuff all to do with you or the CSA, what she earns and does in her life is upto her not you
If an NRP is moving and not informing the CSA of his new address in a bid to avoid his responsibility for paying for his children and the PWC becomes aware of where the NRP is living the PWC has every right to pass this information on to the CSA. Also if a person has knowledge that someone is claiming a benefit that they are not entitled to then they should report this to the benefits agency
@ Alice, would you as a NRP like another woman following your children to school and back????? Its a criminal offense, stuff the rules of the csa maybe the police should know what this woman is doing for the safety of those kids,
there is nothing in the post from Jane Amanda to indicate that she did anything which put the children, or the NRPs partner’s safety at risk. She simply walked the same route and took note of an address which she may or may not use to locate the NRP who is failing in his legal duty by not providing this information to the CSA.
Had the PWC approached the children and used threatening behaviour to extract information from them then clearly this would be unacceptable.
It is also a criminal offence to use any form of communication media (internet included) in a way that can cause another person alarm etc
.
It is also a criminal offense to follow children as well, thats what i have just been told by local police, so maybe i should find out where the poster lives and report her,
@ Alice, you are only sticking up for the PWC yeah we know we have heard it all before, all your bothered about is the details of where the next lot of money comes from, your only doing your job, please do us all a favour, there has got to be more to life than the CSA and the strife they cause people, and please do read up on the law, its changed with so many nasties about
Alice does not care all she is after is her bonus, we all know she lies like a cheap NAFFI watch.
yet another unfounded comment, this time from Craig, another one who considers that he ‘know’s me and another who is no longer a member of the FB page after becoming abusive to various members when his repeated postings did not result in support – the difference being that Craig was removed from the group by the administrators.
Perhaps if members on the various forums put as much effort into providing supportive or factual information as they do in being abusive and expressing personal opinions on people they have never met then the outcome would be a lot more productive
“lisa on February 13th, 2013 6:52 pm
@ Alice, would you as a NRP like another woman following your children to school and back????? ”
Thats just the point Lisa. If I’m reading this correctly she is actually following his new partners children!!! Is that right Jayne, are you following someone else’s children? Please tell me I read that wrong J”ayne – I know where his new partners kids go to school and where his partner works, so it’s just been a matter of following them back home each time.”
That is really sick and I suggest you get expert medical help urgently! Can you imagine if we all started following a strangers children through the streets? Someone would call the police and rightly so.
You have published your name, if your ex comes onto this site and reads this you may have a visit very soon from the police.
What are you going to do next, nail a dead bunny to their door? Did you know there is a law against stalking people? They are not your children, not your ex’s children, they are the children of a person not involved in you and you ex’s marital breakdown.
I understand you are frustrated with the apparant lack of support from the csa but your ex would only give up work again, this isnt the way to deal with it. Please, please stop this, they are children and they are not yours.
@ j, the reason alice is on here plain and simple, the more money they get in for the PWC the more the staff get in bonuses, yes you read it right above the sick sad woman is following children to and from there home, thats stalking at its worst and she needs reporting, as for alice she is a god damn disgrace, i hope to god nobody finds out who you are! you have caused friction with so many NRP lately its untrue
If you read back my original post simply stated that if the PWC has information on the NRP’s address she has the right to pass this information on to the CSA – I did not say I condone the fact that she followed the children in order to obtain that information.
I again responded to Lisa’s statement regarding the safety of the children by saying that the original post did not indicate that the PWC had done anything which indicated that the safety of the children was at any point in danger. The PWC has not stated that she approached the children at any point.
“Alice on February 13th, 2013 7:19 pm
there is nothing in the post from Jane Amanda to indicate that she did anything which put the children, or the NRPs partner’s safety at risk. She simply walked the same route and took note of an address which she may or may not use to locate the NRP who is failing in his legal duty by not providing this information to the CSA.”
I cant believe you just said that ‘alice’, I would expect better from you. There is EVERYTHING in the post that ‘suggests she put the children of the new partner at risk’, she is following someone else’s children in the streets.
Do you have children ‘alice’? Do you have ANY indication of the mental state of the person posting? (a clue is in the title) Would you accept the responsibility of any harm that came to those children? What if they saw ‘Jayne’, got scared and ran in front of a car?
For goodness sake people does anyone on here have any idea of cjild protection protocols? Please if anyone including the site moderators have any idea of who Jayne is or what area she comes from they should give the police this info so they can have a ‘quiet word’ with her and make sure she is alright.
I’m sorry but this is just wrong!
staff at the CSA are not paid bonuses based on the amount of money they collect on behalf of the PWC, another invalid assumption from Lisa
I have to say i totally agree J, i have children and the outside world is a big bad place for kids, walking to and from school if its a route they know should be safe, with women around like Jayne its obviously not, Alice if you have children you should not condone any of her behaviour for the sake of a few quid, its disgusting behaviour from you and the poster!!!!!!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542204/Staff-at-failing-CSA-get-25m-bonuses.html
@ Alice look at the link above, not assumption, or do the papers lie now?????
Hopefully this wont give another PWC grounds to go following other peopls children just for the sake of an address and info to give the CSA, this is not only morally wrong but also illegal,
Lisa – at which point in this thread did I say in any way shape or form that I condone a person following children ?
J – sorry, but I cannot see anything that has indicated that she did anything other than walk the same route as the children, I live on a street that is a main route from a housing estate to a school, it also goes past shops houses and bus stops – I am regularly on the same route as many children making their way from home to school and vice versa – at no point are any of the children walking ahead of me, behind me or across the street from me in any danger simply by me walking along the path. If the original poster was saying she followed the children and approached them and demanded to know their address etc, she is not saying that the children were even aware that she was there or if so if they knew who she was – I agree that had this been the case then the children may well have become alarmed and this would constitute a safety issue.
Again I reiterate that I did not say that I condoned the actions of the PWC, but there is not anything in the original post to show that this woman has compromised the safety of the children
Lisa – I reiterate – staff are not paid bonuses based on the amount of money they collect on behalf of the PWC
at no point in our annual evaluation is it stated how much an individual case officer has secure in payments or agreements – bonuses are paid in accordance with the level of a person’s evaluation so as stated our bonus is not based on cash collected
J – sorry to side track from this thread but I forget which thread we conversed in last night regarding your DEO issue – I did not get the chance to check the reference code for the booklet issued to employers but I will do so tomorrow and get back to you, I think e-versions are available for download on the internet so let me know which thread we were posting in last night and I will post the relevant link for you
The real killer in this story? I am the one who has found his address each time and passed it onto the CSA as I know where his new partners kids go to school and where his partner works, so it’s just been a matter of following them back home each time.
Oh, and his partner also claims single parents benefits and claims CSA from her two children’s biological father
This is quoted from above, she actually follows children home from school etc, we didt actually say you did alice but you know for a fact she is doing this its a criminal offense and the csa condone this by taking the info she has had to get by people like you at the csa not doing your job properly hence these children having there safety put at risk thru this woman following them which is wrong
CSA staff get paid a bonus for reaching their targets pffft a bonus for ruining thousands of peoples lives and enforcing families and children into poverty. Hope you enjoy your bonus at the expense of peoples misery you cause Alice.
CMEC was a Crown Non-Departmental Public Body between 1 November
2008 and 31 July 2012. Therefore, we are unable to provide data before 1
November 2008. The total amount paid out in bonuses each year is detailed
below:
Year Amount Paid
2011/12 £3,818,771
2010/11 £3,973,598
2009/10 £2,404,125
2008/09* £100,116
* 2008/09 relates to the period 1 November 2008 to 31 March 2009. All
other years relate to 1 April to 31 March.
The amounts shown in the table above include payments in respect to end of
year non-consolidated payments made based on end of year performance
marks and in year non-consolidated awards.
The total bonus payments in 2009/10 seem low compared to 2010/11. The
reason for this is that in 2009/10 some of the funds for year end performance
bonuses were put into non-consolidated base payments as part of a three year
strategy. These have not been included as they were not bonus payments.
Yes Alice I was booted off the coffee morning group people obviously did not like what I had to say about the CSA and how they support abusive PWCs who use children as a weapon and as a cash cow.
“Alice on February 13th, 2013 – J – sorry, but I cannot see anything that has indicated that she did anything other than walk the same route as the children, I live on a street that is a main route from a housing estate to a school, it also goes past shops houses and bus stops – I am regularly on the same route as many children making their way from home to school and vice versa – at no point are any of the children walking ahead of me, behind me or across the street from me in any danger simply by me walking along the path.”
Which bit of ‘common sense’ and child protection do you not get? This person isnt just ‘walking on the same road’ as some children who have nothing to do with her, she is deliberately ‘stalking’ what are ‘targeted’ children that belong to another parent who is not involved in her situation.
I did quite a bit of work on childrens welfare including child protection issues and I can assure you that what this woman is doing is not only wrong but is also dangerous.
Have a chat with your local police and see what they have to say. It is VERY worrying and as you work in an organisation that involves ‘child welfare’ issues you should be very concerned.
Alice on February 13th, 2013 6:18 pm
If an NRP is moving and not informing the CSA of his new address in a bid to avoid his responsibility for paying for his children and the PWC becomes aware of where the NRP is living the PWC has every right to pass this information on to the CSA. Also if a person has knowledge that someone is claiming a benefit that they are not entitled to then they should report this to the benefits agency
Your reply might as well have said doesnt matter who you follow just get us the info so we can take the poor fellas cash end of, the safety of these children has and will always be compromised by women like these who have fallen on hard times and are desperate for the money
“Alice on February 13th, 2013 – so let me know which thread we were posting in last night and I will post the relevant link for you”
Will check.
Craig is there any way we can find out where the woman who posts this comes from, maybe local police there need to look at the thread and see that a womans children are putting in very real danger from a woman stalking them to get there mums boyfriends address and work details, yes the csa condone this and its wrong,?????
Again – I do not condone the use of children for obtaining information – I would not suggest to a PWC that they put any child at risk in order to obtain an address or for an NRP who is avoiding their obligation. Similarly I do not condone an NRP or a PWC who uses their own child to influence their case – as a case worker I have had many calls over the years where an NPR or PWC will demand that I speak to their child so that the child can tell me when where or how often they stay with the NRP or PWC etc – aside from the fact that the CSA do not allow case workers to speak to the child I personally would not ever consider it acceptable to speak with a child on a CSA issue.
The CSA do trace work when an NRP is no longer at the address we have for them on file,. We use legitimate desk based tracing tools to do this.
My statement regarding the fact that the PWC has every right to pass on an address for an NRP was in response to Lisa’s statement that the NRPs life has nothing to do with the PWC – the fact remains that it does, he is the father of children for whom he is refusing to take responsibility for. If he is not supplying the csa with his current address – which as a side failure to do so is a criminal offence on the part of the NRP and if found guilty he could be fined up to £1000 – and the PWC is aware of his current address she has the right to pass this information on to the CSA. At no point have I said the PWC was right to follow the children.
@ Alice The message to the CSA contractor should be, “Buck up, serve your customers, earn your keep, or clear your desks and get out.”This is what the minster had to say about staff who dont do there jobs properly and within the law, maybe i should send her a copy of the above and see if he thinks your fab at your job, The CSA website states that the CSA can help to
“ensure parents who live apart from their children contribute financially to their upkeep…work out who should pay and how much…make sure more children receive the maintenance they are entitled to…take quick and firm action to make sure payments get made”.
It has failed to fulfil any of those tasks
Maria Miller is being sent all this, lets hope they manange to locate you, seeing we all use the web its so easy to find somebody these days regardless of whether they are hiding behind a false name,
Alice it is a criminal offense not to pass details onto the CSA we already know that, Why do NRP not do it, because they get so much cash taken from they cant afford to live, it isnt about not contributing to there kids upbringing, its about whats right and wrong, how would you feel if you were a NRPP and you couldt afford to feed your children, please answer that because i have been there and done it, being suicidal isnt a nice feeling knowing that your failing to do your duties as a parent by not being able to do the most basic of task and thats feeding them and keeping them warm because the PWC has all your hard earned cash, flash car and lovely holidays at the expense of me, now what would you do in that situation
“Alice on February 13th, 2013 – The CSA do trace work when an NRP is no longer at the address we have for them on file,. We use legitimate desk based tracing tools to do this.”
Wholly acceptable, distasteful perhaps to some but legitimate. Following people per se is not always a bad thing, a ‘professional’ organisation would have the correct training, legal framework and indemnity insurances, the police for example will back off in a chase if lives are put at risk. This is a distraught parent at her wits end following someone else’s children in an emotive situation. That should ring alarm bells or anyone!
“…in response to Lisa’s statement that the NRPs life has nothing to do with the PWC – the fact remains that it does, he is the father of children for whom he is refusing to take responsibility for.”
I have no argument with that point. My only concern is for the children, who don’t belong to the NRP or the PWC but in fact to a third party. We should not be arguing or get distracted.
Jayne needs help with her claim, fair enough but her statements and actions suggest she is getting ‘desparate’ and may need ‘additional’ help. Again all I would say is following other peoples kids is pretty spooky whichever way you look at it.
The point i was trying t make was that Jane is the EX for a reason and what her ex partner does in his life doesnt have anything to do with her, Just like my ex,s life doesnt have anything to do with me, he is a single man can do as he pleases, i dont know what he earns i dont want to know, its NONE of my business, but the poster does need help, there is a real danger here that this woman will do something stupid because the CSA dont do there jobs properly,
Questions on this particular posting, 1) how far has Ms Amanda travelled to follow these children? 2) What (other than no maintenance) has made Ms Amanda to go to these lengths, 3) Has the CSA failed Ms Amanda, 4) A very bizarre image of Ms Amanda has flown through my mind, was she disguised as Miss Marple, was she wearing a long coat, hat, specs and a beard. 5) has following the children actually achieved anything. 6) Does Ms Amanda need help or arresting.
Personally i feel for the poor woman because obviously she is troubled, either financially, emotionally or just plain ill.
Anyway, said my bit, now you can all carry on bickering and overlook the fact, that someone is actually crying out for help here, just a thought.
J – agreement in part – following children in a manner whereby the children are unaware or unaffected by the action does not automatically put the child in danger, obviously if the ‘follower’ was a trained professional this makes the safety risk less as they would be more cautious and risk factors would be paramount in their minds when doing so.
An assumption that Jane ‘is a distraught parent at her wits end following someone else’s children in an emotive situation’. I understand the basis of the assumption – and yes if Jane is at her wits end etc then yes this would set alarm bells ringing – but there is also a chance that Jane happened to be in the area of the school for valid reasons, she may have been in a calm state of mind and saw an opportunity to obtain information which could benefit her CSA case which did not involve endangering the children in question.
Lisa – Jane’s ex is her ex, and obviously there will be a reason, lets not assume that the reason is down to Jane, equally we should not assume that the reason is down to him.
The point is he is Jane’s ex -partner – he is not (unless Jane’s children have subsequently been adopted) an ex-father. A person may be absolved of their obligation to a partner but they are not absolved of their obligation to their child or children
@ Topper – the answers to your questions are not known, as such the worst case scenario is reached based on assumptions.
@ Alice, Assumptions are never a good thing, assume, makes an ass of u & me. I never intended to answer the dilemma, just though that I might just throw in some questions.
ALICE. You are a SICKO! cant really say much more !
@ Topper – I fully agree with you – assumptions are indeed never a good – or accurate – course of action. As you say you did not seek to answer the dilemma, your thoughts may lead to others re-thinking their assumption
Like you, I feel for Jane – she has posted a statement and others have read between the lines and made assumptions and immediately condemned the poor woman as being a person who has put children in danger and concluded that these children are quite possibly frightened- there is as much chance that the children involved are totally unaware that a person happened to see which house they went into one day after school and the only thing that is bothering them is whether their packed lunch box will contain a biscuit instead of an apple tomorrow
Its all about the money and CSA statistic your interested in Alice
Craig – like Lisa you assume, and your assumption is incorrect. you do not know me. As with Lisa your opinion of me is of little concern to me, if you get personal satisfaction from thinking whatever you think of me then so be it, it does not put me up nor down. I will not however communicate with you as I see no reason to do so
Regardless of what state of.mind this.woman is in, she had.followed another womans children that have bugger all to do with.the case where CSA are.concerned,when people split up it.then becomes.a seperate.life and even if the man.is her childrens.father still has nothing to do with her where he lives like I said before and will say again CSA fail.many families this.obviously being one of.them, its a poor do thw csa cant be arsed to search for the man in the first place maybe.then this.woman.wouldt have had to commit an.offense to begin with
@ Alice…. We all appreciate that people’s ‘opinion’ of you means nothing to you but for me, that speaks volumes…. The people who post on this (and other) websites do so out of need and we form an opinion based on experience of that person. You, like ‘chall’ are starting to become unprofessional …. If you cannot accept the devastating effect the dysfunctional CSA is having on our society then I hope to god that you are childless (so that your children cannot inherit your attitude) or that you are advising from behind bars because from what I have read from your posts tonight does not give me faith in humanity…
Alice no wonder CSA staff come under threat with stinking attitudes like yours you should be named and shamed along with a lot more of you vile disgusting parasite co workers. One day Alice you and your beloved Nazi agency will be held accountable for your murders and treason and enforcing children into poverty not forgetting making them homeless to.
“Alice on February 13th, 2013 9:51 pm – An assumption that Jane ‘is a distraught parent at her wits end following someone else’s children in an emotive situation’. I understand the basis of the assumption – and yes if Jane is at her wits end etc then yes this would set alarm bells ringing – but there is also a chance that Jane happened to be in the area of the school for valid reasons, she may have been in a calm state of mind and saw an opportunity to obtain information which could benefit her CSA case which did not involve endangering the children in question.”
Are we reading the same post ‘alice’?
“I followed the children of my ex’s new partner to find where he lives – February 13, 2013
I am at a loss. …
…The real killer in this story? I am the one who has found his address each time and passed it onto the CSA as I know where his new partners kids go to school and where his partner works, so it’s just been a matter of following them back home each time.
I feel like a complete mug.
Written by Jane Amanda ”
Lots of ‘clues’ in the statement made by jayne dont you think? Have you read the post properly? Obviously it is an emotive situation, ‘I’m at a loss’ sounds like someone who has run out of rational ideas, followed by not so rational behaviour, ‘so it’s just been a matter of following them back home each time.’ isnt a case of someone who ‘happened to be in the area’ for valid reasons, on more than one occasion. Its stalking!
I’m not ‘bickering’ Topper, if you look at my posts of 8:05 pm , 8:54pm and 9:26pm
you may see that my concern throughout has been for the welfare and safety of the children that were being followed and the possibility that ‘jayne’ may need ‘additional support’, from other providers, as well as a financial result from the csa.
I’ve been a PWC and NRP. I dont know jayne or her ex. I’m not interested in their relationship breakdown. I have worked in this ‘environment’ in the past and have had some experience of childrens situations. I am simpy concerned at the (repeated) (look again alice it isnt a one off accidental sighting in the street) and deliberate actions involved in following somebody elses children.
However ‘alice’ tries to square it, my training and experience make the whole thing a bit worrying for me and I would rather err on the side of caution in terms of child protection. It may well be that ‘jayne’ is totally in control and means no harm to the kids, I’m not ‘assuming’ anything of that nature, BUT its a ‘regular event, if the children see her…, what if the new partner sees her…, what if her ex sees her…?
Follow your ex if thats what gets you going but DO NOT follow other peoples children, that is wrong on every level.
@Alice, pathetic parasite springs to mind, dont give up your day job will.you,