Categories
I pay £300 a month for two children – is that too much?
I pay £300vper month for two children who don’t live with me but regulary stay with me for weekends and holidays. I have joint parental responsibility for both. One mother is working and the other is now in a relationship and living with her new partner who is working she also is working. I my household, my partner is a special guardian for a child of 9 with special needs. We both feel that I am paying too much for my two daughters is this correct? My net income without overtime is £1244 p/mth.
36 thoughts on “I pay £300 a month for two children – is that too much?”
Leave a Reply
Having parental responsibility means nothing in terms of how much you pay to csa. It is only the frequency/amount of time you have your children stay with you that may impact….
So £150pm for each child….£37.50 a week, £5.35 a day. Think that’s pretty good in my opinion. Some parents are paying £300 a month for 1 child.
So £150pm for each child….£37.50 a week, £5.35 a day. Think that’s pretty good in my opinion. Some parents are paying £300 a month for 1 child
£400 a month 1 child I pay, think yourself lucky
I pay 520 for 1 child. That I haven’t got a clue where he is living. 300 for 2 children is not so bad. But then again this all depends on what your income is. I am currently paying 20% but there was a time when I was paying 40%. Took me years to sort out. The csa really are scum if the earth
I’m paying 130 for 2 children while on half your wage with child tax credit included in calculation. Its all percentanges. I am currently in contact with my mp regarding the child tax credit being included. The Csa obvously think its ok to take from some children!!
If you think £300 is to much wait till 2014 when is goes up by 20% …. £360 :-/
It’s done on a percentage of ya wages so if ya think its to much go on CSa calculater n work it out
get a court order with your access on it send to these wankers recorded derilvery it will reduce your unlawful cm mine went down to 165 after i had done this i and i have the same type of access and money so u are def paying to much to these family killers
Hi there according to the calculator you are but i don’t know your full details.Are you in arrears with this filth,do you do overtime?,are you on csa1 rules?,also if your on csa2 rules your ctc might be included in there as well.Can you not come to an private agreement with the mothers and if you could best way to do it is standing order at least you have a paper trail.You would be also best to request your data files from them which costs you £10 but well worth it and send it by postal order.
You should use the online calculator (at the top of this page) I’m sure it will be much less than £300, I believe you get a reduction as you have a child living with you… The calculator will tell you what you should pay..
if overtime is regular then that would also be included in the amount used as income by the CSA when calculating the amount you would be assessed as liable to pay
Below is the taken directly from the calculation section above… this is per week … From what other NRP’s have said, it’s not worth your while doing overtime as the CSA will base the calculation on the highest amount… even though you may not do lots of overtime and once they set an amount… they will lie do what they can to make sure you pay the higher amount….
“Your rate is the Basic Rate as your income of £287.07 is above the £200 threshhold with 2 children the rate will be 20% of your total income. a discount of 15% was applied for dependents. There has been a reduction of 14.29% for shared custody.
This brings your payment to:
£41.83”
based on your basic income with no overtime and no WTC or CTC the calculation would be as follows:
net income = £287.07
less 15% for the child in your household – £287.07 x 15% = £43.06
assessible income £244.01
multiplied by 20% = £48.80 – rounded up/down to the nearest £1 means weekly liability is £49 per week (£212.33 per month)
each PWC would be entitled to £24.50 (£106.17 per month)
shared care would only apply if either child stayed overnight with you – shared custody is not the same as shared parental responsibility
The above calculation is based on both cases being opened via the CSA – if only 1 mother was to take their case to the agency the calculation would be based on 1 QC and 1 ROC, the other daughter by the other mother would only be considered in the calculation (she would be considered as a Relevant Non Resident Other Child) if there was a court order in place.
So does that mean that the calculator above is wrong Alice??
Calculator asks 3 questions:
1) Net income – £287.07
2) No of children paying for – 2
3) No of children living with NRP – 1
Result:
“Your rate is the Basic Rate as your income of £287.07 is above the £200 threshhold with 2 children the rate will be 20% of your total income. a discount of 15% was applied for dependents. There has been a reduction of 14.29% for shared custody.
This brings your payment to:
£41.83″
Is it any wonders NRP’s are confused and p’d off with the CSA when staff make it more difficult!?!!!
Sorry the OTHER question is do you have them for over 52 nights per year… he said he had joint parental care which would indicate that he had them for more than 52 nights per year!!!!
How on earth and normal people expected to know that “shared custody is not the same as shared parental responsibility” an overnight stay is the simple and easy way to explain it…. the less you let the NRP have the child overnight, the more money the PWC will get… is that not CSA staffs ‘selling/advertising/promoting’ line???
@ sally
Not so sure that the on line calculator is supposed to be 100% effective, more a case of giving one an approximate idea. Surely the best way is to actually ask the CSA directly??
Having said that, one might get differing answers even going down that route!
Online calculates is very good it’s a pity the Csa don’t use it for there sums it simple it works and there is no mistakes the only thing it does not do is round your money up or down to the nearest pound so there the first lesson a Csa staff member Shoul do is go to the Csa online calculator and take a simple lesson !!!
What’s the point of having a calculator with a straight forward formula that most folk can understand only to be given something completely different when you actually contact the CSA…
NRP’s and PWCs are constantly confused for a reason… the CSA make things too complex for people to understand so that they can get MORE money from the NRP or make an excuse to avoid helping the PWC who recieves NO help from NRP…
Alice increased the weekly payable amount from £41.83 to £49 by making the statement that “shared custody is not the same as shared parental responsibility” special guardianship IS parental responsibility (child living with them) and shared parental responsibility AND shared responsibility would indicate over 52 nights sleeps with NRP (children not living with them) ….. so what is the point in even bringing it up?!? to confuse people into accepting what they are told so that the CSA get more money…
The difference between £41.83 and £49 per week is £372.84 per year… multiply that with hundreds and thousands of NRP’s the CSA over charge and what do you have?? great bonuses and fancy offices!!!!
Sally- the OP does not state he has joint parental care – he says he has joint parental responsibility – this does not necessarily mean that the children stay overnight with him. If the NRP has overnight care of 52 nights or more per child then there would be the appropriate shared care allowance deducted after the calculation.
Also the calculation is based on him working basic hours, so if his income includes regular overtime and he or his partner is in receipt of WTC and/or CTC this could also be taken into account – if either applies the income figure used is incorrect
CTC can always be use, WTC can be used if the NRP is the higher earner in a joint claim, it would not be used if the NRPP is the higher earner, if by chance they both earn the same then half of the WTC would be used.
Alice
Are you for real you are the firs person I have ever in my 45 years wished harm on you are inhumane I hate you hope you worst luck scumbag !
So both our figures are wrong then?? the variables are assumptions on both parts….lol
. As pointed out on numerous occasions you select what you like… He does not sat that he doesn’t have the kids for more than 52 overnight stays per week… YOU assume… SHARED….. MEANS SHARED…. equal parts or thereabouts….
The calculator does not include overtime specifically it asks for net income so someone completing the question would (rightly) assume CONTRACTED hours… But greedy CSA want blood so use overtime as basic income!!! They ask for payslips and use the highest amount… Common sense, explanation and reasoning is not part of the vocabulary the idiots that work for th CSA use…
You and the other greedy CSA staff manipulate information provided by NRPs to get the highest figure possible…. All yous care about is your bonus… Absolutely no shame….
Hear hear Macon!!
The figures are correct using the income provided – I already stated that overtime would be used as income if regular, and in my calculation
Alice on May 24th, 2013 10:50 am
based on your basic income with no overtime and no WTC or CTC the calculation would be as follows:
as for the shared care element I think if ytou read back it was you who assumed that he has the children staying overnight
The calculator is accurate depending on the information that is entered into it .(apart from the rounding up or down to the nearest £1). You entered the figure that the OP quoted, had the OP posted his full income (net pay including overtime and also provided the figures for any WTC and/or CTC) and that figure had been entered into the calculator then the calculation would have been higher.
CSA do not use overtime as basic pay – they included it as INCOME if it is regular.
I am not manipulating the information – I think I provided clear and accurate information so that the OP can do his own calculation and get an accurate figure based on ALL the income he gets
@ Macon – your comment clearly shows how narrow minded and petty you actually are – you wish harm on someone you have never met, simply because they provide an accurate answer to a question. That is totally pathetic – act like a 45 year old and not a 12 year old and you might get on better in your life
Alice
I just think you come on hear to antagonise people when they are at there lowest point most have lost there home ,there children full time and are looking for help , the crap you preach on hear is just twisting the knife you spout all the Csa abbreviation that unless you have ever had you data prints you would never understand them you have narcissistic tendencies as I have said before and for your benifit my life is great since the Csa have got out of my life and if they ever come back for fictitious arrears I am emigrating as I couldn’t handle anyone like you stealing money of me and taking my kids inheritance of them !!!
Alice
You are a faceless twisted individual who loves the power trip of mentally hurting people on this site when you leave your workplace why can’t you leave the Csa company head there and come on hear and help people that is why I have issues with you !
Alice
Why have you never advised or encouraged anyone to make a privet arrangement ?
Alice as usual you are splitting hairs and adamant that you are correct, even when you are wrong and contradict yourself… You assumed he had no overnight stays with the children even though he said ‘joint parental responsibility’ ‘joint’ to the rest of us means together (working together with the child’s best interests at heart… Alien concept to you, I know)!!…. you didn’t ask him to clarify if he had the children overnight more than 52 nights you interpreted it to get the highest figure (as all your colleagues do).
In another response you brought up CTC and WTC if you we’re providing ‘clear and accurate information’ why didn’t you include it in your first response?? Why wait until 3 responses later… This is another standard CSA scam…. Delay tactics to keep taking as much money from the NRP as possible and delay tactics in giving the PWC ANY money…. Not enough information provided!!!
So your ‘interpretation’ of the OP question waspartially correct because you didn’t have all the information… Ad gave your best guess answer based on an assumption…. Do you happen to be a trainer for the CSA as the staff seem to follow the same code of practice as you, ‘hear what you want, interpret it in a way that ensures you get your bonus, and if that means withholding information or lying, then so be it….
As I said before…hear hear Macon
Yes they do stay with me and for more than 52 nights a year, they also holiday with me and have half their clothes bought by me. I am not trying to duck out of paying for my share of their upbringing, but several people have commented that i am paying to much (£150 a month each). i now feel that the csa have diddled me.
Well Alice Sally has certainly got your number there, Assumption and confusion is how you and the CSA operate, why use the facts when you can assume what feels right for you?
How many posts do you read and see something different to what every one else can? But admit your wrong? Never?
That is why you work where you do and I am sure your parents are proud of you.
@ Sally –
I am not splitting hairs and I don’t see how you can say that I am refusing to admit that I am wrong … I provided an accurate calculation based on the limited info available, adding on where there would be variables so that the OP knew that this may differ from the figure if further information was clarified
In my first calculation I made it clear that the calculation was based purely on the basic pay provided as previous replies had pointed the NRP in the direction of the calculator I pointed out that overtime and wtc and/or ctc can be considered as part of income – as such if the OP was to decide to use the calculator then they would be aware of what income they should use when doing so in order that they can get an accurate figure of what they would be expected to pay if they use the CSA.
@ Macon – given your general responses and comments – assumptions about me and my life – I am not even going to waste time responding to you
Alice
I have seen your calculations splitting hairs over 2 or 3 quid and proudly saying my sums are correct when are you going to admit the agency you work for are criminals and comit fraud and ruin kids life’s why don’t you becom a whistle blower and become a house hold name 😉
Come on Alice, blow the whistle on these incompetent twats and be a hero to me and the thousands of others being miss treated by the CSA/ASA.
I and thousands of others would make a donation to a paypal account for your honesty..
Please don’t say you don’t know what we are talking about.. The CSA think they are above the law…
In a robust judgement sure to cause consternation, the Court of Appeal has condemned the Child Support Agency (CSA) for “obnoxious” and “unreasonable” legal failings in threatening fathers with jail without giving them the right to defend themselves.
Sitting with the Lords Justice Patten and Richards, Lord Justice Ward said: “The procedures adopted do not comply with the rights to a fair trial and were flawed.”
This was a test case, brought by a group of solicitors and barristers to establish whether the standard working practices of the CSA breached the rights of fathers under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 6 protects the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time frame, the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven and similar legal rights.
The appeal was focused on two fathers under scrutiny by the CSA for alleged non-payment of child maintenance: Christopher Gibbons who was appealing against a prison sentence of 21 days, suspended for 11 years and Kambiz Karoonian of Ormskirk, appealing against a suspended sentence of 42 days. The CSA claims that Mr Karoonian owes more than £10,000 in child maintenance arrears but he denies this.
Amongst other criticisms, Lord Justice Ward said the wording of court summons sent to the two men had wrongly implied that they bore responsibility for proving that they did not owe the money claimed, thereby reversing the traditional legal burden of proof, when it is up to the accuser to prove their claims.
The Latin expression sometimes used to define the concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is: Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof lies with who declares, not who denies).
Lord Justice Ward said the ruling had been made with “considerable reluctance” and in the full knowledge that it could “emasculate” the CSA’s ability to extract money from recalcitrant fathers.
@ mike… Alice will never whistle blow as she relies on her bonus and does not care one iota for The CSA victims…
She would be the perfect person to blow the whistle on this farce of a company but she never will, she thinks we should be speaking to our MPs… Again typical CSA mind set… We have to do all the work and the CSA do nothing…. She did say that she reported CSA issues to her bosses last year but I’d take that with a pinch of salt…
Most people do involve their MPs now but we will never see Alice put her job on the line the help us…. She is in her comfort zone… Feed the victims limited/selective advice under the pretence of helping but in reality, she is rubbing her hands together with excitement while waiting for her next bonus…. 🙁
Burden of proof Alice?
When arrears are discovered the CSA write and say “you have not paid enough child maintenance in the past and here is a DEO to collect this money over 2 years”
No evidence of how or where this comes from, No concern on the impact this will have on this individual, No explanations. No Proof the arrears are owed just a collection schedule,
To fight this the NRP must complain, then use ICE, then the Ombudsman, 3 years later the CSA admit the errors. The NRP is in debt his children alienated all because the basic human right is ignored, proof of debt.
You must be so proud to be part of a company that does that to people.
Why should any Csa victim have to get there MP involved the Csa only have to do their job, my MP was great but he has more important thing to do than to baby sit the Csa !