I’m not convinced the CSA is being fair or legal – does anyone else feel the same?
As NRP the CSA told me during my first phone call I received last week that because my partner has opted to not receive child benefit for the 4 year old child we both have staying with us I am not entitled the usual 15% deduction on my net pay before the CSA calculation is made. The wording in the CSA booklet says:- What happens if the non-resident parent has other children living with them?
The non-resident parent will usually pay less child maintenance if they are paying either the basic or reduced rate, and they or their partner are receiving Child Benefi t for other children living with them.
This is because they also need to pay for the care of the other children living with them. In these circumstances, we work out the amount of child maintenance that the non-resident parent must pay based on part of their net weekly income, instead of all of their net weekly income.
If the non-resident parent pays the basic rate If the non-resident parent pays the basic rate, we will not take into account:
• 15% of their net weekly income, if there is one child living with them • 20% of their net weekly income, if there are 2 children living with them, or • 25% of their net Can this be true because we could have stayed in (not opted out) and still have have been receiving child benefit, yet I still have another child to look after ???
I am not convinced the CSA is being fair or legal – any experience out there please ?
6 thoughts on “I’m not convinced the CSA is being fair or legal – does anyone else feel the same?”
Leave a Reply
Do not expect the CSA to act within their legal limitations.
The problem is the CSA need to get max money and any loopholes they have they will exploit.
Perhaps ask your partner to claim child benefit but not claim working tax credits as what they should legally knock off they reclaim through tax credits. My mate should have been paying £40 less a month but when they took into account wtc he was getting £5 knocked off.
if you want my opinion …it’s another ill thought out scheme that the CSA take full advantage of !
Yes m8.they treat me like shite. They bend all the rules and they dont go by the law. The law says that your employer cant give your details out to anyone without your sayso. But they tell your employer its the law to give details or they get fined. Bull shit you google if any employer been fine and you wont find one. You can take your employer for giving your personal details to the csa. They only want your money. They dont care about kids coz if they do care about kids y do they put you in prison take your house off you so you cant pass it on to your kids and take you driving lisence off you so you cant work to give your kids money. They are wankers and thats that. As soon as i get money i will be looking for the workers of the csa and have they fucked one by one.
@ Callum, Not too sure why your partner has opted not to receive Child Benefit but that is up to you two. The CSA will only recognise the child as a Relevant Other Child if the Child Benefit is being claimed. The reason for this and I guess it is logical is because all NRP could simply claim to have children living with them in order to have the maintenance liability reduced.
It may be worth your while looking into calculating what your maintenance liability should be when all factors are taken into account, i.e Child Benefit, Working Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit, it might even work out in your favour??
Paul Jones liked this on Facebook.