We use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. We do this to improve browsing experience and to show (non-) personalised ads. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Hi sorry to hear that you are being given the runaround by the csa.
My advice is start campaining, joining groups, contact your mp, write to the newspapers, complain that the csa only target nrps who already pay, are compliant and want to support their children. These nrps are targeted by the csa, with false made up arrears. While non complient nrps, who refuse to pay are not targeted, because they are not an easy target for the csa to hit their targets and collect their bonuses.
No point complaining about the csa unless change is demanded and the nrps who are avoiding supporting their children are the ones targeted by the csa, not nrps who pay and always have.
This is why you are getting nothing, and probably never will until there is change and accountability to the corrupt csa.
Regards,
Woody
Why do we have to listen to one side of the story usually the mothers! It’s usually her fault this agency makes so many mistakes because where money is concerned nothing else matters! It all should go back before the courts where access and maintenance go side by side, it shouldn’t just be the mum claiming she is owed money and that’s that! I don’t see where the kids feelings ever come into these stories
Yes indeed lisa
Always about IM OWED THIS MUCH and they seem hell bent on chasing their deadbeat ex’s whatever and no mention of the kids…it’s always about the money.
Let’s put it another way… If my ex left me and left her kids as well and wanted nothing to do with them and made it clear she was not going to pay me any money ? Then I wouldn’t even bother with her, I’d have more pride and self respect, why would I go chasing after a mother who runs out on her kids and wants nothing to do with them, so I sure as hell wouldn’t want her money
Gonk
So a mother who wants to bring her kids up well has no pride and respect? Haha typical absent father. If the mother agrees to have a child then the father runs off, WHY shouldnt he be responsible 50/50. The dads already have freedom and dont need to pay childcare.
@ Bridgee
First of all I am not an absent parent, my ex relieved me of my parental duties because she didn’t want me around anymore after opening her legs for another bloke. And yes no pride or self respect sticks as far as I’m concerned to mothers who screw their husbands over but still expect to take their money for the kids she took away from him…that’s what I call having no self respect and pride. As I said, if the boot was on the other foot and I had done the dirty and left my wife and took the kids away? I would certainly not expect my ex to then cough up cash each month to support me…it’s called having pride and respect towards what I done to her. My bed..I lay in it…..as they say, but the same don’t apply to a lot of you women…you screw the old man over, you want nothing from him anymore,you deny him his kids but you sure as hell still happy for him to support you. Hypercrites spring to mind. Exploitation of an unfair system that allows the Nrp to be robbed because he was stupid enough to believe a wife who supposed to have loved him and wanted him to raise their children together and watch them grow.
It’s never 50/50 because where does the CSA take money from the mother??? Or adjust what the Nrp pays to her depending on income she gets from a new partner and all her benefits on top. Easy answer. She has nothing stopped, so potentially she has a very wealthy partner, claims child benefit , has several holidays each yr, 2 cars and a nice chunky lump from the ex…”thank you very much that will do nicely, now run along and do some overtime so I can take even more from you” That’s the real world of the pwc and Nrp and the CSA. Money that’s forced out of a father because he fathered a child and needs to be punished for the offence. You may laugh when you read this but that’s how it makes a man feel when he’s treated like this. In my books where a wife does as mine did, deserves Nothing from her ex. She chose to walk and be with someone else, sobeit, let him support you, even more so when the guy she moves in with goes out of his way as well to take your wife and kid. My reply to him is ” you wanted them…you look after them” I will provide extra for my kid for school trips, those fancy cloths she might want, gifts etc etc. that should be my right and my privilege, and I have a say in how and what my money is spent on, more importantly my daughter and not her mother and her partner. This is what’s so wrong with this agency, its title suggest it looks out for the welfare of the child..but it does nothing to ensure the money is actually spent on the child.
And another thing, what if the father also agrees to have a child, and wanted that child in his life but has it taken from him at the age of 3 and never sees his child from one week/month/ yr to the next, missing out on those young years that can never be gotten back, but STILL expected to pay for the privilege. WRONG WRONG WRONG
Gonk