Myself and my ex look after one child each, so why is the CSA even involved?

March 13, 2013

This website (csahell) and DBDA are at least two websites clearly describing the gross faults of the CSA.

I, too, suffer at the CSA’s hands despite having both the children living with me 50% of the time, so much so that reading the Shared Residence Order that’s been in place for the last 7 years, it’s impossible to determine which is NRP and which is PWC

In fact, both parents (me and their mother) are neither NRP nor PWC.

It is due to an anomaly that Child Benefit cannot be split that we have this peculiar situation where I’m PWC for one child to which she’s NRP, and she’s PWC with the other child to which I’m NRP. Both children are 13 and 14 with just 13 months between them.

Both kids live with one parent, then the other. Over a 2 year cycle, it’s impossible to determine the PWC/NRP as it’s all exactly 50/50.

So why are the CSA involved in my case? Is there any way out of this?


  • wilf says:

    Darren:- Whichever of you is the PWC named in the case needs to call the CSA and ask for closure.

  • Alice says:

    at present you are both PWC to the child for whom you are awarded CHB and NRP to the other child. As such both of you are entitled to have an active case and claim via CSA for the child to whom you are deemed to be the PWC. The common reaction is indeed why are the CSA involved in such situations – the answer is that in some situations one parent is a higher earner than the other and as such the child living with this parent may be disadvantaged as their budget would be lower than the parent with the higher income. When there is 50/50 shared care of both children this is not so relevant.

    The options are to continue to both claim against each others and as such the income into both households may be balanced out, or for you both agree to close your cases (both would need to contact the CSA to request the case they are PWC on and ask for closure) and if it was considered appropriate between you both a private agreement can be made for the higher earner to pay the other party an agreed amount.

    I believe that under CS3 cases will be closed if there is 50/50 shared care – I cannot say this for certainty as I have not had my CS3 training yet, it may be that this is a current proposal not yet in force. Perhaps there is someone on the forum who is up to speed with the CS3 legislation who can clarify this

  • >