NRPs have no recourse with the Child Support Agency

March 27, 2011

Why has the NRP got no recourse with the CSA, I have paid my ex maintenance every month – I have doubts it goes on the kids though! How many people on benefits can run mini cooper S’s with all the extras and have designer clothes, iphone 4 etc. Thats my issue with it all.

My ex decided she would go through the CSA to be difficult. I have to fight to see my kids as if I had them extra nights it would reduce her payments. I would love to have my kids live with me full time, but I’m only the father, what rights do I have!!!

I work an my new partner – not British (not lazy or out to get what they want) stays at home to look after our son, she has already said she would happy look after them also as she is agrieved that I have to shell out money to a benefit scrounger with no intention of working.

The NRP is simply seen as a bank account for the RP.

Fathers should have more legal rights, in fact they should have equal rights but no in the UK its mothers all the way….

Comments

3 Responses to “NRPs have no recourse with the Child Support Agency”

  1. Daisy on March 28th, 2011 11:49 am

    Fathers have equal rights to their children. The issue appears not to be your lack of rights but your apparent resentment to the mother of your children. The legal system is a useful tool to gain more contact with your children or indeed residency if that is the course of action you wish to take, although courts rarely remove children from mothers unless there are extraneous circumstances. You dont need a solicitor and can represent yourself for free, if you make an order the crb will offer free advice and guidance on such matters and courts are lenient on etiquette etc for individuals who represent themselves.

    Your evident animosity towards the mother of your children, although maybe valid one cant comment as 2 sides to every story etc, is not the right attitude to display to your children.

    Children have the right to formulate a bond and a relationship with both parents regardless of the situation. CSA payments should not be used for the sole gain of the resident parent however the non-resident parent should not refuse to contribute financially purely because they suspect the money is not being used to directly benefit the child.

    Oh and before anyone makes any comment about the lack of rights a father has etc here’s a short insight: I got married young at 18 and had a child at 19. The relationship was extremely violent ending with a fractured skull and a prolonged stay in hospital (although he did serve time for this) Add to this the revelation that the person in question had sexually abused my child. Despite these revelations the legal system supported his application for contact to my child. Given this I find it difficult to accept that fathers have no rights!

    All cases are individual. What is important here is how your children see you as a father. There will always be animosity between resident and non resident parents no break-up is amicable. Perhaps it is better to look at it not from whether YOU have rights or the MOTHER has rights but that the CHILDREN have rights. I dont believe you should not be frustrated or annoyed etc but I believe in these situations people loose focus on what is important.

    This is not about winning or loosing. This is about children who never asked to be brought into the world. Who have the right to be emotionally, physically and financially supported by both parents.

    Oh a further point to note – I do not claim any money from my ex either from a personal arrangement or through the CSA. I support my child alone working full time whilst completing my masters. Although I have to admit even with a decent career I am unable to afford a cooper s!

  2. John on March 30th, 2011 1:21 pm

    This is exactly why this shambles has to be shut down. It is breaching NRP’s Human rights and Civil liberties.

    These idiots are out of control, answerable to nobody and continually acting outside the rule or enactment of law that they are entitled to use!

    In essence they are mercenaries of the British Government!

  3. Dzon on April 4th, 2011 4:56 pm

    @ Daisy,

    You seem to be agreeing with me most of the time.

    My animosity generates from the situation I find myself in now details of what happened in the past are not for this forum.

    I don’t like the fact I can be held to ransom over access to my children, and the fact that the CSA ignore all I have to say. It is purely HOW MUCH do you make? Everything else is irrelavent and as seen as a father purely looking to wriggle out of paying.

    All I want is to see my children without the usual fight with their mother. She restricts access as this alters how much she can get through the CSA. She is adament my new partner should go out and get a job, even though we have an 18 month old. WHY? Because should my partner be working then it would mean she would be entitled to more money – I need some explanation as to where the fairness in this is as it is irrelevant what income her partner would have!?!?

    It isn’t about winning or losing. Its about seeing my kids without a constant fight. OK, fathers seem to have some rights but these seem to be secondary, extremely limited and a bit of an add on. The kids to my ex are a bargaining tool to generate more income from me. This shouldnt be the case.

    There are fundamental flaws in the setup at the moment. Kids should be first, not money!!!

    To the CSA, chase fathers/mothers who do not pay and not them that pay! Greedy ex’s who just want more all the time should be sent packing.They cause the issues with the NRP by wanting wanting wanting…. slagging off the NRP to the kids that they aren’t paying enough…

    I admire you and only wish my ex would have the get up and go to further her life. I am more than happy to pay towards my children and their futures – but this money shouldn’t be used to substain her lifestyle. She dropped a figure of 16K a year to live off once, then quickly realised her mistake. Bear in mind that is 16k after her rent and council tax is paid.

Got something to say?