One child is £100 a month worse off than the other because of the CSA’s mistake

October 25, 2013

Since the birth of my second child 6 years ago, I have consistently paid (proven to the CSA) a minimum of 10% each to both mothers, which has never been challenged by either mother. In March of this year the CSA got involved. After a 4 month battle with the CSA to understand how they do their calculations, I now apparently owe £2300 (accrued over 6 years) in arrears for the first child, as I should still have been paying 15% consistently for child 1.

Their only justification is that nobody, including both mothers informed them of child 2. The CSA acknowledge I have complied with the terms they would have directed me to pay at the birth of child 2, but say they are within legal legislation to claim this. What I really struggle with is now me & child 2 is worse off than child 1, to the tune of £100 a month – how is that a fair outcome for anyone? When I have paid everything due already once? Thank you.

Comments

  • Adrian says:

    You say the csa got involved march this year ?? Now they can only apply arrears from the date of application from the pwc. So what I’m saying is how can they backdate 6 years worth of arrears ?? Sorry I may have read it wrong and just jumping to conclusions but seems to me that they trying to justify charging you arrears when they really shouldn’t

  • >