Those who pay are the ones who suffer the most

August 31, 2010

So the ones who are paying and have been paying for years are discriminated against, because the CSA doesn’t bother pursuing the ones who have never paid or are deemed as uncollectable.

This matter should be put before the supreme court, as it is blatant discrimination. Feckless fathers being allowed to get away with, having arrears written off while the ones who pay and want to pay are being hounded and targetted repeatedly.

CSA shouild be disbanded now and forced to repay all the monies back to those who have paid (and have all ready paid into the tax system that pays benefits any way). How can it be that somebody is allowed not to pay and others are paying. Discrimination!


  • Jayne Bushell says:

    Well said…

  • Vikki Marland says:

    I agree! Chase the t**ts that give up their jobs as soon as csa are onto them, become self employed & make £500+ on eBay selling their own 10 blackberrys a week!

  • Shaban Afzal says:

    I've actually ended up paying more because my ex wife lied to them and said i keep my daughter only 8 nights per month when in reality i keep her 16-20 days per month. When i took her to a tribunal hearing the judge was shocked to learn that i had all the proof how long my daughter stayed with me and she didn't get any increase in payments. Now i just realised i've overpayed my arrears by about 6 months so i'm going to calculate and pay accordingly, if you ring the bastards your on hold for ages until they have consulted their manager or team leader and your just provoking them and giving them an excuse to either take more or screw you around, the best solution is take matters in your own hands and deal with it.

  • Darren 'Scuzzer' Lightfoot says:

    Yea I no how you feel my dx as 2 kids only one is mine but she told csa that both was mine

  • Melanie Jones says:

    I have heard it's being disbanded next year, any truth to this??? I hope so…

  • Darren 'Scuzzer' Lightfoot says:

    yea right they are not right in the head

  • Jason Wallace says:

    @Melanie All civil servants are going to have to take a cold hard look at their roles and ask what value they provide. The salaries of civil servants have to come from somewhere, either taxation or from borrowing. Period. There IS no other way of paying them. As a nation we are borrowed out and we need to repay some or all of that money so that leaves taxation.If you then look at the cost of employing someone, and believe me I have employed people then the cost is close on double their salary once you take into account pension, NI and other employment costs so if we look at a relatively modest £20,000 salary for a civil servant then we are looking at an employment cost of £35,000 plus. Add to that the bizarre situation that of course we have to take tax off that person which involves even more civil servants and the cost of employment of a civil servant is greater than that of someone i'n the private sector. At least it is to the ultimate employer – you and I who are the tax payers.Now consider that person earning £20,000. They could very well also be receiving some State benefits because their employer does not pay them enough to support their family. Again, more civil servants. Again adding to the cost of employment.Now if I look at what I make, working a 70 hour week and the amount of tax that I pay then ALL of my tax is going to pay about a third of one person's cost of employment. That means that two of my colleagues are paying for that person's salary etc.To the CSA – well every time they call we have a 90 minute conversation during which we discuss the fact that they have failed to collect on 40% of the time, that they now collect less than I was paying beforehand – and they can only collect this amount by my ex preventing me from seeing the kids and thus benefitting from the absurd 52 night rule. Every time I ask them to identify one single piece of value add that they offer and they cannot. In business this would be the test.Now, i'n the UK we have a Government agency who have hundreds of years experience collecting money and on the whole they do it professionally, with integrity, efficiently and courteously – this agency being called Inland Revenue. Why we need the CSA to whom we have to prove our earnings and who patently do not understand the tax system when this all known to the Inland Revenue defeats me. Why we cannot simply have an additional tax for NRPs I cannot understand.

  • Karen Bedford says:

    I totally agree that they go after the easy targets – isnt that just like anything/everything in life?!

    Shame that people who want to support their children suffer for the ones who dont.

  • Gill Baxter says:

    Turn it over to whoever is responsible for collecting tv licence fee's u'd get into more trouble for not paying that than u do for not paying for ur child!! And they have more success!

  • Neil Richards says:

    It is being revamped over the next 3yrs. And its a damn sight worse. Maintanace taken on gross pay. Only thing they let u have is cost towards a pension,and thats capped at a limit which they havent said wot that is.

  • Phil Lee says:

    Robbing thieving civil servants using whatever mickey mouse rules to invade privacy, screw peoples lives up under the guise of acting in the childs best interests… it should be shut down and those in charge facing manslaughter charges for the 60+ men who've died as a result of the overwhelming stress these leaches placed upon them.. it will get worse sadly. Pleeeeese don't give me the absent father bullshit either – dads have toapply for rights, mothers do not, absent fathers have to beg for school reports/photos of their child despite it being a right, the list is so one sided wake up peeps YOUR SONS could be next.. then and only then will you realise how one sided this whole bag of garbage is. The solution is community courts, agreements under oath and sensible amounts requested. I have no time for fathers who don't father – it isn't just about £. sadly too many women see the CSA as just another "right" to free money irrespective of need or the damage it may cause – sadly – it is a right.

  • Troy Love says:

    I am seeing two different sets of people suffering here. The few that are paying and the many who aren't receiving anything at all. This is why the few suffer to make up for the ones that aren't. Shaban do you have any advice.

  • Maxine Knowles says:

    Absolutely Troy, there are mothers and fathers who are all victims of this system which simply does not work.

  • >