What happens if my ex chooses to lie?

October 17, 2014

I desperately need some help with this situation. My CSA case is (almost) closed. There is apparently a £1000 ‘suspended debt’ from Oct 2006 to Jan 2008.

I paid my ex directly £200 each month. This amount was £120 less than the amount due (by mutual agreement) because of an £1800 over-payment a year earlier. These payments continued for 15 months, at which point the debt was clear.

The CSA wrote to me in Jan 2008 saying “Your last payment of regular maintenance to us for will be detailed in the collection schedule will will be sent separately. This means that you will have paid your maintenance liability up to and including 17-01-2008″.

I have sent a copy of this letter, plus the relevant records of debit from my account, which correspond to the cheques paid directly to my ex. (Bank records aren’t available that far back) I also sent a table of payments made; this has the statement “15 deductions of £120 (inc 3 on 17/3/07 in £600 chq) = £1800.00 : overpaid now clear” written and initialed by my ex on 15/3/2008.

From a conversation with the CSA case officer, it seems that in spite of this evidence, all my ex has to do is to deny receiving the money, whereupon the CSA will draw up a payment schedule for me to pay this £1000 (AGAIN!).

What can I do?

Can I force my ex to produce her bank statements for the dates in question, to show her corresponding account credits?

Doesn’t the letter from the CSA in 2008 mean that I was fully paid up?

Doesn’t her initialed statement on the payment table have any evidential value?


  • Bill says:

    They can only ask for arrears from the times when you were paying via them.
    If the PWC claims you have underpaid during the time they had you down as paying directly they can not take any action.
    Are you sure that all parties were aware you were paying directly and not through them?
    Sounds as though the suspended debt comes from a period when you were paying through the CSA prior to your direct payments.
    They cannot take into account anything paid directly unless the PWC states all arrears a fully paid. If the PWC does not do this they are obliged to take her word for it unless you can provide definitive proof to the contrary.

  • Bill888 says:

    Thanks! – I was paying cheques directly to her agreed amount of £320/mth, but reduce by £120/mth (as mutually agreed) for 15 months, to reduce an over-payment I had made. The CSA sent me a table of weekly payments which is very hard to understand, because they used a flat rate all the way through, in spite of me paying the ex directly. Right at the end of the table (Jan 2008) the balance shows £5781 DR (arrears?) and a £4800 CR adjustment. I have no idea where they get these figures from, unless the ex told them I’d paid 2 years of £200/mth or something. Anyway the difference is £981 and that’s probably this ‘suspended debt’. But my record of all the payments made to the ex shows – in her writing – “17/03/07 to 11/3/08 15 deductions of £120 (inc 3 on 17/3/07 in £600 chq) = £1800, therefore overpaid now clear” followed by her initials and date. 15/3/08, 2 months after the apparent suspended debt became due.
    If it’s genuinely due, then I’ll pay, but as ML from the CSA kindly pointed out (four times I think). It makes no difference that those cheques were debited from my account, or that the ex signed (initialled) the record of payments (this record is titled ‘Accrual of arrears since start of claim’). If she chooses to say that they weren’t for maintenance, then I’ll have to pay again. I feel utterly powerless. The question is, are her initials on the document enough? Surely there’s enough evidence..?
    Thanks again – there are others on both sides in far worse situations than mine so I can at least be grateful for that.

  • >