Why don’t the csa look at ‘household income’ like the DWP do??

June 26, 2013

If they took this into account for BOTH the NRP AND the PWC, then everything would be so much fairer wouldn’t it??

Balance the payments that the NRP should pay – looking at their own outgoings BEFORE making any assessments for child maintenance, against the amount the PWC has to live on!!

For example the NRP has £1000 a month of utility bills/mortgage or rent/council tax (essentials to live on yeah??!!) allow a ‘standard’ amount for food/petrol to work/or public transport, say £500 a month for this example. However the NRP only earns £1800 a month – take home pay. Therefore the NRP has £300 a month left. Ignoring debts (as that’s too complex to get the CSA to try and assess).

Why can’t CSA do an assessment on the remaining amount the NRP has left????

Bear in mind the CSA should add into the equation the amount the PWC earns!! That’s fair isn’t it???? If the PWC is earning min wage, or not working because the PWC is at home with the kids then the PWC’s income is disregarded. However if the PWC is bringing home £5000 a month and the PWC’s bills (inc all essential bills/food/fuel etc.)  Then in that case the NRP should pay less!!

That IS much fairer!! It can’t be that difficult to do…the CSA already have access to DWP, HMRC records so they have all the relevant information.

Comments please………….


  • Mark says:

    That’s too simple!
    I had the choice of pay the CSA, or be homeless. The CSA said that paying them is more important than paying rent and bills.
    So I ended up not paying them as I prefer to sleep with a roof over my head than be homeless!
    They are now threatening bailiffs due to unpaid monies owed.
    They are a joke! No wonder fathers commit suicide because of them!

  • John says:

    They are not interested in both households income, because they want to demonise and criminalise the non resident parent, and bleed them dry of any money, in order to fill up the government coiffeurs, to pay for CSA staff bonuses and their gold plated pensions.

    It’s not about the children, it’s about ultimate power in impoverishing the non resident parent. To treat them as pariahs in society.

    What comes around…..goes around and they will eventually be brought to book.

    Keep all documentation as evidence when we all sue them!

  • Bonnie says:

    I recently posted a response on a post about Overtime that fits in well with this post :

    This is not an equal system. The taxpayer STILL pays for the majority (not all) of PWC who get Income support , council tax and housing benefit, child benefit, child tax credit and/or working tax credit PLUS CSA payments (that’s all not including their WAGES on top)
    On CSA 1 both parents are meant to contribute to THEIR child, in my case I had to contribute to another person’s child as the CSA wanted my wage details and used household income. They then increased the payment to PWC and said as she got tax credits that her income was ‘NON ASSESSABLE’. How is that two people paying for their own child? Why cant they use her wages too? They were topped up with tax credits to make up for a partner not being there. This is the NRP and the NRPP paying as well as the tax payer , so we are all paying twice over if CSA is involved. My child was awarded an allowance of £33 a week living in our home, the non resident child was given £137 a week, they used overtime /holiday pay (paid weekly) and calculated a fictious wage that they would not recalculate. Is my child less of a priority than the non resident child? Does my child cost less to feed and clothe? Should I pay for my child AND another woman’s child and should the tax payer ALSO then contribute to that child? The PWC was not expected to contribute and yet got all the benefits for the child as well. I am all for paying for your children , but a reasonable amount , fair to all parties. Where tax credits are given to NRP they are required to give a slice to the PWC for a child that is already getting THEIR own tax credits. However if the PWC gets tax credits they are classed as being on benefits and therefore get to keep all of their allowance plus that of the NRP’s children in the home whether that be CTC or on CSA1 child benefit.
    CSA1 they get out of contributing to THEIR own child as they are on benefits. Thats a crazy rule. When it suits the CSA tax credits are benefits when its the PWC receiving them and when the NRP gets them its an income to be used in the maintenance calculation. NEW FAMILIES don’t have a chance and equality is all we ask!

  • Lisa says:

    Believe it or not if you complain enough they will take household expenses into account, join our facebook group child support agency ripoffs or http://www.csa-ripoffs.co.uk, we can give advice and support for all,

  • Jack says:

    CSA told me over the phone today that the amounts they take from your money is designed to give you the bear minimum, basically as an NRP you are allowed to exist.

  • andy says:

    The hell are we allowed to “exist”. After all my bills, mortgage, CSA etc, I am left with £50 a week to live on, and my petrol has to come out of that £50 as well.
    I don’t have Sky, don’t have any credit cards or loans (at the moment), have a pay as you go phone which very rarely has credit on it, got neighbours that are kind enough to let me use their home phone and internet when i need to, have an old banger for a car (which is on it’s last legs and almost beyond repair, and I cannot afford to get another car). I would seriously be better off quitting work at the moment. Got my car tax, insurance and mot due soon, and I cannot afford any of them, so i may not have any choice but to give up my car, which means giving up my job, which means i can’t pay my bills, and can’t pay cs-bloody-a. So, that means the people who they are acting on behalf of are actually the ones that will lose out, and I will, inevitably at some point, be homeless and penniless, and another statistic.

    Thank you CSA, thank you British government, and thank you my greedy bitch of an ex wife.

  • gonk says:

    your system as you put it is way to simple for the csa to un derstand and certainly would not work for them because it would mean them having to play fair and that just goes against the csa grain

  • brett says:

    Being fair is not in the CSA remit. Its just take take take from the NRP.

  • Mrs Beckham 2 says:

    thanks guys for all comments, and I totally agree.
    it’s so unfair that in MOST cases the PWC has more in their hand each month BEFORE even any CSA payments!!
    Basically none of the ££ that my partner paid has gone on the kids….back when he was allowed to have them, not overnight obv as it reduces her money, he paid for her, her new bf and his kids (bf was 14 yrs younger no kids) to go on holiday abroad ffs, the kids used to come with sh#tty old clothes to us and shoes that hurt so he would feel obliged to fork out for shoes/clothes poor kids, and she did that delib so she could get him to pay out more!
    He hasn’t seen them for 3 yrs now as she poisoned them against him (he wasn’t working as he had accident and we were both on benefits as I was off too with long term)
    so he like other NRP’s has suffered from parental alienation and even though kids are 3 yrs older now (oldest is 12 nearly youngest is 9) they still don’t want to see him!
    She should be in jail…….for child abuse……as parental alienation is emotional child abuse. Yet she’s happy to get his cash she wants him out of the kids lives!!

  • Shaun says:

    I created a petition about this yesterday, I totally agree and the more signitures on this petition, the more chance we will be heard.

    Please pass the word round about this petition and have as many people as you can sign it.

    Admin, would it be possible for a link to this petition be put on the front page please?



  • >