Categories
CSA Complaints

Why isn’t the CSA supportive to Fathers who are suffering too due to their partners greed?

22 March 2013 by Marian Dineen

My Brothers partner ran off to Spain with their two children seven years ago; she gave no reason – my brother found out that she was in debt, left him in debt as she didn’t pay the bills, and ran up bills on credit cards pretending she was married to him and used his surname. It took a lot of stress and money borrowed from family members to gett he children back in the country and to stay here! She ran off with someone thinking they had money bit he hasn’t.

She contacted the CSA wanting money from him even though she knew the situation she left him in and he has always said he would never pay them but what the children needed to let him know or give him the receipts and he will reimburse her thst way but she wouldn’t.

The CSA have been continually ringing and harrassing my brother for money and threatening legal action and some have been very rude! To cap it all, the CSA sent people around to my Brothers place of work last Friday and demanded £1000 from the wage department and were again outright rude; they said they will be back for more….now my brother won’t have anything to live off and to pay his bills etc – he is struggling as it is….The CSA don’t give a damn about a person’s situation – it is no wonder that people commit suicide because of them and women being so greedy like her! It went through the Courts in a Court order that she is supposed to bring the children half way for him to collect them every second weekend but she doesn’t even stick to the rules of the children visiting every second weekend.

Why is it that Fathers don’t have any rights or anyone to back them in these situations??

Is there anything he can do please? I am worried for him….

75 thoughts on “Why isn’t the CSA supportive to Fathers who are suffering too due to their partners greed?”

  1. If you brother’s ex has made an application to the CSA for child support your brother is not legally allowed to refuse to pay what he has been assessed. If he has refused to pay and is in arrears the agency can impose a Deduction of Earnings Order so that his child support payments (regular maintenance and arrears) are deducted direct from his salary and paid to the agency by his employer. If his employer has received a DEO and have not implemented it then they are breaking the law and they can be prosecuted. A DEO can be imposed for a max of 40% of a person’s net income.

    With regards to the credit cards his ex partner took out using his name I would expect this to be considered as fraud on her part and as such the matter should have been, or should be reported to the police.

    If there is a court order in place with regards to access and his ex is not complying with the terms of the court order then this would need to be referred back to the court as she is in breach of the order.

  2. With regards to the credit cards his ex partner took out using his name I would expect this to be considered as fraud on her part and as such the matter should have been, or should be reported to the police.

    So Alice when fraud is committed do the CSA have a duty to report it???

    Go On Answer Please……………………………………………………………………………….

  3. Stuart – the CSA cannot report alleged fraud on credit cards, CHB, JSA or tax evasion – apart from the fact that this is not within their remit, which is, as the name suggests to secure financial support for children who have a parent who does not live with them – they would not have the relevant details to pass on to any of the relevant authorities.

  4. But when they discover child maintenance fraud do they not have a duty to report this crime. as a PWC claiming fraudently for a child she is not in reciept of CHB for and does not live with them. Are they obliged to not report this to both NRP and Police. or do they just ignore the crime?

  5. An nrp would be informed that the csa case was to be closed or a child removed from the claim, if they then wished to take the matter further and take action against the PWC then they are at liberty to do so.

  6. Quote Alice

    With regards to the credit cards his ex partner took out using his name I would expect this to be considered as fraud on her part and as such the matter should have been, or should be reported to the police.

    But Fraud by a PWC claiming and CSA collecting from a NRP when they should not have done so. Is not considered so by the CSA? They just stop the collection but have no duty to report the crime or inform NRP what has happened, Is that not a bit unfair and slightly illegal for the CSA to do this? Surely the CSA should report what has happened to the NRP to give him the opportunity to report to the Police?

    So in your and CSA eyes one is fraud the other is not? Love you to expand on that please.

  7. If the NRP has reported that the child’s circumstances are such that the PWC should not be claiming CHB for them the CSA will inform the NRP that they will check if CHB is still in payment, if it is they will advise the NRP that they should contact CHB office and report possible fraud on the case, the agency will re-check at a later date and if it is seen that CHB has since ceased the child will be removed from the case accordingly and will advise the NRP that the child has been removed, the date that they have been removed from and that this action has been taken due to CHB no longer being in payment for the child. The agency cannot confirm if CHB has been ceased due to fraud as they do not get to see the reason why the claim has stopped.

  8. Not really answering this Alice.

    When after discovering that fraud has been committed, do the CSA have no duty to inform the NRP that this is the case? or do they just remove the child from the calculatuion and keep quiet?

    This is not about CHB it is about a PWC claiming fraudently for a child and the CSA taking Payment from an NRP. On discovering this the CSA do what? should they inform the NRP of this fraud as it will have caused loss?

    The CSA as is their role should be checking the pWC is entitled to the money should they not? and then on discovering they are not should inform the NRP of the fraud offence. As like the credit card fraud it is obtaining money by deception, and failure to report by the CSA is in fact covering up this criminal act.

    Do you agree or is it different for the CSA?

  9. So just to make it crystal clear to avoid any confusion you may have,

    A PWC claims via the CSA for 2 years for a child she is not in reciept of CHB for and does not live with the PWC.

    The CSA does not check at anytime and removes the money via DEO from the NRP.

    On realising their error, Do the CSA not have a duty to inform either the NRP or Police of the fraud committed by the PWC?

    Love the answer from Alice on this as is obtaining money by deception just like the credit card fraud where she would expect the Police to be informed.

    Just to be clear the NRP was unaware of the fraud going on and was just forced to pay. No proof No evidence just CSA believed PWC was being honest.

  10. I do enjoy your posts stuart, respectful whilst not allowing for corrupt, oily replies.

    Fraud in any other department, is investigated. The only two areas it is not is within the CSA and MP’s expenses.

    I hope the OP is compensated with interest. The PWC involved deserves all the lessons coming to her.

  11. It is beyond belief the double standards and lack of an honest response from this department.

    Thanks Carol I try to be fair in all I do and that is why I find these people so alarming and frustrating.

  12. The CSA take on changes to cases as and when they are notified of the – it is the legal duty of the clients to report changes of circumstances to the agency, not the duty of the agency to monitor cases. If an NRP contacts the agency to advise that a QC is no longer in education or living with the PWC etc then the agency will inform the NRP that they will investigate the issue, and report back to the NRP on their findings – this could be informing the NRP that the PWC has confirmed that the child still lives with them or no longer lives with them, or that they have confirmed that CHB is or is not still in payment. If it is ascertained that CHB is still in payment but the NRP believes that this should not be then the CSA will inform the NRP that they should contact the CHB fraud dept with the information and ask for the claim to be investigated.

    If a child is removed from a case after the CSA the NRP will be informed of the date the child was removed and the reason why. Any payments made in respect of Child Maintenance for that child after the date the child was removed from the case will be refunded on the account and reimbursed to the NRP if appropriate.

    So in short – yes the CSA will inform the NRP why a child was removed

  13. But not inform fraud was committed or inform the Police?

    Simple answer to a simple question Please.

  14. It is not the duty of the agency to monitor cases……………WTF!!!!

    Great news for all involved in this corrupt pile, No wonder it is such a cock up.

  15. it is the NRP’s choice as to whether they wish to take action against the PWC.

    As previously stated the clients – ie NRP and PWC are obliged to report all changes of circumstances to the agency, if the agency are not informed of any changes they will not re-assess cases.

  16. Again not answering Alice you are laughable, How can an NRP do that if the agency do not inform that fraud was committed.

    2 Threads on the go and you fail to grasp or answetr the question.

    Let the forum decide if your input adds any value. I for one know now that you are incapable of answering valid simple questions without a handbook.

    CSA and you are a perfect match You feel one offence should have the Police notified but when the CSA are party to the fraud you do not.

    You have said all you need to now.

    Thanks for nothing as usual.

    Laughable and credibility smashed to pieces by your responses.

  17. I really do not know what you expect me to say Stuart. The agency will take action to remove a child from a case when they no longer meet the criteria, they will inform the NRP of the date the child no longer met the criteria and the reason why the child no longer met the criteria. The bottom line is it would be the NRP who was being defrauded by the PWC and as such any action should be taken against the PWC would need to be done by the NRP

  18. So, therefore if fraud is being committed it is not criminal? What?

    Dishonestly obtaining money i.e. Theft, by using fraud or other means, should not be in the remit of the CSA or civil courts. It IS a criminal offence! Theft act 1968!

    Ironically appropriate, that if the CSA obtain an nrp’s money, it’s a case for a tribunal as it may be a civil debt, (it’s theft by any other means).

    The CSA have been given a ‘get out of jail free card’, via the statute books, and who makes the statutes, theiveing politicians!

    Enough said!

  19. Alice

    it is clear what the answer is but you will not admit it. The CSA will not report the fraud committed by a PWC against an NRP. and also will not inform the police of the fraud will they Alice. Do not know why you find it so difficult.

  20. and as I have repeatedly stated the issue is between the NRP and the PWC – it is not the CSA’s place to report the matter, this is the decision of the NRP as they would be the one who was defrauded

  22. You would expect credit card fraud reported to the police but not Child maintenance fraud that is interesting, as the CSA collected the money.

  23. if the person against whom the fraud had been committed wanted to report the fraud to the relevant authority that is there choice – whether it be credit card fraud, identify theft or whatever – as I have stated many times this would be the NRP’s decision.

  24. If a NRP fails to report a change of circumstance or provides incorrect or misleading information then they can expect a fine up to £1000.

    If PWC makes a claim fraudently against a NRP, the CSA will cover it up and not report it. They will not even tell the NRP this has happened.

    Alice it would appear has the right answer for everything,, Good Old Alice.

    And it is the NRP’s fault for not knowing.

  25. So the CSA do not have to inform the NRP of the crime committed against him.

    And still a yes or No is not forthcoming from Alice???????

  26. Anyone reading this please note that Alice can not answer any question that makes the CSA look bad, hence the amount of time it takes to answer these very simple questions, No wonder her career is where it is at the CSA, Was you always like this or is it trained out?

    Simple question…..Simple Answers…..But No. Lets avoid the issue and spout what the book says.

  28. If you read back to what I have already posted early on in the thread the agency would not be in a position to inform anyone of any confirmed fraud – if we are referring to the CHB issue I have already stated that the agency are not privvy to the reason why CHB is ceased, all the agency can see is whether the claim is live and in payment or if not the date it was ceased.

  29. Ok Alice have explained the scenario crystal clear, Fraud was committed the CSA are aware and choose not to inform the NRP of this fraud. and take no action yet would fine a NRP for less.

    You have a problem answering this I can tell.

    Google not giving the answer and you can not understand the moral question. It is clear from your answers that NO the CSA will not inform of the Fraud.

    Bit bad really that.

    Ok nothing more to say is there, you have proved plenty today.

  30. Alice has now returned to not answering this simple question as my answer says it all.

    Disgusting really.

  31. How do you conclude that the CSA are aware that any fraud has been committed? Do you not understand the fact that although the agency will be able to confirm that CHB has ceased for a particular child they do not see the reason it has ceased? Without seeing the reason a claim has been ceased how would the agency be able to confirm it was down to fraud?

  32. Because as I have explained they were challenged as to why a NRP was paying for 2 years for a child that no longer lived with the PWC.

    They checked and discovered that the PWC was indeed claiming fraudently.

    Then told said NRP that it was an error No mention of fraud, they covered it up.

    Then 2 years later the NRP discovers the actual reason..

  33. Please try and understand Alice it is so so simple yet you fail to grasp every time.

    So therby the CSA knew it was fraud and did not inform the NRP just removed the child from the case.

    Double standards is it not.

  34. stuart on March 24th, 2013 12:56 pm

    So just to make it crystal clear to avoid any confusion you may have,

    A PWC claims via the CSA for 2 years for a child she is not in reciept of CHB for and does not live with the PWC.

    The CSA does not check at anytime and removes the money via DEO from the NRP.

    On realising their error, Do the CSA not have a duty to inform either the NRP or Police of the fraud committed by the PWC?

    Love the answer from Alice on this as is obtaining money by deception just like the credit card fraud where she would expect the Police to be informed.

    Just to be clear the NRP was unaware of the fraud going on and was just forced to pay. No proof No evidence just CSA believed PWC was being honest.

    This was some 6 hours ago Alice why oh why did you not get it then??????

  36. How do you conclude that the CSA are aware that any fraud has been committed?

    Because Alice they admitted it too………………………so now do you not feel the police should have been informed and the NRP too………………………or is it ok for the CSA to do this??????????. bearing in mind you believe that the police should be called if it was a different fraud?…………………….

    Well Alice????? oh dear oh dear.

  37. The CSA will not report the fraud because, lets face it, it serves them rather nicely doesnt it?

    All them targets being met, keeps the government happy, interest on the money taken, claw that working tax credit back….yes, why let a little detail of the ‘child’ not actually living with PWC or being eligble for child benefit, get in the way of business?

    But if you as an NRP were doing extra overtime without telling them, just to pay for lifes essentials…..different story it would be.

  38. So just to recap on a very interesting day,

    If a credit card fraud takes place then Alice would consider this fraud and that it is reported to the police.

    Yet if the CSA discover a PWC has claimed fraudently for 2 years as she was not in reciept of Child benefit and the child did not live with her, The PWC had failed to inform the CSA of a change of circumstances.

    Then this is ok for the CSA to ignore this and not fine her the £1000 they threaten NRP’s with. Its ok not to tell the Police and its ok not to tell the NRP who has suffered a major financial loss. It is Ok for the CSA to ignore this fraud.

    Maybe Alice will come back and explain as I can imagine it will be hard to understand for many of us how this can be.

    I imagine it will be because it’s not their job or they did not know.

    But they have admitted they did know Alice and all the above is true,

    Thanks for today Alice it has revealed so much about you.

  39. OMG…STUART
    MY MAN,MY MAN
    Mate…you mirror my feelings and views on this woman Alice 100 % You absolutely will never get a simple answer out of her.she just spouts CSA rules and regs and legislation.
    It’s very convenient as usual Alice where it’s not the CSA’s duty or obligation to investigate poss benefit fraud despite it being part of the Dwp…Stuart has you Sussed as I do.you don’t really help anyone just remind them of the law.you never answer simple questions with a simple answer.
    In short…you work for the CSA…you look in on here to get an idea on how badly the CSA is Performing and probably feedback to your peers. You are told by your peers not to in anyway undermine or suggest the CSA is useless or or even any good at its job. You are told to not answer a direct question with a direct and honest answer if it at all might implicate the CSA, you may answer it with another question or remind the person asking the question about legislation.
    Now I for one would never ask for your help since reading a lot of your replies to questions on here.also I genuinely would like you to show me genuine helpful and positive outcomes to any posters requesting your help.Trully,I will take back all I said.
    I think you are just a CSA mole…lol
    Gonk

  40. carol on March 24th, 2013 11:01 pm
    The CSA will not report the fraud because, lets face it, it serves them rather nicely doesnt it?
    All them targets being met, keeps the government happy, interest on the money taken, claw that working tax credit back….yes, why let a little detail of the ‘child’ not actually living with PWC or being eligble for child benefit, get in the way of business?
    But if you as an NRP were doing extra overtime without telling them, just to pay for lifes essentials…..different story it would be.

    CAROL…SO TRUE…SO BLOODY TRUE
    Gonk

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *