Child Support Agency Question

A very big difference. You stated that she has an obligation to pay his ex wife. Thats incorrect. And The partners income makes very little difference to an assesment. Depends on number of kids in household. His housing costs and income

I would advise the op not to be taking advice from message boards as most people havent the proper knowledge of this subject to give the correct information.

To the OP. Add me to msn if you want and ill help as much as I can.

Msn: [email protected]
 
So, you are telling us that the CSA will not calculate his total household income (including his patners income) and outgoings and assess him on that? But that they will assess only his income and his outgoings and assess him thus? If that were the case why would they even need to know if his current partner can contribute towards household expenses?
I'm not pretending to have a huge knowledge of this, but I can imagine no other reason for the CSA wanting to know his partners income. In any event honesty is the safest, though perhaps not cheapest, approach.
 
area51_for_psx said:
Im sorry to tell you but that is incorrect information. The CSa only want his partners income so we can check and see if she can contribute to household bills. That is all her income is used for she has no obligation to pay his ex wife anything.
Click to expand...
I think that is sophistry. He will be required to pay more to his ex-wife. The extra amount will be determined on the basis of his current partner's income. His current partner will be expected to make the extra up from her own income. The extra money to be paid to his ex-wife is coming from his current partner's income. So she is paying the extra money to his ex-wife, extra money which is determined by her (his current partner) income, not his income.

You are technically correct, but only if you ignore how the payments are calculated and which person's income the payments come from.
 
Well seeing as I've been through this for the past 10 years, court cases, solicitors fees, etc, etc, I can tell you some 100% facts rather than some of the speculations:

1) You DO have an obligation to provide this information. You do NOT have a legal obligation, but if you don't, they will do their own calculations which I can guarantee will be OVER what your wife actually gets! They call this an interim calculation, and again I can assure you that you can argue till the cows come home, if they perform this calculation, trying to adjust it fairly and accordingly will probably NEVER happen.

2) They will perform these calculations on your partners Tax and NI contributions. So if, for example, you new partner earns £20k a year, yet has a mortgage, credit card debts, or basically her outgoings are high then quite simply - tough!! They will calculate things on what she EARNS and not what her expenses are - MASSIVE difference!!!!

3) People have mentioned that your new partner doesn't pay towards your child, this is true in terms of money, but I don't wish to sound harsh, but unless you have a strong relationship, you new partner will probably pay emotionally - it's HARD, it's UNFAIR, it's ****!

4) Same as area51; with respect to everyone helping, try not to listen to advice from people who have had no experience from this. You would seriously not believe some of the stuff that can happen and having been through this for 10 years I've known fellow fathers on the brink (some, God forgive them, have gone too far :( ), relationships torn to shreads and the rift deepened when the CSA get their claws in.

Again, like area51 said, my email is in my profile.
 
God forbid people should be expected to pay money to help bring up the children they fathered/mothered, what is the world coming to?
 
doopydug said:
Lying is not an option - both myself and my partner would like to keep things on the straight and narrow - she just doesnt feel that HER income should be considered when deciding how much I should pay for MY child
Click to expand...

No it should not be ,but it has an effect and there is nothing you or anyone on this forum can do about it ;)
 
SB118 said:
I've corrected that for you.
Click to expand...

and I've quoted the most sensible post in this thread for YOU. oh and it wasn't yours.

area51_for_psx said:
A very big difference. You stated that she has an obligation to pay his ex wife. Thats incorrect. And The partners income makes very little difference to an assesment. Depends on number of kids in household. His housing costs and income

I would advise the op not to be taking advice from message boards as most people havent the proper knowledge of this subject to give the correct information.

To the OP. Add me to msn if you want and ill help as much as I can.

Msn: [email protected]
Click to expand...
 
Having paid for two of my fab kids through the CSA for 5 years my ex agreed to let me pay her directly 2 years ago (she can be a nice lady). The CSA managed to screw it up so many times and mostly to my advantage!! Now I get to pay for my kids rather than surrender the money (it feels very different). My main issue with "The Agency" is that they spoke to me always like someone who would otherwise refuse to pay.
I agree with the sensible answers. Your lovely new partner will not be paying your ex wife. YOUR household expenses will be adjusted. It is in your interest to declare them rather than "force" the CSA to assume. That said if the principle is more important than the small financial difference keep it to yourself, win a few brownie points with the misses and throw them shoulders back!
By the way, the only reason I know any of this is coz I read the leaflets and did the maths......Get your specs on bruv.
 
Haggisman said:
wow.... did you actually read the op? :confused:
Click to expand...


Wow did you actually see my last post quoting the person who actually works for the CSA.

This thread was heading the same way they always do when the CSA is mentioned i.e. the CSA is evil blah blah etc and my point was/is that if you decided to have kids you should pay for their upbringing and not everyone else.

As it happens I agree that the OP shouldn't have to supply details of his current partners income but he should have to pay what he and all other non-resident parents are expected to.
 
Id just put N/A too, it isnt your information to disclose, if they want her private information they have to ask her, wouldnt this be DPA? You cant disclose other peoples private and personal details etc?

If they dont accept the N/A they will no doubt ring or inform you of this and you can sort it out from there?
 
KASM said:
Wow did you actually see my last post quoting the person who actually works for the CSA.

This thread was heading the same way they always do when the CSA is mentioned i.e. the CSA is evil blah blah etc and my point was/is that if you decided to have kids you should pay for their upbringing and not everyone else.

As it happens I agree that the OP shouldn't have to supply details of his current partners income but he should have to pay what he and all other non-resident parents are expected to.
Click to expand...

But the point of this thread was about his partners earnings potentially being used to calculate his liability. She would indirectly be paying for kids she is not related to.
 
KASM said:
Wow did you actually see my last post quoting the person who actually works for the CSA.

This thread was heading the same way they always do when the CSA is mentioned i.e. the CSA is evil blah blah etc and my point was/is that if you decided to have kids you should pay for their upbringing and not everyone else.

As it happens I agree that the OP shouldn't have to supply details of his current partners income but he should have to pay what he and all other non-resident parents are expected to.
Click to expand...

No one here disagrees with you. You appear to be intentionally provoking. Do you know shrek?
 
SB118 said:
How about the OTHER parent pays too?
Click to expand...

You mean the parent the child lives with? who would already be paying for food, clothing, child care etc on a daily basis. I don't think you quite got the idea that its the non-resident parent pays to 'help' bring up the child; they're not expected to pay exclusively.
 
KASM said:
You mean the parent the child lives with? who would already be paying for food, clothing, child care etc on a daily basis. I don't think you quite got the idea that its the non-resident parent pays to 'help' bring up the child; they're not expected to pay exclusively.
Click to expand...

So what about the money you spend on the child when they are actually with you? You pay when the kid is with you, then you pay more when the kid is with your ex? :confused:
 
OT but SB118, whats their thinking in your situation? does your daughter eat in her sleep or something? i cant understand how it costs more to have her for 4 nights than 4 days :confused:
 
^^ They say it's the cost of housing her :confused: My ex is happy though, if she doesn't get it from me, she can get it from income support (or whatever one it is you get to stay home with a brood of kids)
 
This is the key! The CSA is there to off set the cost of income support and not provide for the children. The formula is the same (or was before they changed it). In case of doubt, check out the £50 "carers allowance". A mirror of the personal allowance in income support and "not to be considered in any spouse maintanence agreement".

It is all in the emphasis. I am happy to be free and still raising my kids
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom