Frustrated with the CSA

Garyj881

Garyj881

Garyj881

Associate
Joined
29 Sep 2006
Posts
2,164
Location
West Yorks
In March my place of employment relocated, this meant an extra 200 miles per week working out about £160 + in extra fuel costs.

I was informed I can claim for this as an expense with the CSA under travel to work costs.

The CSA say that the first 150 miles are excluded but any thing over that is typed into a calculator and says how much of a reduction on my payments I will get. I worked it out at 210 miles per week (42 milesper day) which is 60 miles over the 150 exclusion. I rang the CSA as I havent heard from them and they said that I am not entitled to anything, after questioning why they said because I only do 150 miles from A to B. The CSA have worked out my travel as the crow flies :confused: I explained to them that I don't have a helicopter or jet so I drive to work on the motor way.

They are sticking to "as the crow flies" rule and I CAN'T appeal against it.

Yes this is a "I've got a problem, to the internets" post, but would like to hear if anyone hear has experienced anything similar and is it worth me pursuing?

:o
 
The CSA are a complete joke. They obtained a deduction of earnings order because they hadn't heard from me.. I have letters ( and confirmation of receipt ) from August 2010 onwards, all have gone unanswered, all calls ( went through dpa checks ) have gone un-returned, and I'm still waiting for £700 or more that they owe me because they didn't read my letters about the number of nights I have my daughter. So basically they lied ( saying I had gone AWOL ) to get the DEO - when I have confirmation they have received all correspondance relating to payments, agreements etc..

I'm now paying off £500 from a high-interest credit card that I had to get because I had no money left to pay for food/fuel to get to work, and I'm calling them on a weekly basis ( they supposedly have five working days to get back to you - note that they work on Saturdays ).

My suggestion to you... don't deal with them over the phone. Send recorded delivery letters. Each time you need to call them, insist on going through DPA ( eg. can I give you my reference number ) with the operator, even if they're only leaving a message, or nobody there etc.. - this is then logged against your record, so you can prove that you called on such a date and time.

My next step is to see my MP about these issues, is't known as a "Parliamentary intervention" - lets see where we get.

Not much useful info for your specifics, but I hope you don't feel your alone in dealing with these idiots.

Have a look on the net, there are various forums dealing with the CSA, one is known as CSA HELL.
 
OldCoals said:
Why don't parents just sort out maintenance between themselves and cut out the middle man?
Click to expand...

because some women like do involve the CSA out of spite.

often the woman will inolve CSA because her friends dont like the father and they convince her its the best thing :rolleyes:
 
OldCoals said:
Why don't parents just sort out maintenance between themselves and cut out the middle man?
Click to expand...

Actually, to be fair, the CSA often involve themselves where no involvement is wanted by either parent. I have a great relationship with both my daughter and my daughter's mom - we always have had private financial arrangements.

It doesn't stop the CSA trying to get involved every couple of years and every time they do they're a royal pain in the ass to get rid of.

I understand the need to tackle absent parents, but I suspect this set up may actually be responsible for some absent parents, rather than a solution to.

Incidentally, I had a court summons from them a few years ago listing me as both the plaintiff and the defendant. I absolutely wished they wouldn't notice before the court date due to the expected comedy, but unfortunately it got cancelled.
 
All sorts of reasons, from convenience, to trust, privacy etc..

The CSA are the figures that people ( including the courts ) tend to use anyway.

Personally - I was handing over cash each month ( bad ) but getting a signature on a logsheet ( good ) confirming the amount. She wasn't happy - went to the CSA ( and got more anyway - let me make this clear, I have no problem paying the higher CSA figure ).

Unfortunately, she failed to tell the CSA that we had a private agreement, and so the CSA wanted money for all that period as well - and this is what I'm trying to get back. They admit they owe me the money, but never return my calls. The bad thing is that this money won't be coming from the CSA, it will be from the pwc ( who was, shall we say, dishonest with the figures ) - so it'll either be zero maintenance payments for x months, or £10 a month for seven years...

Reliability is another issue - there's a perceived better reliability of payments from the CSA, but realisitically, this can only be via what they've done with me - deducting it from your salary by your employer, so I don't even see the money. "unfortunately" for the parent with care, the employer then has up to 19 or so days to pay that money to the CSA, and the CSA can then take up to a week to pay the parent with care. So realistically it could be 26 days after payday before that money gets to the parent with care.

But I'm fine with it - the only people I have to justify my salary to are the CSA, not the pwc - she doesn't need to know what I earn, where I work etc...
 
Garyj881 said:
In March my place of employment relocated, this meant an extra 200 miles per week working out about £160 + in extra fuel costs.

I was informed I can claim for this as an expense with the CSA under travel to work costs.

The CSA say that the first 150 miles are excluded but any thing over that is typed into a calculator and says how much of a reduction on my payments I will get. I worked it out at 210 miles per week (42 milesper day) which is 60 miles over the 150 exclusion. I rang the CSA as I havent heard from them and they said that I am not entitled to anything, after questioning why they said because I only do 150 miles from A to B. The CSA have worked out my travel as the crow flies :confused: I explained to them that I don't have a helicopter or jet so I drive to work on the motor way.

They are sticking to "as the crow flies" rule and I CAN'T appeal against it.

Yes this is a "I've got a problem, to the internets" post, but would like to hear if anyone hear has experienced anything similar and is it worth me pursuing?

:o
Click to expand...

The legislation is written that way. So your travel to work calulation is correct. Thats why no appeal rights as they are doing it correctly.Might not be what you want to hear but its correct.
 
OldCoals said:
Why don't parents just sort out maintenance between themselves and cut out the middle man?
Click to expand...

because parents, one or both, lie about what they are doing or what cash has changed hands, to ensure they get the most money as possible from the state in the form of the dole or other benefits..


The CSA is to protect the tax payer. If neither partner is claiming benefits or state help, and whatever they have sorted out is working amicably, the CSA don't give a monkeys.

The CSA only exists because so many people lie to claim state money they are not due (eg. 'Dad has given no money, so I need more dole money'). It's there to try and protect us tax payers from the many, many liars out there fraudulently claiming 'dad' isn't paying his way ..

Also 'mum' CAN NOT say 'Dad only has to give £40 a week I, er, magically decide, as I'll claim the rest off the social' EVEN IF DAD AGREES. As, again, the tax payer is being conned. Parents don't understand and think 'why can't the nasty CSA butt out' -- er, because YOU can't decide dad only has to pay £40 a week THEN claim you can't live properly and need the state's help!!!! BECAUSE you're ripping off the taxpayer!!

As mentioned - if neither partner claiming anything off the state - the CSA doesn't give a monkeys about what arrangement you've made. If they are .. well .. they are stealing money off us lot by dad not paying enough (so the tax credits going up) and the CSA are OUR guardian angels!! :)


Of course scabby parents lie about anything they possibly can to disguise the income from their partner - to claim more government support. Then HATE the CSA when they put in ways to try and stop the lying. Or don't understand private made agreements DO NOT CUT THE MUSTARD if it means johnny taxpayer still has to prop-up one partner. So all the 'secretely give me £800 a month but don't tell the CSA so I still get my dole money' -- well -- the CSA has to try and protect against that -- hence 'private arrangement' have to be monitored. As lots of people lie. To defraud YOU AND ME. And the CSA get a bad rep because the couples don't understand that them privately deciding an arrangement which still means mum claims £80 a week of the social whilst dad is a millionnaire and 'secretely' gives her a wad of money each month 'off the books' is UNACCEPTABLE.

BOTH come off state support, and see how long the CSA is remotely interested in either of you. Here's a clue -- about 4 minutes.

Grr -- no-one understands ... !
 
Last edited:
my ex found out that they no longer take CSA payments into account for benefits. So I get a phone call from them demanding money. Hang on he only moved in with her 3 months ago. She hasn't paid me for over 12 months B*tch. Oh well I'm laughing now the boy has moved back in with me. So she's now down the money I would have paid her say £200 per month. Child benefit £80 per month and now whatever she has to pay me maybe £20 per month.

So her trying to get one over on me is going to leave her £300 per month worse off.

Why she bothered I dont know he leaves school in June and he's not likely to be going to college either.
 
britboy4321 said:
because parents, one or both, lie about what they are doing or what cash has changed hands, to ensure they get the most money as possible from the state in the form of the dole or other benefits..


The CSA is to protect the tax payer. If neither partner is claiming benefits or state help, and whatever they have sorted out is working amicably, the CSA don't give a monkeys.

The CSA only exists because so many people lie to claim state money they are not due (eg. 'Dad has given no money, so I need more dole money'). It's there to try and protect us tax payers from the many, many liars out there fraudulently claiming 'dad' isn't paying his way ..

Also 'mum' CAN NOT say 'Dad only has to give £40 a week I, er, magically decide, as I'll claim the rest off the social' EVEN IF DAD AGREES. As, again, the tax payer is being conned. Parents don't understand and think 'why can't the nasty CSA butt out' -- er, because YOU can't decide dad only has to pay £40 a week THEN claim you can't live properly and need the state's help!!!! BECAUSE you're ripping off the taxpayer!!

As mentioned - if neither partner claiming anything off the state - the CSA doesn't give a monkeys about what arrangement you've made. If they are .. well .. they are stealing money off us lot by dad not paying enough (so the tax credits going up) and the CSA are OUR guardian angels!! :)



Of course scabby parents lie about anything they possibly can to disguise the income from their partner - to claim more government support. Then HATE the CSA when they put in ways to try and stop the lying. Or don't understand private made agreements DO NOT CUT THE MUSTARD if it means johnny taxpayer still has to prop-up one partner. So all the 'secretely give me £800 a month but don't tell the CSA so I still get my dole money' -- well -- the CSA has to try and protect against that -- hence 'private arrangement' have to be monitored. As lots of people lie. To defraud YOU AND ME. And the CSA get a bad rep because the couples don't understand that them privately deciding an arrangement which still means mum claims £80 a week of the social whilst dad is a millionnaire and 'secretely' gives her a wad of money each month 'off the books' is UNACCEPTABLE.

BOTH come off state support, and see how long the CSA is remotely interested in either of you. Here's a clue -- about 4 minutes.

Grr -- no-one understands ... !
Click to expand...

Not sure where to start here.

The CSA have NO authority if neither the PWC or NRP request their involvement. The PWC can be receiving benefits and have a private arrangement with the NRP, thus the amount paid by the NRP is set between them.

I'm sure you didn't mean it, but several times you've mentioned 'Dad not paying his way' which is unfortunately how the CSA treat 90% of cases... A mother can also be a NRP.

The CSA make their own rules up, and with alarming regularity mess cases up that effect NRPs lives. One of my clients payed £240 too much for 7 months, all the while being told by the CSA that he is in debt. One I got involved and finally convinced them to send menhis assessment and a breakdown of previous payments / circumstances data - I found that the PWC had told them that my client had a 2nd job... No checks, upped his assessment on the PWCs say so.

It's taken me 3 months to fix the mess, useless call centre (I sent them a letter advising I record all calls, now when they answer they put me straight through to a manager as 4 agents refused to talk to me if I'm recording...
 
arknor said:
because some women like do involve the CSA out of spite.

often the woman will inolve CSA because her friends dont like the father and they convince her its the best thing :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Surely the mans fault for getting a woman like that pregnant in the first place?
 
jamief said:
Surely the mans fault for getting a woman like that pregnant in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because it only takes one person to get someone pregnant?

I admit it's a long time since I did sex education at school but I always thought it was two consenting adults.



M.
 
arknor said:
because some women like do involve the CSA out of spite.

often the woman will inolve CSA because her friends dont like the father and they convince her its the best thing :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

This. An ex did that to my mate once even though they had agreed a weekly maintenance amount in the divorce and he gave her the house and £20,000.

She was so ****** when the CSA assessed him for £40 per week less than he was paying her under the agreement.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom