No, they take it directly from your wages, it's impossible to stop paying it.
Child Support Agency
- Thread starter Lonewolf
- Start date
No, they take it directly from your wages, it's impossible to stop paying it.
Because women are extremely bitter creatures after a break up, if they think they can get more than you have offered they will take you to the CSA to prolong your suffering.
It's rare that any of the people I know have not been dragged into the CSA route despite trying to settle it amicably.
One of my friends ex's loves to bait him even 10 years later how he's paying for her holiday or car.
What bugs me is when the women cheats and move in with a new man they effectively double up, they cannot lose while the poor old bloke has to pay for her new family set up. If a man decides he's going to help rip apart a family he should take on the responsibilty for the family he's torn apart.
I'm not the op but to answer your question
If the op stopped paying they could just enforce a payment order directly with his employer meaning the CSA bill will come out of his wages before he gets his wages.
Secondly and most importantly I think. Is that there is this general rule within the CSA that it is up to the person being claimed from to prove it is not owed. In other words you are guilty until you prove your innocence.
i feel sorry for the employees i give them hell when i ring up. its bordering on criminal how screwed up the system is i got a letter the other day saying i owe £900 in arrears
iv never missed a pyment and am certain iv been overpaying for 2 years they even reassesed my case and STILL overcharge me. theyv got me bringing home a lot more wages than i do and iv no idea how i even sent all my payslips off!!! as for the £900 arrears nobody i get hold of knows anything about it and when they say well ring you back i just laugh at them they have never EVER rang me back in over 20 attempts
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2004
- Posts
- 7,479
- Location
- Derby
I had a good experience with the CSA, When I split from my ex 6 years ago we agreed for me to pay £200 a month. Great. The first 3 months was fine, saw my daughter etc. Then the ex inlaws got involved and told my ex to contact the CSA. She did.
However I did do my homework prior to agreeing the £200 a month. I rang the CSA and they said I was entitled to pay (at that time) £155 per month. So naturaly I paid more because of having the feeling that then CSA was to be involved at some point.
For my ex to claim single parent benefits and various other things she had to be claiming off me via the CSA. So I got a letter from them saying I am to pay my way etc, I even told my ex you will get less from me if you go to the CSA, her parents told her to ignore me as they said she would get at leat £500 a month of me... Oh how I laughed, In their faces I might add.
So a few weeks later I got a call from the ex telling me I should be expecting to pay a lot more than the £200 I was already paying I just kept telling her it wont be that much, she never belived me.
So, the CSA got it all sorted and I started to pay directly out of my wages via my employer that way I never miss a payment and it will be adjusted every year automatically as I have a small rise and maybe more overtime during that previous year.
Needless to say the ex and her family were very ****ed off ....... to this day I am paying £175 now. Only gone up a few quid in 6 years. Only 7 more to go all being well. Dont even see my bloody daughter anymore..
However I did do my homework prior to agreeing the £200 a month. I rang the CSA and they said I was entitled to pay (at that time) £155 per month. So naturaly I paid more because of having the feeling that then CSA was to be involved at some point.
For my ex to claim single parent benefits and various other things she had to be claiming off me via the CSA. So I got a letter from them saying I am to pay my way etc, I even told my ex you will get less from me if you go to the CSA, her parents told her to ignore me as they said she would get at leat £500 a month of me... Oh how I laughed, In their faces I might add.
So a few weeks later I got a call from the ex telling me I should be expecting to pay a lot more than the £200 I was already paying I just kept telling her it wont be that much, she never belived me.
So, the CSA got it all sorted and I started to pay directly out of my wages via my employer that way I never miss a payment and it will be adjusted every year automatically as I have a small rise and maybe more overtime during that previous year.
Needless to say the ex and her family were very ****ed off ....... to this day I am paying £175 now. Only gone up a few quid in 6 years. Only 7 more to go all being well. Dont even see my bloody daughter anymore..
And thats the other thing that irks me from friends troubles, they get limited access to start with until the women has worked her poison on the kid. When this happens it should be reflected in the payments.
My brother in law had hell with his ex mrs, she just ****ed him about with access knowing each time it went to court it was costing him. She would rarely turn up anyway. She didn't care she just wanted to keep twisting the knife.
It's 15% for any first child and 20% thereafter I think. Not on a vast amount and my salary been cut again, $1500 in less than 2 years
That's the new rules. My mate is on the old rules. He earns £35000 per annum gross and takes home just over £2000. They make him pay £800 per month for the child despite having to rent a house (he stupidly gave her £30,000 and the house in the divorce but these aren't taken into consideration with the CSA)
It's another year or two before the CSA will re-assess him under the new rules and make him pay just 15%.
Last edited:
Easy..
Get paid in cash
Your not far wrong got a Friend who was geting Raped by the Csa,
was paying 250+ a month working for vauxhall.
in the end he quit his job and become a Taxi Driver (get Paid in Cash)
now hes only paying £9 a Week
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
The purpose of the CSA is basically not to support the mother or the father or even the child. The purpose is to help the taxpayer.
So if no-one is on benefits, the CSA will be 100% happy for you to come to whatever private arrangements you want.
But if one or both is on benefits and the other one can pay cash to support the people RATHER then the benefits be paid -- obviously the CSA is going to try and make that happen on behalf of the taxpayer. Everyone slates the CSA because they don't realise they are there for the taxpayers benefit. So when you say things like 'Why can't we just have a private arrangement' the reason is because one or both of you is still probably going to be ***** enough to be claiming off the state AS WELL if you do this. If the CSA enforces something -- THEY'LL tell the benefits office -- the benefits will be cut accordingly and TAX PAYERS LIKE ME benefit by having lower council tax. Or so the theory goes ..
So you have blokey earning £100,000, with a private arrangement to pay ex-wife £1000 per month -- and wife is ALSO half-inching full benefits off the taxpayer because she doesn't bother declaring the private arrangement. THAT is why the CSA exists. If neither is claiming benefits -- the CSA won't give a flying monkeys about you ..
Conservatives should LOVE the CSA. It is directly setup to make the *****'s benefit-claiming life more difficult if the father could foot the bill rather then Mr Innocent Taxpayer. RaidenGb - post above -- is basically saying 'Mate of mine is only paying £9 for his kid AND YOU SUCKERS ARE PAYING THE REST ... Hahaha taxpayers should always be copping the bill .. by the way . the CSA sucks!!!!'
Taxpayers reading -- every time the CSA fails or someone manages to 'not pay them', don't celebrate -- it just means Mrs Benefits is going to keep scratching money out of YOUR back pocket rather than/in addition to the bloke who couldn't keep his pants on.... you're the one who will cop the bill for the kid for 16 years even though YOU did nothing wrong -- because they found a way to screw the CSA. The CSA should highlight more frequently how many millions upon millions of pounds they save the taxpayer by tracking down Mr 'can't be bothered to pay' or Mrs 'I'll still claim benefits AS WELL' and hammering them.
So if no-one is on benefits, the CSA will be 100% happy for you to come to whatever private arrangements you want.
But if one or both is on benefits and the other one can pay cash to support the people RATHER then the benefits be paid -- obviously the CSA is going to try and make that happen on behalf of the taxpayer. Everyone slates the CSA because they don't realise they are there for the taxpayers benefit. So when you say things like 'Why can't we just have a private arrangement' the reason is because one or both of you is still probably going to be ***** enough to be claiming off the state AS WELL if you do this. If the CSA enforces something -- THEY'LL tell the benefits office -- the benefits will be cut accordingly and TAX PAYERS LIKE ME benefit by having lower council tax. Or so the theory goes ..
So you have blokey earning £100,000, with a private arrangement to pay ex-wife £1000 per month -- and wife is ALSO half-inching full benefits off the taxpayer because she doesn't bother declaring the private arrangement. THAT is why the CSA exists. If neither is claiming benefits -- the CSA won't give a flying monkeys about you ..
Conservatives should LOVE the CSA. It is directly setup to make the *****'s benefit-claiming life more difficult if the father could foot the bill rather then Mr Innocent Taxpayer. RaidenGb - post above -- is basically saying 'Mate of mine is only paying £9 for his kid AND YOU SUCKERS ARE PAYING THE REST ... Hahaha taxpayers should always be copping the bill .. by the way . the CSA sucks!!!!'
Taxpayers reading -- every time the CSA fails or someone manages to 'not pay them', don't celebrate -- it just means Mrs Benefits is going to keep scratching money out of YOUR back pocket rather than/in addition to the bloke who couldn't keep his pants on.... you're the one who will cop the bill for the kid for 16 years even though YOU did nothing wrong -- because they found a way to screw the CSA. The CSA should highlight more frequently how many millions upon millions of pounds they save the taxpayer by tracking down Mr 'can't be bothered to pay' or Mrs 'I'll still claim benefits AS WELL' and hammering them.
Last edited:
Not quite? If he pays 1000 to csa, the person receiving the claim doesn't see the full amount so that isn't quite true though im sure it is a bonus for them to be able to see the money movements
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 May 2008
- Posts
- 2,606
- Location
- Bristol
Apparently they can't intercept your wages outside of the EU...
Spent 3 years of my daughters early years going through the courts to gain some access. Women use kids as weapons against their ex partner without remorse
The daughter and I have had our ups and downs, but we're still in touch.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 10 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 4,080
- Location
- London
Awesome -- then the taxpayer could cop the whole lot of costs as benefits are claimed, and you wouldn't have to see your kid ever again. Win/win.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 1,415
- Location
- Finally, Swindon
I'm not surprised there aren't more threads about the CSA. Everyone whoever deals with them feels like they are being screwed over. The payers think they pay too much and the receivers think they get too little. It's a circle that can never be squared.
People who are paying into the system just want to get on with their lives - you can only bitch-off about something that unfair for so long. If you are a bloke and your ex-wife is the parent with care (or whatever it is), you have no power. The CSA can do what they like and the ex is laughing all the way to the bank.
As I see it, it's like one of the previous posters said, it's meant to save the government money - nothing wrong with that, but it's original purpose was to get cash off non-paying parents. What's happened is that it's just morphed into something bigger and all it does is mess up compliant parents' lives. As for chasing down the non-paying parents, it doesn't give a stuff, it's just too difficult
I'm 8 years into 22% (was 24%) of my after tax income being paid over...only another 6 years to go (private arrangement before the CSA got involved). I'm counting down the days...she's allowed to offset 50% of a huge mortgage against her income...how someone could ever get a mortgage that's more than their monthly take home I don't know...the appeals process clearly didn't see that there was anything wrong with this
'nuff said...I've mastered my anger...but not my bitterness...I'll avoid CSA threads from now on..
People who are paying into the system just want to get on with their lives - you can only bitch-off about something that unfair for so long. If you are a bloke and your ex-wife is the parent with care (or whatever it is), you have no power. The CSA can do what they like and the ex is laughing all the way to the bank.
As I see it, it's like one of the previous posters said, it's meant to save the government money - nothing wrong with that, but it's original purpose was to get cash off non-paying parents. What's happened is that it's just morphed into something bigger and all it does is mess up compliant parents' lives. As for chasing down the non-paying parents, it doesn't give a stuff, it's just too difficult
I'm 8 years into 22% (was 24%) of my after tax income being paid over...only another 6 years to go (private arrangement before the CSA got involved). I'm counting down the days...she's allowed to offset 50% of a huge mortgage against her income...how someone could ever get a mortgage that's more than their monthly take home I don't know...the appeals process clearly didn't see that there was anything wrong with this
'nuff said...I've mastered my anger...but not my bitterness...I'll avoid CSA threads from now on..
Say no more, Have had so much trouble with them.
My wages the same every month, yet the begining of every year i have a larger payout.
There explanation, Its works like your council tax. Also i pay exactly what they ask without fail and on numerous times have been told im in arrears.
I lost my rag with them last time and sad if you dont sort it out i will cancel my payments and take legal advice, The next month it was as it shouldbe.
If your daughter is not in full time education then you shouldn't have to pay it.
I can think of many worse things for tax to go on than single mothers.. there needs to be some equality though, women want men's rights when it suits..
there are many things which need over looked..eg
if a woman leaves a father for another man then any money should go direct into a savings account in the kids name
csa should be non profit
payments should be actual costs for keeping a child not for gain
access seriously needs sorting out, kids are not a bargaining tool. if a father or mother its capable they should get access, and if access is a good split, payments should be adjusted accordingly..
im sure there are many more issues!
there are many things which need over looked..eg
if a woman leaves a father for another man then any money should go direct into a savings account in the kids name
csa should be non profit
payments should be actual costs for keeping a child not for gain
access seriously needs sorting out, kids are not a bargaining tool. if a father or mother its capable they should get access, and if access is a good split, payments should be adjusted accordingly..
im sure there are many more issues!