Reply to: Father jailed for refusing to pay child maintenance

[BrilloPad]

100% spot-on. As a non-resident parent paying maintenance, there are so many aspects of the system I would like to challenge. But I do not have the time, resource, emotional availability and yes, the courage to do it. But this guy did. I feel sorry for his predicament but I admire his courage.

You could join http://www.fathers-4-justice.org . costs £30 per year and will help a great deal.

At the moment they(we!) are trying to organise a demo outside the prison he is being held in. I will put the adress up here when they stop moving him between prisons in case anyone wants to write to him.

Another way to help is to contact your MP.

Too many fathers dont do either the above which makes it very hard to challange the system. If all did a little bit it there is a chance of getting some change.

[barely_pointless]

Gibbon,

my sentiments exactly, patience is a virtue in this sort of thing.

[Joe Black]

100% spot-on. As a non-resident parent paying maintenance, there are so many aspects of the system I would like to challenge. But I do not have the time, resource, emotional availability and yes, the courage to do it. But this guy did. I feel sorry for his predicament but I admire his courage.

Seconded. Likewise thirded in wendigo's case.

The phrase "all that is necessary" etc springs to mind. Standing up for principles sometimes costs, too much for some, though the benefits in the end might be received by many.

[Lucy]

He has discovered the cost of his principles.

He is obviously not a contractor.

[Swamp Thing]

Gibbon: this is good to know, thank you.

[Gibbon]

I actually offered some of the divis to be taken into account and they wouldn't.

Sent my wage slips in and just waiting confirmation.

The courts can rule that your delibratley withholding divis but the CSA can't make your Ltd company pay them out as it's a separate legal entity.

In any case it gets messy and I will do the new company carousal etc make someone else director allsorts of fun and games.

I would have carried on paying a reasonable amount and will still make sure my son doesn't go short. But my ex won't be getting it.

[Swamp Thing]

However my case worker says that they can't take divis into account so she will be getting about £20 a week based on my salary

Ok there will be appeals and tribunals, but it's only four years til my son is 18.

Gibbon, are you sure about the divis not being taken into account? Has your case-worker put this in writing? I had always thought that if put to the test, the CSA would interpret divis as deemed salary and apply the % on the net amount (as if it had undergone PAYE).

[Gibbon]

Sometimes it's best to play the long game, my ex without doubt used maintenance to furbish her own lifestyle even upto buying and keeping a horse whilst only working part time. However the kids were happy, I got to see them and they do evantully grow up. My daughter is now 18 and finished
sitting A - levels and I no longer have to pay her mother for her. My ex has just lost maintanence for her and child benefit and tax credits. She now has to sell the horse . She's not happy about this and now wants me to pay more for my son who is 14. She has now gone to the CSA after 10 years.

However my case worker says that they can't take divis into account so she will be getting about £20 a week based on my salary

Ok there will be appeals and tribunals, but it's only four years til my son is 18.

[Swamp Thing]

I'm not sure what you mean by that VM, but although it is true, IMHO without people like him fighting against bad law we'd be in a sorry state. Who here bends over and pays IR35 taxes? Should we knock Arctic Systems for their stand against S660?

It is only highly-publicised cases like this that can change the CSA for the better.

Quote: "Last year, it was said the agency had an estimated £3 billion in unrecovered debt and a backlog of 333,000 cases." It is wrong to try and recover that from unjustified but easy targets.

100% spot-on. As a non-resident parent paying maintenance, there are so many aspects of the system I would like to challenge. But I do not have the time, resource, emotional availability and yes, the courage to do it. But this guy did. I feel sorry for his predicament but I admire his courage.

[BrilloPad]

as someone who is paying CSA in a similiar situation, it is subsidised. it is reduced by x/7 when you have the child more than 110 nights a year (old rules) ie. i have my lad 3 nights a week and cos this is more than 110 nights a year i pay 4/7 of the overall total of CSA.

the major pisser with the CSA at present is that new claims are done on the new rules. assessing me on the new rules would see me at least £20 a week better off. but they wont change people from old rules to new. if i stopped paying they would go mental and take it direct from employer, or get me in another way.

The whole system is a waste of money. i forced down the csa route due to ex signing on, but now that has changed, we agreeing a figure and dropping the CSA involvement. she stands to make an extra £20 a mth (to cover extra high school costs) but then no one needs to know how much i earn as a contractor! we're happy with that.

Make sure you have the CSA dropped in writing...

[andy]

the good always get shafted. Thats why i put in fraudently reciepts and expenses!

**** YOU IR!!!!!!!
C'MON GET ME YOU BA54ARDS !!!!

Knock Knock

[Maxamus]

Alas the good often get shafted.

the good always get shafted. Thats why i put in fraudently reciepts and expenses!

**** YOU IR!!!!!!!
C'MON GET ME YOU BA54ARDS !!!!

[scooby]

Why should he have to pay £360 \ month if he has them 50% of the time?

The money is to cover cost of raising the kid, not to subsidise her lifestyle...

as someone who is paying CSA in a similiar situation, it is subsidised. it is reduced by x/7 when you have the child more than 110 nights a year (old rules) ie. i have my lad 3 nights a week and cos this is more than 110 nights a year i pay 4/7 of the overall total of CSA.

the major pisser with the CSA at present is that new claims are done on the new rules. assessing me on the new rules would see me at least £20 a week better off. but they wont change people from old rules to new. if i stopped paying they would go mental and take it direct from employer, or get me in another way.

The whole system is a waste of money. i forced down the csa route due to ex signing on, but now that has changed, we agreeing a figure and dropping the CSA involvement. she stands to make an extra £20 a mth (to cover extra high school costs) but then no one needs to know how much i earn as a contractor! we're happy with that.

[BrilloPad]

I suspect there is more than meets the eye here. The CSA are not automatically involved unless the parent with care is claiming means tested benefits in relation to the children. So either the ex-wife put a claim in or she was as I suspect at one time claiming benefits. If so then you the tax payer were helping him support his kids.

If he had given his ex-wife enough money to help her stop claiming benefits the CSA would never have been involved, I know this as this is exactly my cicumstances.

His ex put in a claim. He was paying for the kids anyway. One of the reasons I would never pay my ex a penny until she withdrew her CSA claim in writing. He is a good man who tried to do the right thing. Alas the good often get shafted.

[Gibbon]

i am never getting married

you mean never having kids,

but thanks in a small way for strengthing the gene pool.