Why should I pay csa.

I would like to reply to you as a woman.

I have 2 children and my x is supposed to pay me £5 a week. He has manged his income right down as he helps his partner out in her business - draws no salary and has no share in it. So she keeps him.

So far i have received nothing other than an abusive email to say what difference can £260 a year make to you you B****.

and when my partner moved in i was then informed he could pay towards my xs children.

The CSA can do very little.

It also seems that there is a chance with the new legislation as I earn more on paper than my x he will have to pay even less!

So the system is flawed. And in my opion it can be abused against the Parent with care.

What is this new legislation people keep talking about ?

SM

It is interesting to hear the perspective of a mother who finds the system does not work for them.

I have this vision of the CSA being a huge army of pen pushers that uses a lot of public money to achieve very little.....so a bit like our MPs!!!

I am a mother for whom the 'system' most definitely isn't working. My stbx is giving me no financial support, despite the fact that I am pregnant with our third child, and even with a generous dose of Tax Credit, I am living on less than a quarter of what we did as a couple in the same property. I cannot make ends meet. My husband sees his children on a 6/14 nights basis so I am not depriving him in any way of seeing his children. Indeed, this is what he wanted and I have bent over backwards to accommodate his needs at the expense of mine.

I have made a CSA claim but it will go nowhere in the short or medium term - my husband is a self-employed company director who claims he is on a modest wage. The CSA, by their own admission, can only really manage people who earn on a PAYE basis or with businessmen/women who are prepared to be honest about their earnings, dividend payments, share payouts etc.

On top of this, he has not paid the mortgage on the family home for 3 months nor on his home for 2 months (it is jointly owned - previously a rental property we owned), has refused to pay school fees (but took a Prohibitive Steps Order out on me to stop me removing our child from a fee-paying school), is refusing to contribute to joint debt accummulated as a business venture that went wrong, the overdraft....but he has put a hot tub in his back garden, been for weekends away and is about to take a 2 week holiday abroad (expecting me to drop everything and look after the children, pay for childcare whilst I work whilst he's away). He is accummulating CCJs at an alarming rate. He doesn't care - all that matters his pleasing his girfriend.

Sorry, but this is not a system which is working for me!

Hi
I cannot complain about the CSA at first they were slow to get things started but with a few phone calls from me they contacted my s2bx and I was receiving payment although I think my s2bx should be paying more I am so grateful and very lucky to be receiving any thing .

It was sad that i had to go to the CSA as my ex would not pay me money he kept saying when i am sorted .

when i am sorted I will pay you something this was not helping my situation I needed this money I couldt wait for him to be sorted .

He really didt have to sort any thing much he only pays minimum for a room and his food bill a month is next to nothing as he payed a fixed rate .
he canceled all the direct debits that were associated with our MH .
So in effect he really was better off .

The only real system that will work in my opinion is fathers and mothers that although they have split dont let this affect the kids but of course it takes them both to want this .

No good having the person with care saying lets talk if the person with out care refuses to discuss it same as the person with out care says lets talk lets work this out if things were honest and open then parents with care may not be struggling and parents with out care may not be struggling also .

where there is money to be payed out there will always be one parent wanting more one parent wanting to pay less some parents not getting any thing and other parents paying all they can with out question .

Some will see it as unfair to pay other will se it as a responsible as just because they are no longer with the other parent they will not let there relationship break down affect there responsibilities as a parent and they will not let this affect there children .

As parents we should in an ideal world be able to sit down and realistically be honest about money coming in money going out then deciding how fairly they can do these things people do acheive this but It would be nice to see all parents put there child first and foremost


This is why we have the CSA it is flawed but it does enable some people to survive it doest help every one when it should but men and woman alike some times think that once they splite with the mother father thats it responsibility over.

Any one can be a parent but it takes a special person to be a mother or a father and by being a parent you accept responsibility for there care financially if you are able to and morally but more than any any thing because you love them and this love should be unconditional.

dido xx

There will always be unreasonable parents - both parent with care and non-resident, so there will always be one or the other stating how unreasonable one or the other is.

As Fiona has said, often the children do badly with the standard of living they have. I am finding this with my children. I'm lucky in my children seem to be able to grasp the fact that I can't give them what families with two working parents can.

Parents have the choice to put their children first. It's just a shame that both parents can have the same objective.

Personally, I've learnt that its all down to choice. One can choose to be responsible, courteous and reasonable - or choose not to be.

I agree a man ( NRP) should contribute to his children, I do buy clothes and take my daughter from holidays.

The main Issue is that when a system is so unfair, is the maiin reason men are not prepared to make payments.

I think that if men had a mandatory right to contact, they would then not feel that system is unfair and als not to be stripped of all there hard earned assets. They would then be prepared contribute.

It seem the system is expecting the NRP to live in poverty, just for the goverment to collect money for the RP ( mainly on benifit).

Child did asked to be born, but the child did not ask to be denied contact to the NRP by the RP/Goverment.