Self employed father and child support

It sounds like your a long way from getting to the courts but even if the courts do make an order in relation to the child support it only stands for one year and then either side can ask the CSA to complete an assessment.

If you ex is self employed and doesn''t want to pay it''s very difficult for the CSA to do anything. If you do apply for a variation this process will take some time and is very difficult to prove as basically the CSA bases it calculations on his taxable income. If he has any clue then he will put a new car in his new partners name and so on.

It is a weird catch 22 and this is one reason why I think the CSA should be shut down and maintenance calculations should be returned to the court as everyone''s situation is different and I think deserves a couple of hours of a judges time to actually look through the facts of the case.

I don''t think the State should be setting a rate for how much one parent should pay the other for support of their children. They take nothing into consideration other than the number of nights the children spend with the NRP. They have no knowledge of the amount the NRP spends on the children when they are in his/her care. They don''t even care whether or not the child maintenance is actually spent on the children. Once they have deducted the required amount, they consider their job done.

It should be left for both parents to work out payments between themselves without the benefit of the CSA calculator. Many low paid dads however willing they are to support their children, can face financial difficulties post-separation. They have the same outgoings as the mother, but without child benefits, child tax credits or working tax credit.

It seems an unfair system to me when dads pay for their children when they are with them and then pay for their children again when they are with their mother. It is even more unfair when the mother earns more than the father. If the parents can''t or won''t work out a sensible sum which leaves neither one of them in financial difficulties, then they should defer to the Court to make a decision.

If the children are receiving shared care, then it is in the best interests of the children that both parents remain solvent and are able to provide a home for them.

The courts have no jurisdiction to impose an order for child maintenance in the vast majority of cases. CM can be agreed in a Consent Order but not imposed by a judge. In an ideal world parents would be able to make their own agreements but unfortunately we don''t live in an ideal world and obtaining financial contributions from some parents is rather like extracting teeth from a hen.

The CSA can consider a variation on the grounds of diversion of income when the non-resident parent can control the income and is considered to have unreasonably reduced there income by diverting it to someone else. Making a decision is difficult and investigation is very time consuming. If a case reaches the tribunal stage a third party may be required to produce documents.

Hi
I think over time the figures will need to be declared to the HMRC (self-assessment). Also, all spending will show up on credit referencing systems like experian (which will be used in investigations in future) and they will be linked financially (again, which shows up).
They could work it so his partner has most of the income and does all the spending, so he looks poor, but dividends need to be shared, limiting how much they''ll have to live off. It would be questionable why one biz partner has all the money and the other not.
This can all be investigated in the longer term when the evidence is there, i.e. the data exists an you''ll get back-pay!

Also, if they are strategically doing all of this to reduce maintenance, what does this say about how much they care about the welfare of the children!

Having said that, if they do care, but just don''t want you to have cash (some have good reasons for this), then ask him to supply maintenance in some other form. For example, my ex buys footwear, 1/2 presents, 1/2 dinner money and 1/2 school trips, etc. Plus he plays for the kids'' after school clubs. I therefore, don''t ask for maintenance as this is good enough - my choice! And tax credits help a lot in terms of the regular costs: food, clothes, etc.

eeagles wrote:

HiHaving said that, if they do care, but just don''t want you to have cash (some have good reasons for this), then ask him to supply maintenance in some other form. For example, my ex buys footwear, 1/2 presents, 1/2 dinner money and 1/2 school trips, etc. Plus he plays for the kids'' after school clubs. I therefore, don''t ask for maintenance as this is good enough - choice! And tax credits help a lot in terms of the regular costs: food, clothes, etc.

it is always worth asking for a direct contribution so there is no sense of ''paying for lifestyle'' which many NRP''s object to. You''re obliged never to go out or have your haircut or a new pair of shoes when you''re a PWC or the ex and his new partner will accuse you of spending their money on something other than the children.

Unfortunately with self employment, if he doesn''t want to pay he won''t and if he''s got a half decent accountant, there''ll be very little the CSA can do about it.

Fingers and toes crossed for you that you have an ex with a sense of responsibility or a new partner with a bit of sense. It rarely seems to work that way, however.

I have read all the replies to this thread, but at the end of the day I am sorry but it took two people to make the child so it should take two people to financially support that child.

If one person leaves then no matter what, their child should come first and they should do whatever they can to support that child.

But maybe that''s just me being human...

I don''t think anyone would argue with the principle it''s the execution that''s the issue. No accountability for the money being handed over ? there''s no court in the land that would authorise that.