new rules

Have been reading about new rules supposed to be coming in this year about changes to CSA.

Just seems like another smack in the face for parents who are left with children to look after when a spouse leaves. I give up, there is no way I will ever see a penny from my ex to support his own child.

The law is disgusting, allowing this to happen.

Sorry, just makes me so angry.

I would have thought the new system made it much harder for NRP to avoid paying maintenance?

Going straight to HMRC means they can see any declared earning, (HMRC are likely to chase anything suspicious themselves because they want the tax).

Hi, just out of interest what are the proposed changes?

survive

From what I understand it they are trying to pusued parents to agree between themselves but you can apply to the CSA to work it out, they will go direct to HMRC about the NRP''s earnings, work out a payment plan(as they do now) and send to both parties, you then have the option to appeal, after which the payments are expected to be made by the NRP direct to the RP but in accordance with the payment plan the CSA worked out, if there are issues (late or non payment etc.) evidence is supplied & the CSA can arrange to take the payment themselves but will charge the NRP as well as a small amount to the RP (to encourage both to sort it out between themselves & make payments direct, in full & on time).

I dont think i''ve missed anything out .
Its being introduced slowly over several years though and in stages although I think you can apply to switch over at some point but im not sure when.

I think the new system will stop PWC using the CSA as a means by which to punish the NRP by involving the CSA. What it won''t do is deal with those NRPs who play games, job hop, work through agencies, work cash in hand or are self employed directors of limited companies.

I guess the vision is that ultimately, the CSA will only deal with those ''difficult'' cases rather than the majority of cases. Presumably then they will become more specialised and competenent in dealing with the ''difficult'' cases as well as deal with them more quickly. I suspect, however, that what will happen is that the majority of PWC will agree to a private arrangement only to return to the CSA a few months later recognising that they are going to have to pay the fees to guarentee regular maintenance.

I personally have no issue with paying for the CSA''s services because my ex is one of the difficult ones and putting the whole thing into someone else''s hands to deal with is by far the best thing for my stress levels. And my pocket in the long run - the legal costs would be astronomical.

But yes, Perin, you''re right. It''s just a jig around and means very little to those of us who have truly ''difficult'' NRPs.

On the other hand, it does provide an incentive for NRPs to pay up without the CSA having to use measures such as taking money directly from their earnings - the percentage levied on the recalcitrant NRP is much higher than on the PWC.

If it means that there is more time for the CSA to deal with the really problematic cases, then that may also be a good thing.

Best wishes,
Sadie

I agree Sadie. My concern is that the intital ''success'' (private arrangements being made right, left and centre) will mean significant redundancy at the CSA...then slowly a proportion of previous cases will be forced back into their hands...so they''ll be more stretched than they currently are...