breach of court order

The thing about an undertaking is that it''s a legally binding agreement to do, or not to do something. To breach an undertaking could lead to serious consequences, including imprisonment.

The ex may have been very unwise to give such an undertaking, but if he volunteered to give it then it''s binding. If either or both of the children wanted to live with him then he would need to apply to the court to be released from his undertaking.

It''s fairly standard, to my knowledge, for undertakings to be included in the recital. To include them after the words "It is Ordered" would be a court order, not a freely given undertaking.

In another post LittleMrMike was helping someone who was being asked to undertake to release someone from the mortgage, and pointed out that if you give an undertaking which you cannot comply with through no fault of your own, you could still be sent to prison for doing so. In the above example the person could undertake to make best endeavours to release them from the mortgage, but to undertake to release them from the mortgage would be very unwise, as the power to do so lies with the mortgage lender.

Is it worth it to complete the D11 and try to get him back to court as I have very little money and it is going to cost me £80. Is an undertaking not legally binding?

I am finding this really hard to understand.

Are you sure that it''s not just a HMRC mess up with the stopping of CM for those over a certain amount?

Have the CSA actually said that they have reduced payment because he is claiming CB?

u6c00 is right about the significance of an undertaking, but it isn''t that clear cut and it''s a bit of a conundrum I''m afraid. Legally any agreement purporting to restrict the right to apply for child maintenance is void.

king henry wrote:

My ex signed a financial court order and said in the court order he would never claim the child benefit for our 2 children.
He has now claimed child benefit for 1 child which means that CSA have taken away his payments for that child. He earns in excess of £52,000 and is now paying me £58 per month to support 2 children on a 50/50 residence.
I cant afford to take him back to court over the breach. Help is desperately needed to overcome this problem.

But you can''t claim child benefit if you earn over £50k. If another person tries to claim CB then they always write to the person who is already claiming to see if there has been a change of circumstances did you get a letter about it?

in this particular case if he is earning that much he wont get CB but the general issue is can a court order supercede a granting of benefit to an eligable person?
The point of the benefit is to provide funding to help the child and as the "childs needs are paramount" not allowing a party to claim an entitlement seems odd. It looks as though one party was ill advised and the agreement was badly formed if not simply invalid?

WYSPECIAL wrote:

But you can''t claim child benefit if you earn over £50k. If another person tries to claim CB then they always write to the person who is already claiming to see if there has been a change of circumstances did you get a letter about it?

You can claim child benefit if your income is over £50k, but you will have an increased tax liability, i.e. the government claw back a proportion of the child benefit through the tax system, but you will still receive £20.30 child benefit per week into your account.

The amount of increased tax that you pay is dependent on your income, but it only reaches £20.30 per week when your income is over £60k per year. After this level you can choose not to receive the child benefit at all for the sake of ease.

Nevertheless, being entitled to child benefit for a child, even if you''re paying the entire amount back in tax, gives you a number of passported benefits. As an example (in theory) you could apply for an bigger social housing property as you would be classed as the main carer of a child. Similarly you could apply for child maintenance if you receive the child benefit.

In answer to the OP''s question:

You can apply to enforce the order if you choose, imposing criminal sanctions on your ex for breaching an undertaking, however as other posters have pointed out, the undertaking could be invalid, so the process could be costly and ultimately fruitless

Regardless of whether you choose to do this or not, the court does not have any power to order HMRC to transfer the child benefit to you. They might punish your ex for breaching his undertaking but that will not get the child benefit back in your name and therefore resolve your finances.

You need to contact HMRC first in order to find out what''s going on. The court cannot do this for you.