The CSA - how much does a child cost?
The CSA - how much does a child cost?
Author
Discussion

KentishS2

Original Poster:

15,169 posts

263 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
It seems to me that the CSA are there to punish men who have no rights anyway over their children.

My ex walked out as soon as she discovered she was pregnant and as soon as he was born she went to the CSA. The words "freeloader" and "gold digger" come to mind!

I've worked out that the mother of the son I can never see (as the she won't let me) will get the sum of approx £100,000 off me over the next 15 years.

Fair or not?

turbobloke

117,128 posts

289 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Not.

randlemarcus

13,646 posts

260 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Not, but she doesnt get it directly anyway, does she? I thought the CSA got the cash from you, and the female gets the benefits from the DSS

cotty

42,217 posts

313 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access

Wildfire

9,947 posts

281 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access


I totally Agree with you on that one.

KentishS2

Original Poster:

15,169 posts

263 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
I believe it goes into a CSA account and then into hers.

The CSA statement says my son only needs 60% of what they ask me for but it is charged as a tax on income etc.

My salary has dropped and my mortgage has increased and I'm £15k p/a worse off but they have put up my payments by 14%, I appealed and it took them 14 months to reply and have told me they are still correct and I now have loads of arrears too. Aint life great!

KentishS2

Original Poster:

15,169 posts

263 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Wildfire said:

cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access



I totally Agree with you on that one.


What's worse is that she let me see him for over 2 years and form a bond then suddenly stopped me seeing him and even tried to justify it by telling me he isn't mine.

I told the CSA this and I have to pay £1000 for DNA tests for both of us. I'm pretty sure he is my son, she was just trying to hurt me even more.

Mrs Fish

30,018 posts

287 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Wildfire said:

cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access



I totally Agree with you on that one.


Totally agree

polarbert

17,936 posts

260 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
i dont think its fair either.

anniesdad

14,589 posts

267 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
My son's 13 and I pay £145 a month to his Mother directly. So that's say £27K-£30K up to his 17th birthday.

I was one of the soft targets targetted early on as we agreed via court (as was done at the time) what level of maintenance I should pay and therefore was down on the records. I never shirked my responsibility and have paid from the day he was born. However the court award was half that of the CSA who simply doubled my committment overnight probably 10-11 years ago. They never did answer my question.....why? They did try to reassess it probably 8 years ago, but both his Mother and I agreed that I was paying enough and agreed not to fill our forms in. She is now working and claims no benefits other than child benefit and possibly tax credits.

p.s. when does a Father not have rights?


>> Edited by anniesdad on Friday 8th April 13:35

bigandclever

14,338 posts

267 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
anniesdad said:
p.s. when does a Father not have rights?

When he's unmarried. Or was that a rhetorical question?
KentishS2 said:

I told the CSA this and I have to pay £1000 for DNA tests for both of us. I'm pretty sure he is my son, she was just trying to hurt me even more.

There was a thread a couple of days ago where someone mentioned they could do 'unofficial' paternity tests. Look for the Cheap Stuff thread.

Scruffy

3,757 posts

290 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
You're stuffed.

The next 16 years you will be faced with the constant chip, chip, chipping away at your cash.

Try not to divulge too much. Consider your assets carefully. These will be factored into your assessment. Your assessment will also include some mythical figures generated by the random number generator they use to come up with the amount due.

Note that the amount assessed will in no way remotely resemble the amount your ex gets via the DSS/Child support and will probably include half your assets and her outgoings - rent - council tax etc.

Even if she shacks up with a millionaire, you will still be liable, and your contribution may well be increaced...

Still...

£49 per week is £40,768.

My little one was 3 when the proffessors at the CSA made their initial calculations. £416,000 payable at £600 per week. The money came out of my wages. The money I couldn't pay went into an arrears account to be paid when I had the means. So, £600, My wages £370 less what you would get on the dole £38.00 (at the time), no allowance for rent/morgage, poll tax (at the time), gas/elec/water etc... £268 per week into a arrears account.
They couldn't reassess me for six months and couldn't back date... (at the time).
£416,000 assessments at around £30.00 a week meant that my son would have been 28 - they failed to spot that one and still stung me for nearly £7000...

Shit, you've started me off now...

rude-boy

22,227 posts

262 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Wildfire said:

cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access



I totally Agree with you on that one.


Ditto, especially in this case. This is exactly the reason why I fully support the aims of Father For Justice.

However the father should still have to pay if the court had ruled that he should not have access. For instance where a father was an abuser, etc. he shouldn't have a right to access but should still have to pay.

I don't want to thread-jack but would also add that what my two step-son's father pays a month doesn't even cover their pocket money. Yet he has a 3 bed house with no mortgage, a classic car worth £15k+, and a day to day car. Funnily enough he is self-employed...

I hasten to add that he does still buy them xmas and birthday presents and is not averse to buying the odd track suit, etc on the few weekends a year we drive over 200 miles so they can see their dad for a weekend, if of course seeing them that weekend doesn't interfere with his social life

JagLover

46,743 posts

264 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
Wildfire said:

cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access



I totally Agree with you on that one.


I agree too-the man should only have to make payments if he has full access.

Scruffy

3,757 posts

290 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
rude-boy said:
...so they can see their dad for a weekend, if of course seeing them that weekend doesn't interfere with his social life


Nasty.

Isn't it about the kids?

Keep your bitterness directed at the bumbling morons that have created this system.

One of the worst being: Rapists aren't eligble to pay support.

birdbrain

1,564 posts

268 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
cotty said:
NOT

I dont think they should be able to take the money if the father is not allowed access


Totally agree, unless of course, the father is an abuser.

Scruffy

3,757 posts

290 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]


My initial assessment took place at the Newcastle office, 'cause I was born there. the papers were transferred to Cheshire, where I lived. The interdept. papers got lost - I got fined . The computers weren't linked. The software that was supposed to calculate the figured was still at beta stage. Cheshire assessed blind as they had no figures and due to a dept' shift my papers were transferred to Nottingham. Cheshire fined me for not returning any papers, and back dated the payments, but typed 28 instead of 2 for the age of the child. Then I moved house...

birdbrain

1,564 posts

268 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
I know it's a terrible situation and some women play it for all it's worth but wouldn't it be even worse if someone who was an abuser was allowed to continue having unsupervised access to the kids and therefore carry on abusing them?

No easy answer to the problem, I accept.

Scruffy

3,757 posts

290 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]


I think social workers are fairly suss these days (well my missus is )...

At least the CSA can't make these judgements...

cotty

42,217 posts

313 months

Friday 8th April 2005
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]


where is that vasectomy thread again