Having to pay CSA arrears already paid for

A question about : Having to pay CSA arrears already paid for

Hi all,

Back in February 2013 I received a call from the CSA saying that I owed arrears of Ј352 to my son's mother. This sum was money that was backdated to 01 June 2012 . During this period I was in fact giving the mother money privately for maintenance and at the time I informed them that I had already paid the money they wanted me to pay. I was not even aware that a case had been opened with the CSA or that I had the option to pay this money through the CSA until feb 2013 as no one had ever called me to ask for any money prior to that.
being somewhat appalled at the service the CSA had provided, I convinced the mother to close the case (or so I thought) by paying her off the debt privately and continuing to pay for maintenance amicably.

In November 2014, 2 years later, I received a call from the Child services telling me, to my complete surprise, that the case had only been put on hold and that the mother has now requested for me to pay arrears of Ј750 including the Ј352 from feb 2013, which I will be paying to her for the third time!
I told the Child maintenance services that I would like to challenge their decision, they went back and listened to conversations they had with myself and the mother back in February 2013 and decided not to change their decision on the basis that in 2012 the mother had said that she had received the Ј352 from me, but that it not been given to her as child maintenance. (Why on earth would it be considered to be anything else?)

Again, I continued paying the mother child maintenance until June 2013. At that point we were in court and she refused to take any child maintenance from me so that she could tell the court that I was not giving her any maintenance. Though none of the payments I made are being considered by Child maintenance.

Most of the money was given to the mother every other week cash in hand without receipt. (I know, big mistake) I do have evidence in the form of bank statements that I have paid the mother at least Ј160 but they will not consider these payments either as the mother simply says that none of these payments were for child maintenance.

I was also told that I should have raised my concerns back in 2013, even though I had clearly stated on the phone to them that I had already paid the mother this money, and this was the reason the mother put the case on 'hold'. Once she put the case on hold and I payed the mother the money I never heard from them again about that Ј352 so I assumed everything was hunky dorey...

Last but not least, no one, neither the CSA or the mother, has ever contacted me or asked me to pay any more money than what was agreed privately between me and the mother and already being payed (besides feb 2013 and nov 2014). These are payments I would have been more than happy to make, granted that someone had actually gotten in touch with me to inform me of that I owed this money in the first place.

So, I guess my question is, do I really have no other choice but to pay the Ј352 for a third time? and if so, how on earth is it even possible that the child maintenance agency can be allowed to run this way? surely they cannot possibly be so clueless as to not know how unfair they treat certain parents and the inherent dangers of giving the requesting (possibly extremely spiteful) parent so much power over the other. From my personal experience with them, they will always take the word of the parent receiving the money as truth even if what they are saying is extremely unlikely.

The only evidence I have of payments besides bank statements is a phone call I recorded back in feb 2013 where she admits that I have been paying her money for maintenance and that she would have it deducted from the CSA. In the call she also admits that she simply did it because she hates me and wants to ruin my life. Though the child maintenance person I spoke to, although very nice, couldn't have cared less. I just find the whole thing totally unbelievable...

Thanks for your help!

Best answers:

• Another point I forgot to mention is that the mother is claiming I only have my son over for 49 nights a year. That's what the court order states as "official" dates, but in the court order it also mentions that I can have my son on any weekends we agree on between ourselves. (not very often as he lives a 6 hour drive away) These extra weekends bring the total nights that my son stays with me to over 52 nights a year (allowing for shared care rate) but again, they will only listen to the receiving parent even though I am telling the truth. What is more worrying is that as a result of this , the mother is very likely to stop me from having extra contact so as to make sure I pay more instead of seeing him more. (I will now only be allowed to see him during school holidays)
  Is there nothing I can do about this? you would have thought they would be encouraging contact not restricting it.
• I'm really sorry but I think you are going to have to pay.
  Same thing happened to my dh only its was Ј1000's because bm told CSA she had no details and it took them a while to track him down. All that time he'd been paying direct but because the standing order didn't say maintenance for xx on xx date they said the money could be for anything.
  We went to court but still had to pay.
  They threatened to take our home, dh with prison and taking his driving licence how he'd pay then didn't matter.
  I would stick with paying CSA now no way agree to pay direct.
  As for nights with you, they told us its dh word against hers and they will always side with PWC.
  I hope I'm wrong and its changed as this was 5-10 years ago
• Thanks for the replies. It looks like there's almost nothing I can do but pay again then... I will bring my case to the Independent Case examiner anyway in the hope that they will listen to the phone call as evidence, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
• We went through the system -even asked our MP for help. I wish you well in your case.We found a lot of prejudice aimed at the nrp & family.We went to a tribunal & everything but the wheels of the CSA do not move fast ....at least when its the nrp that is trying to prove something.... I live in hope that the more recent information (in my husbands case )will come to light soon.
• A bit after the event but always get everything in writing where direct private payments are concerned. I know that introducing that level of formality can be a bit awkward but it certainly saves situations like this from arising.
  I was a debt manager in the "old" CSA - I left when CSA went private - and I've handled more cases like this than I'd like. If the pwc says the money wasn't accepted as child maintenance, then the CSA will take her word for it. It's galling that you have to pay the money again - in this case for the third time - so I can only hope that the arrears agreement the CSA makes with you is a fair one.
  Good luck, kennystetson.
• We learned the hard way ... every single payment for years was paid through our bank to hers same amount same day of month (allowing for bank hols etc) but they ask the pwc what she took the money for! It not fair that they take the word of the pwc over an nrp.Where is the justice in that, a lot of people want to support their children and have done only to be treated in this off hand way.A lot of extra money was spent on the children( as it should be too !) such as uniforms ,shoes & holidays with us (only camping but that was all we could afford).We are still having to pay so called 'arrears' although we have asked for the debt to be repaid over their 2 year debt steer as we have contested the amount.
  Very interesting comments from Billy Rubin.Thank you. A tribunal gave us the right to allow for the children of family here to be taken off the arrears as we didnt know there was a CSA case open(pwc said there wasn't & took payments direct to her bank)The judge allowed this.We wished we had asked him to preside over the whole case -he was very sympathetic .
• In our experience when we told them what had happened (including stopping all contact for 6 months) they dismissed our concerns and told us maintenance is not related to contact, which of course it is.
  Maintenance is NOT related to contact, shared care is.
• Yes you can take the mother or CSA to court, but no, you wont get legal aid to do so.
• We had about Ј1200 off the 'arrears' but had to pay rest completely ,in fact still paying despite ongoing the case ending nearly 2 years ago. The fact is she had the money ,as you say, why would you be paying anything direct otherwise.In our case if the pwc wasnt getting anything why would she have left it so long to tell them? It doesn't figure at all. Our MP stepped in ,speeded up the inquiry process,we got my husbands SARS report direct from CSA with recordings of phone calls but at the end of the day they said she had to say all the money she received was CM which she wouldn't.
  At least now the judges are realising that access shouldnt been witheld by pwc or they could be in contempt of court for Parental Alienation.
  Hope you get some help with your case. Sadly, specialist CSA lawyers were much to expensive for us to afford.
• Same as Cally, we got a bill for thousands of pounds of arrears which hubby had already paid, but the PWC denied that she had had anything as a lot of it was given in cash, even though hubby could prove that the money was coming out of his account each month he couldn't prove that it was maintenance for the children. He was also paying things like house insurance and tv license for the family home. The CSA did allow (after asking permission of the PWC first) half of the value of the bills that he could prove he'd been paying off the amount of arrears, but he had to pay the rest of the arrears, despite the fact that she had already had this money. Sorry can't be more positive!