Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • DN is ok DCA NOA is ok, though not one from Newday saying they've sold it. agreement states esigned on a sunday at 11am?? really??  but no typed names or tick box nor any IP address used. if the date is correct then poss ok, it that your correct address for that time of take out? but if not, then that could simply be a copy of someone elses they've used with you details copy'n'pasted over theirs. the agreement details separate T&C's in at least 8.4. a full set of T&C containing your correct address for the time MUST be included. failure renders the agreement unenforceable... have you the T&C's too? dx
    • Npower and Scottish Power and others have always had regulations that require them to treat customers fairly - the threads here and my experiences demonstrate that those regs are little more than useless.   Even Octopus recently spent month after month saying they needed to increase my monthly payments despite my credit balance slowly going up TWICE I had to reset it online back to prior payment as they unilaterally increased it unilaterally. Raised formal complaint and they than said i was paying too much and reduced the payment, again without my agreement, although that time at least they told me they were doing it.   .. and Octopus has been one of the better ones.    
    • Thank you. You left all your personal details showing on the invoice, but I've removed them. From Googling it seems the free parking is limited to one hour.  You stayed two.  There is no point appealing, you did overstay.  That's apart from the fact the private parking companies are just interested in £££££ and never accept appeals. We have other Iceland cases, Iceland as a company refuse to have these invoices cancelled. So it's up to you. Pay £51 and the matter goes away. Or refuse to pay.  Horizon very rarely do court.  We would support you all the way. 
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

child support agency applying for a liability order


postggj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5129 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

BROTHERS PROBLEM THIS/NOT MINE

 

WELL ITS THE SAME OLD STORY TO BEGIN WITH

DIVORCE WITH KIDS AND MAINTANANCE

 

MY BROTHER HAS TWO CHILDREN

WELL THEY ARE 16 AND 18 NOW

 

IN THE BEGINING WHEN THEY SPLIT UP HE WAS PAYING DIRECT TO HER AT £100 PER WEEK FOR THE TWO CHILDREN. HIS EX WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THIS AND CALLED IN THE CSA.

AT THE TIME HE HAD BEEN WORKING FOR ABOUT THREE MONTHS AND THE CSA ASSESSED HIM TO PAY £800 PER MONTH FOR THE KIDS. BECAUSE OF THIS HE HAD TO RESIGN FROM HIS JOB.

HE STARTED UP HIS OWN COMPANY AFTER THAT.

 

he has had an assessmant stating he has been zero rated for child maintance due to his company figures, they went to his accountants in person and inspected his books, he had been paying a minimum ammount due to the low wage he takes from the company BY AN ATTACHMENT OF EARNINGS ORDER

the Csa are happy with this and have cofirmed everything in writing.

 

he now has received a letter from the csa stating they will be applying for a liability order in seven days under S.33 OF THE CHILD SUPPORT ACT 1991 UNLESS HE PAYS ARREARS OF 10 K IN SEVEN DAYS.

 

THEY PUT THE ARREARS FROM 2002 TO 2010

 

THIS IS ONE DEPARTMENT NOT TALKING TO ANOTHER BUT ITS LIKE BANGING YOUR HEAD AGAINST A BRICK WALL.

 

THINKING CAPS ON PEOPLE

 

THIS IS WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

been doing a bit of digging

 

doES the csa exist anymore

 

i thought it had been replaced on the 5 june 2008 by

 

THE CHILD MAINTENANCE AND ENFORCEMENT COMISSION

 

SO USING S.33 CHILD SUPPORT ACT 1991 IS IRRELEVANT

 

COMMENTS PEOPLE

Link to post
Share on other sites

bumping this up as this threaD IS RATHER QUIET

 

I HAVE JUST MET UP WITH MY BROTHER AND HE HAS SHOWN ME THE LETTER FROM THE CSA

 

NOW IN THE BIT WHERE THEY SAY THEY WILL BE APPLYING FOR A LIABILITY ORDER AND YOU CAN GO TO COURT AND ARGUE AGAINST THE APPLICATION

 

ONE OF THE REASONS STATED THAT THE MAGISTRATE WILL NOT DEBATE IS

 

YOU BELIEVE THE ARREARS FIGURES ARE INCORRECT

 

THATS GUILTY UNTILL YOU PROOVE YOUR SELF INNOCENT

 

NOW WHAT AREA OF THE CHILD SUPPORT ACT 1991 CAN THEY MAKE THOSE CLAIMS

 

COMMENTS PEOPLE

Link to post
Share on other sites

you would have to earn £20000 profit per year to pay £400 per month so u say he had to pay £800 per month thats means he would have to earn £40000per year PROFIT

Your being a little vague how many years has he paid csa or ex wife?

Link to post
Share on other sites

listen................ there is a way! they are not law the only way to fight this if you dont want to pay is go on to dead beat dads website join the forum and they will give u all the info you need

Link to post
Share on other sites

if he can prove his earnings what is the issue postggj?

 

 

THIS SEEMS TO ME TWO DEPTS NOT TALKING TO EACH OTHER

 

HE WORKED FOR THREE MONTHS FOR AN EMPLOYER ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AGO

 

HE HAD TO LEAVE AS THE CSA WANTED 800 QUID A MONTH OUT OF HIS WAGES (HALF)

 

THE CSA ASSESSED HIM AT THAT JOB FOR 12 MONTHS, NOT THREE

 

THEY WONT ALTER THERE FIGURES

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats The Point

 

He Went Self Employed By Setting Up His Own Company And Paying Himself A Minimum Wage

 

Thats Why The So Called Arrears Have Never Been Paid

 

Its 12 Monts Assessmant When He Only Worked For The Company For Three Seven Years Ago

 

He Has Just Had An Audit From The Csa And Was Zero Rated For Child Maintanance, Its Just The Arrears From Seven Years Ago They Are Now After Him For

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would write to your local MP about this, if he was self employed and was only paying himself £100.00 per week then he only would of had to pay £5.00 per week, if he has his past 6-10 yrs tax returns to prove this then they cant do this liabilty stuff its a nonsense, if worst comes to worst get solicitor and let cmec take him to court and they will fall flat on there faces, the more people complain about cmecs bully boy tactics something just might snap one day, we can live in hope.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Firstly, the liability order has not been applied for yet, this is a lengthy process. The main thing is for your brother to make contact and start to comply. The only reason they will go down this route is if people are self-employed, because they can't go to an employer for a deduction from earnings. And secondly, they will apply for this liability order if the non resident parent is non compliant.

 

Your brother needs to request an account breakdown, showing the different amounts he was liable to pay from different times. He can offer to pay whatever he is liable to pay at the moment - this will ease the pressure from the csa.

 

If your brother has paperwork to confirm the amounts he needs to pay (£0.00 as you say) then he can contact the csa and see what they have to say about this. It may be that the amounts have been recalculated (revised) at some point in time - if this is the case - the new liability will stand no matter what and your brother is liable for the debt calculated.

 

Best bet is to contact them and see what they say, account breakdown, offer to make payments - liability order will be postponed - but beware - bailiffs usually come before this so.. your brother needs to act quick..

 

Hope this helps, if you need anything else let me know.. as it is difficult to reply as your message is a little vague with the life of the case etc..!

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...