General Chat

My daughter has given the CSA, on many occasions, my 8 year old grandson's father's name, address, place of work, parents address, mobile phone number and even his National Insurance number...........but still they can't find him! He did reply to one letter about 5 years ago saying he was out of work (yeah right), supporting his mother (even with her full time job) and his younger siblings (all of whom had left school by then). CSA said sorry to trouble you...........and let him escape again! My daughter and her son have less to live on a week than my 90 year old mother-in-law (not that she begrudges her Nan). Even a small contribution from his father would help. Sue xx

Errol Could you please clarify your remark re DNA test. Are you saying thet 99.9 % really gives any room for doubt? Rosex

99.9 per cent means there is always 0.1 per cent chance of doubt or mistake. Also there are recently documented cases of certain companies giving out false results,. There is a well documented case with (I think) Cellmark giving out incorrect results. It may have been one of the other big companies but I am fairly certain it was Cellmark. Mistakes do take place, whether deliberately or through malpractice - just look at the mistakes in the Damilola Taylor case!

Rose TECHNICALLY, there is always room for doubt, except when it is a definite 'no'. Because - a man always has male relatives, either close or distant and IN THEORY, one of those (unknown) relarions could equally well be the father of the child. However, most women know very well who the fathers of their children are, and so do the fathers themselves. If a man is 99.9% likely to be a child's father, then I reckon it is up to the MAN to produce another man related to him who is more likely to be the father, not for there to be a get out for him. I am reminded - when I was a teenager, DNA tests were still in the future, and paternity was proved by blood tests. A local girl, silly and innocent, had had a child and taken the father to the Magistrates court for maintenance. The young man turned up with six or seven mates, all of whom swore they had enjoyed this young woman's favours. The poor girl was in bits. The Magistrate, who was well-known for his rather eccentric behaviour, questioned each young man thoroughly and appeared to believe their stories. Beaming at them all, he said 'Well, it is very difficult to tell which of you may be the father. I order you all to undergo blood tests, and in the meantime, as you ALL enjoyed this young woman's favours, you will ALL pay 30 shillings a week for the upkeep of this child' Uproar in the court! Several of the mates immediately backed down - and were arrested for perjury! I laughed at the time and laugh even more now when I think about it. OC

Thanks OC ,yes I realise that another male relative of the father could technically be implicated. I imagine that is what Errol meant also... I just wanted to make the point that if it is accepted as proof for the CSA,Social Services and the law courts then that piece of paper does mean something! Rosex

Sue Sorry you had such a bad experience with the CSA. Mine were wonderful, as I said - they even had his employer taken to court and fined £1000, for refusing to divulge my OH's income! lololol. just thought - I was not asking for money for myself, only for my daughter - wonder if that makes a difference? Errol There are all kinds of mistakes and injustices made every day in all sorts of situations. I really don't think that the remote possibility of a mistaken DNA result should free all men from their financial obligations to their children. OC

From the Telegraph 2001....(paraphrased )re Cellmark 'approx 17 out of 170,000 tests might (given the 99.99% accuracy) have been inaccurate' This is was from a report where a man had asked for a DNA test which incorrectly said he was not the father........... I think DNA tests where the two potential parents and child are tested is much less open to error (or malpractice) than say matching DNA in criminal cases which might be open to prior contamination (or am I just watching CSI too much lol!) Rosex

Mistakes have been made in the past with chasing men who have paid etc and then they have been presented with incorrect but huge bills, and they have committed suicide because they got nowhere trying to sort the situation out. After their deaths, everything was suddenly sorted out correctly and it was stated they hadn't owed anything after all, yet the hounding had caused the men to take their own lives. CSA have always chased the easy targets, my o.h. was paying for his boys even tho he had them staying with him lots, and took them on holiday and had them when his ex wanted to go away with her friends etc. He also bought all their shoes, and other things for them. When I came into the picture, he was being chased for arrears of several thousand pounds, I helped check everything out and it was found he was not being counted as having housing costs of his own, i.e. CSA thought he was living rent or mortgage free, as he had messed up the forms he filled in. He still had to pay more money till it was finally sorted out, meanwhile his ex had her new man living with her almost full time, she was warned once by DSS investigators that he either could stay over 2 or 3 nights a week (forget what it was) and she could still claim benefits, or he had to move in full time and she must come off benefits. She ignored that warning and was told that she had to stop claiming straight away or face prosecution for false claims. (She had upset a neighbour and we think they reported her.) Her chap moved in full time and she stopped claiming but o.h. still had to pay her money till the boys left eduction. He had already bought her out of the marital home so she had a large amount as a deposit on a new house and SS had helped her with her mortgage etc, all of which new chap had to help her with. She had already been working part time too, don't know if she had declared that. CSA has never been efficiently or fairly run and I don't think things will improve now, more mistakes will be made and more people hounded while the real cheapskate fathers will still get away with paying nothing.

Rose I agree - when you are testing known people against known people, so to speak, there is less likelihood of error than testing against random strangers. I don't know what the answer is really - the old Court system didnt work for me. I suppose that as long as you have men who are determined to escape their financial responsibilities towards the children they have fathered, then there will never be an answer. OC

hi there all just got back in from the gentleman in question sorry i didnt explain very well right he was with a girl who he was with for 3 years in that three years she got pregnant he caught in full stream with someone else he was in contact till the lad was 2 and a half yrs old then she didnt want him to see him anymore he was paying maintenance then csa got involved as someone else said stuck their nose in they asked him in 1999 for 21 thousand ponds from 1989 to 1999 so he ended up suicidle and on anti depressants and eventually hospitial and pace maker the doctors etc in the intervened and told themto lay off him as he was going to be dead theyve just caught up firstly itsthe same figure as 1999 so why so much for 10 years and where is the following 7??? I too have been on the other side and have friends in the same boat but my argument is this if the women has a good enough reason not to go and get money off them the csa will back off ie if the ex islikely to beat her up upset for the kids etc so why cant it be the same the other way also as his new family have had hell and the ex had decided she didnt want him to have a part in the kids life i think a csa review or shutdown needs to happen a petition should be started HOWS ABOUT ALL THOSE STILL WAITING FOR MONEY OFF THE CSA OR EX PARTNER SEND A MESSAGE OR A BUMP TO SAY ME OR THOSE OWING THE CSA LETS SEE IF I CAN BE OF ANY HELP BY ASKING CSA ABOUT DIFFERENT PEOPLES SITUATION AND SEE WHAT REPLY I GET Sorry mega babble going to bed now hope all children are snuggled up in bed with no worries like us parents have nite nite

Liz, it is just such such a shame that the responsible fathers who pay as much as they can, are the ones that the CSA seem to concentrate on, Maybe those cases should be mediated seperately by mutual agreement between the parents with the aid of good family lawyers. Then the CSA could go after the ones who don't pay anything even when they can afford to. Rosexx

My brother was paying a decent amount of maintenance for his two that he'd agreed with his ex-wife. However, when the CSA got involved (we think it was her mother called them) the money he paid them was the same but the ex was getting less. She didn't realise at first and thought it was because he was paying less. I'm aware of several cases of people who've never missed a payment and then the CSA have contacted them and told them they owe arrears for non-payment. The CSA has mostly been a waste of space, I understand that it has helped some but there are others that it has let down greatly on both sides.

Susan, I am glad you came back and tried to clarify things, maybe you should put UPDATE in the title. There were far too many people jumping on your friend without knowing the full facts. It sounds as tho he has been through the mill and needs to get csa to make sure the child is his before he goes any further. The mother of that child sounds a real bitch and I hope she is better to the child than she is to those around her, what ever messages are being passed on to the child through all this? because sure as eggs are eggs, the child has been told or overheard a lot of the hassle and will be thinking it's father doesn't care about it etc, when it is the mother who stopped contact. Some women aren't fit to be mothers.

nudging for Louise

Would just like to add having read the last few posts, paying maintenance should not be dependent on whether you see the child or not. You pay the money to support the child not to buy the right to see it. There are lots of good reasons why mothers/fathers don't want to have the ex partner have contact, which are not always apparent to outsiders. That ' nice young man from the good family' might not be mentally stable ,might take drugs, might beat his partner up............or just cause the child to be distressed because they only want contact on their terms ,not neccessarily what is suitable for the child. If I was the absent parent I would still pay as much as I possibly could simply because it WAS my child. Rosex