Is this really what we and our MP'S really mean by child support? Is this the type of idiocy we want? If CSA have failed to claim anything from this man since 1994 and he has supported his son, they can hardly expect him to rush and give them £62,625.08. This is another disgusting action of an agency that is out of control and running on promises of bonus money for collection figures. It's sick.
1 in 6 women name wrong dad in CSA paternity cases
All CSA material sent to parents carries warnings that it is a criminal offence to supply false information. But the CSA admitted no mothers had been prosecuted, or named and shamed for falsely naming the father of a child. CSA don't make any money from it so why bother but tests are costing the tax payer a million. (More)
The damning report!
And still it fails miserably.
Read it and tell us what you think. Do you agree, disagree, have something to add or bring our attention to some other aspects of this, the worst agency in the history of British government.
One has to question why this new system, the last system and the one before that are all designed to hit every father as if he were a "non resident parent" that did absolutely nothing for his kids, who neither seen, cared for nor wanted to contribute or be a part of their children's lives? While any NRP that does try to be actively involved with his children and that is by far the majority of fathers is penalised, victimised and left in a position where he may be incapable of being financially involved with his kids in favour of his ex partner who can be in a situation where they bear no financial responsibilities what so ever. Why do all three of these systems drive a huge wedge between mother and father?
