Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » Family finance

Child Maintenance Service: the Government's new child support scheme

Rosalind Kent
by Lovemoney Staff Rosalind Kent on 18 February 2013  |  Comments 5 comments

The broken Child Support Agency is being replaced by the new Child Maintenance Service. What improvements can we expect?

Child Maintenance Service: the Government's new child support scheme

If you have just gone through a divorce you will know how expensive it can be. (See How to get Divorced Cheaply for tips on keeping the cost down).

There are inevitably further complications if children are involved – particularly if the parties can't come to an agreement.

Who deals with disagreements?

In the past the Child Support Agency has been the sole body tasked with dealing with the collection of maintenance payments for children whose parents have split. Since its inception it has received much criticism for maladministration and general ineffectiveness, resulting in low public faith in the Agency.

The last thing you need during a stressful divorce is the added misery of delays and mistakes from the very people who are meant to be helping you.

Of course, the Agency claims its error rates are minimal, and blames the majority of them on a ‘faulty’ computer system. But a report from a Whitehall spending watchdog claimed that in 2009-10 there were actually about £25 million worth of financial errors, which is no small sum!

Other complaints include a lack of fact checking by the Agency, such as discrepancies between the earnings absent fathers declare and their actual income going unchallenged. Taking these figures at face value has left many single mothers seriously out of pocket.

The launch of the Child Maintenance Service

Because of unhappiness with the current system, the Government has decided to introduce a brand new statutory scheme for arranging the payment of child maintenance. While the old Child Support Agency is not going to disappear entirely (at least for the time being) it will be run alongside a new (and hopefully greatly improved) service.

Run by the Department of Work and Pensions – which also deals with the administration of benefits – it is hoped that the new Child Maintenance Service will reinstate public confidence in the system.

The schemes will initially run alongside each other for the next three years. During this time, the Child Support Agency will work to close the cases it currently manages in preparation for transferring entirely to the new scheme.

What improvements have been made?

Recognising that significant problems have dogged the running of the Child Support Agency for most of its existence, the Government has given assurances that there will be ‘significant’ differences to the way this scheme is to be run.

For example, it has promised that the method for calculating maintenance will be simplified, and it will use gross income figures provided by HM Revenue & Customs, rather than relying on those provided by the individuals involved.

Who can use the Child Maintenance Service?

At the outset, the new scheme will only affect those who have four or more children. The children must have the same two parents, and the family must have had no previous involvement with the Child Support Agency.

This means that only a few new applicants will enjoy the benefits of the new scheme to start with. The idea is that all applicants will apply to the Child Support Agency in the normal way, with only ‘appropriate’ cases being sent to the Child Maintenance Service. 

However, this is only because it is very early days for the scheme at the moment. The plan is that anyone who applies for maintenance, regardless of their circumstances, will have access to it in the future.

The drawbacks

It is important to note that – as usual – there is no such thing as a free lunch. Applicants will be charged a fee to apply for maintenance under the new scheme, and they will also have to attend an interview to show that they have considered other ways of arranging maintenance before being accepted.

However, if you claim certain benefits this fee will be reduced. And if your relationship has broken down as a result of domestic violence, no fee at all is payable (contrary to reports in the press claiming that battered women are going to have to pay through the nose to escape an abusive partner).

An interesting alternative

There is another option for those who don’t fit the current criteria for the Child Maintenance Service, or for those who don’t want to be subjected to fees in the future.

Couples who are separating can try to sort out arrangements for their children using the services of a website called Child Maintenance Options. This service is also run by the Department of Work and Pensions but gives parents the opportunity to access FREE information and support, initially through an online and telephone service and later by face-to-face assistance. It is hoped that this service will help parents come to amicable child maintenance agreements on their own, and only those who are completely unable to reach an agreement will have to take the next step and use the Child Maintenance Service.

So, unless you are already dealing with the Child Support Agency (in which case you have to continue to deal with them until the Child Maintenance Service is fully up and running) then your best bet is to use the Child Maintenance Options website and work hard with your (soon-to-be-ex) partner to come up with the best possible arrangement for your children.

Contact them in the first instance via their website. Alternatively you can ring them on 0800 988 0988 to start the ball rolling over the phone.

More on family finance:

Is an au pair a good way to cut the cost of childcare?

Government childcare plans will INCREASE costs!

How to get divorced cheaply

Breastfeeding: free help and moneysaving tips

Protect your kids from your money worries

Enjoyed this? Show it some love


Comments (5)

  • bengilda
    Love rating 100
    bengilda said

    My daughter's experience of the CSA is one of very helpful people who are utterly incompetent and can't get anything right no matter how many tries they have.

    Facts have been mixed up, figures magically changed, documents lost, files lost, staff who have virtually no idea what they are doing, different facets of the case going to geographically different parts of the UK.


    Ideally the CMS should recruit and train new staff, particularly in executive posts, in the main from outside the Civil Service. Under no circumstances should any of the existing CSA staff be recruited in the CMS, in fact their continuance in the Civil Service should be in extreme doubt. Only this way will we avoid the continuation of the present catastrophic system.

    Report on 18 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • culluding-fool
    Love rating 60
    culluding-fool said

    The current system isn't working for me. I'm a single father and spent a couple of years trying to get maintenance out of my ex before trying CSA. I've received £20 from CSA in two years despite my ex have a very well paid job. The courts have an order in place for her to see our daughter but nothing seems to be able to be done about the money side of things. Maybe they would work harder at it if I was a woman. It says in the documentation that they can take money directly from the absent parent's bank account but they haven't done that yet. My ex is self employed and deals all in cash so I doubt there is much record of her true income. CSA told me they can't deduct money from her earnings while she is self employed. She also receives working tax credits. Not sure how she worked that one out as a single person living on her own in full time work. Anyway, bottom line is that CSA may as well not exist in my case. All talk no teeth.

    Report on 18 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Crispvs
    Love rating 12
    Crispvs said

    The sooner the Parental Extortion Agency (AKA the CSA) is replaced with something competent and properly thought out the better.

    The continuing mantra I hear in the media, on the telephone and in letters from this organisation is that they are charged with exacting payments for the support of children from recalcitrant absent fathers who should be contributing but are not. The fact is however, that alongside the selfish recalcitrant absentees, there are many thousands of men who are good fathers who desperately want to be able to spend more time with their children but who are prevented from doing so due to their exes having moved unreasonably long distances away or denying access, regardless of court imposed conditions. These men do not wish to be absentee fathers - they have been forced into that position by the often unreasonable actions of women. The CSA takes no account of these facts and seems to prefer to pretend that they are of no consequence, as men are an evil species of rodent whose only purpose is to pay money. The organisation has men in its sights as its targets, regardless of the legal or economic realities which should apply. Nor does the payments it exacts bear any relationship to the amount of time children spent with each parent. Like Child Benefit and Child Tax Credit, it is all or nothing, even if a child spends almost as much time with the 'non-resident' parent as the 'resident' parent.

    The CSA appears to work on the assumption that all children should be with their mothers and that those mothers will be disadvantaged if they do not receive enforced support from fathers. This assumption (or set of assumptions) is naive and simplistic. The reality is that some of these women are actually already better off than the men they have walked out on. It is also a reality that simply being female does not guarantee that a person is a better parent than someone who is male. Neither does the CSA necessarily take any account of anything that the father may already be contributing.

    After my ex unexpectedly moved to an undisclosed location which turned out to be two hundred miles from where I live I had to endure a five month period when she refused any sort of contact, despite court orders and I have had continuing access issues ever since. One constant though, is the demands of the CSA. I had been paying a regular amount to her in any case to provide for my son, but then I discovered that she had not been telling the CSA about the money she was receiving from me, meaning that she was being paid twice over. They were continuing (and still continue) to demand a minimum of 15% of my gross income, despite my ex being both better off and being in breach of numerous court orders. They refused, point blank, even to consider the possibility that I might already be contributing a considerable sum to her for my son's upkeep (despite me sending them the proof) and did not bother to contact her about it. I stopped my voluntary payments to her after I realised she was not going to tell the CSA about them, which was about the same time that I realised I was actually the one buying most of his clothes and shoes when he was with me (even most of his school uniform), most of which disappears south, never to be seen by me again. There is also the fact that I also have to spend hundreds of pounds every year in order to see him and collect him to spend school holidays with me, as she virtually never makes the trip herself (although she has sometimes said she will bring him up, only to announce that she will not be once it is too late to book rail or coach tickets at discounted rates).

    Therefore, nowadays, she gets 15% of my gross income through the CSA but I have no idea what she spends it on - it is certainly not shoes and clothes for my son! I have been advised by solicitors that it would be virtually impossible for me to gain primary custody of my son. How would it be, I wonder, if the boot was on the other foot? Hmm - double standards abound!

    Cuddling-fool - unfortunately I'm not surprised at the way the CSA have treated you. They probably feel that as a father, you should automatically hand over custody to your recalcitrant ex. As you have a 'Y' chromosome you will already fit their profile of an unsuitable parent and they will almost certainly deliberately do as little as they can to help you.

    I have heard what Iain Duncan-Smith feels about the CSA in person and I far as I can see, his opinion of it is no better than mine. He also believes in joined up government and dislikes the way departments presently hide information from each other. The sooner a good and fair replacement for the CSA is fully rolled into action the better. For once though, the minister in charge takes a strong interest in the fairness or lack thereof in the present system and rather than just tinkering with it, he is determined to build something better from the ground up. I and many others like me are waiting for it with a sense of relief and urgency in equal measure.

    Report on 19 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • amwell44
    Love rating 77
    amwell44 said

    crispvs - contact / join Families Need Fathers (FNF), who are helpful and supportive.

    Report on 19 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • whyohwhy
    Love rating 1
    whyohwhy said

    I use to work at the CSA and most of the problems stem from the computer system that the government forced to go live before it was fully functional (yes there are some staff issues as well).

    Unfortunately this is just a rebranding of the CSA with the potential for the same old problems. When I left the new system was being discussed and this one was agreed as it was the cheapest option. It will basically be adapted from the old computer system (you do not want to know how much tax paper’s money has been spent on that) so potentially have same problems. Add to this which way the wind is blowing with targets, so instead of staff going after the people who won’t/don’t pay. Management is only interested in number of cases calculated and money coming in - which means all the easy targets.

    The most common source of complaints was against the uncooperative self-employed, it takes forever to get tax records from Inland Revenue (CSA does not have direct access to their system) to do a calculation, they then usually appeal this stating that was just a good year (giving their accountants enough time to hide their money). Then when you do try and get them to pay which if they do not co-operate relies on enforcement of the law usually through the courts which relies on specially trained staff (they reduced the numbers of these as they cost too much money).

    My advice for what it’s worth is try and be civil for the sake of the children and come to arrangement between yourselves . Children are expensive and not a bargaining tool to be used against each other. I do and did feel genuinely sorry for parents who are denied access and the calculation used is extremely biased towards the parent who the child lives with – if child stay 5 nights with one parent and two nights with the other parent, the 2 night parent has to pay for 5 nights but the 5 nights parent pays nothing for the 2 nights with the other parent.

    If you do have to use CSA and do run into problems my only advice is to make an official complaint and get your MP involved and keep on complaining until resolved – they have timescale targets on complaints, don’t be fooled by “I’m sorry you feel that way” answer given out.

    Report on 20 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  1 love

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
Balance transfers rate and period Representative

Barclaycard 31Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 31 months (2.99% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status. A Balance Transfer fee of 3.5% will be applied, then reduced to 2.99% by a refund (terms and conditions apply). Plus an additional £20 fee refund on balance transfers over £2000.

Barclaycard 30Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 30 months (2.89% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status. A Balance Transfer fee of 3.5% will be applied, then reduced to 2.89% by a refund (terms and conditions apply). Plus an additional £20 fee refund on balance transfers over £2000.

MBNA 30Mth Platinum Credit Card Visa

0% for 30 months (2.89% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status.
W3C  Thank you for using One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest