The government’s latest plan for parents to agree amicably to their child maintenance agreements or face a fee fills me with despair.

Under proposed new rules parents unable to reach a mutual agreement on payment will both be charged a fee if they ask the new Child Maintenance Service to intervene. The paying parent will have a 20% fee added to the maintenance payment while the receiving parent will have to pay 4% to ensure they receive the money to which they are entitled.

I am deeply concerned by this change and think that once again government is failing vulnerable members of our society when they are facing a crisis and most need support.

First of all separating couples are no longer eligible to claim legal aid for most divorce and child contact issues – now they are once again being targeted as the government seems determined to keep civil matters out of the court system.

Single parents – 95 percent of whom are women – will undoubtedly feel under great stress as they struggle to chase maintenance and have to pay money, which they probably can ill-afford, in a bid to receive their just payments. And, if they need advice and support about the new system, this will cost them £20 to use a service that calculates how much they are owed.

My other worry is that some single parents will be deterred from making new child maintenance claims, or could even settle for an inappropriate arrangement, resulting in their children losing out on vital financial support.

While the former Child Support Agency was indeed inefficient, at least it allowed parents take action against ex-partners who were trying to avoid their responsibility. Pension Minister Steve Webb’s argument that the CSA was using an IT system riddled with defects and costing £74 million per annum to run reveals the true reason why changes have been made.

He may state that parents need to be responsible for agreeing financial support for their own children support, but the reality is these changes have been made to cut costs and remove people from the child support system, which is in my opinion, the only place where these disputes can be properly settled.

Instead of targeting those already most disadvantaged and needy, the government should consult parents, family lawyers and other relevant third parties to come up with a system that ensures vulnerable single parents receive the support they deserve – and are entitled to.

Do you think that the new child maintenance policy is penalising those single parents most in need?  We’d like to hear your views and if you have any questions about child maintenance payments please call us on 0113 246 0055, leave us a comment below or drop us an e-mail.

The post Will single parents and children be the losers under new child maintenance reforms? appeared first on Jones Myers.

The government plans to charge single parents for using the services of CMEC, the body that oversees the Child Support Agency (CSA), in an effort to position it as a last resort after all other avenues for reaching an agreement have been exhausted. This move, like any other made in relation to the CSA, has prompted an emotional response from several quarters – not least former Lord Chancellor Lord Mackay of Clashfern who has openly opposed the proposals.

In the year to December 2011, the CSA collected or arranged almost £1.2billion in maintenance, a tenth of which was arrears. However this only accounted for 78 percent of cases in which maintenance was due; what of the remaining 22 percent? And what of the hidden impact of the CSA’s enforcement activities, which have included raising over £2million by seizing and selling absent parents’ properties.

The CSA is no stranger to controversy and, as usual, the latest announcement has polarised opinion. Here, Jones Myers partners Fiona Kendall and Peter Jones endeavour to make sense of the situation.

Fiona says: “Despite a defeat in the Lords, the government intends to reverse the decision in the Commons, limiting CMEC access to those couples who can’t reach agreement about maintenance.

“Since there aren’t any couples using CMEC just for fun, this is a pointless exercise. The CSA is a last resort for situations where parents cannot agree the appropriate amount or, more often, the paying party has a less than helpful attitude to their financial responsibilities.

“Granted, CMEC relieves most of the burden on our courts from dealing with maintenance claims, and some would argue there should be a charge. But who should pay? The defaulting parent? Both parents in equal shares? And how is payment made when parties are either short of funds or unwilling to pay at all – the very reason they have ended up at CMEC’s door? It is an unnecessary complication within a system that is already unwieldy and uncompromising.”

Peter Jones takes no prisoners with his assessment. He says: “It is about time that the Government stopped tinkering with or trying to re-invent this flawed method of calculating and enforcing child maintenance payments. It is almost 20 years since the CSA was launched, during which time it has been relaunched and finally absorbed into CMEC, with no evidence to indicate why it should be any more successful this time around.

“In the interests of every separated parent and their children, it is vital that we retune to pre-CSA days and leave the matter in the hands of the courts. The CSA’s focus is on enforcement and we should give no quarter to an unsympathetic and formulaic approach where vulnerable children are concerned.”

Do you agree with Fiona or Peter, or do you believe that CMEC is within its rights to charge for the CSA’s services? Tell us below or email us here.

The post Pay up or no payout – would you pay the CSA? appeared first on Jones Myers.