header-logo header-logo

31 January 2019 / Matilda Kingham
Issue: 7826 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Maintenance matters

Matilda Kingham provides an overview of the diversionary tactics employed to avoid paying child maintenance

 

  • Primary jurisdiction.
  • Unearned income.
  • Challenging an assessment.
  •  

    Primary jurisdiction in respect of child maintenance lies with the child maintenance service (CMS, formerly known as the Child Support Agency). When an application is made to the CMS, the CMS will consider the income of the paying parent (known as the non-resident parent) and apply a formula to this income to produce an assessment.

    This calculation is relatively straightforward where the non-resident parent earns income in a conventional fashion such as via PAYE. However, only a non-resident parent’s earned income is taken into consideration as the Department for Work and Pensions feel that ‘the majority of people […] only have one income stream’.

    As a result, the CMS struggles to deal with more complex income structures, particularly those where the paying parent is self-employed and/or receives income by way of dividend or rental income. Unearned taxable income is not automatically taken into consideration by the CMS when it makes its calculations and the receiving parent has to let the

    If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
    If you are already a subscriber sign in
    ...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

    MOVERS & SHAKERS

    Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

    Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

    Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

    Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

    Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

    International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

    Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

    Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

    Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

    NEWS
    Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
    The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
    A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
    After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
    Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
    back-to-top-scroll