header-logo header-logo

Child support reforms: third time lucky?

14 June 2007
Issue: 7277 / Categories: Legal News , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

The controversial Child Support Agency (CSA) is to be replaced by C-MEC, a body with greatly enhanced powers to force non-resident parents to pay child maintenance.

C-MEC, the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission, will be able to: blacklist defaulting parents from taking out loans and mortgages; take money out of bank accounts; impose curfews; and force parents to surrender their passports. It will have powers to charge errant parents for the cost of tracking them down.

The reforms, outlined in the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill, is an attempt to curb the failures of the CSA, which has an overall debt mountain of £3.5bn including about £760m from debts so long-standing they can no longer be legally enforced.

However, family lawyers are campaigning to amend the proposed reforms. Resolution’s child support committee chair Kim Fellowes, a director at Newcastle firm Dickinson Dees LLP, says Resolution is concerned that, while the government is keen to reduce administrative burdens by encouraging parents to agree their own private arrangements, the proposed reforms contain nothing that would enable parents to enforce these arrangements.

She says it is unclear where parents could go to get help on working out arrangements.

The group points out that there is no information on how historic debt, which can no longer be legally enforced, will be collected and if compensation will be paid to those parents who have lost these maintenance payments through no fault of their own.

Resolution also wants divorce courts to be given the power to cover arrangements for child support payments where they are already involved.
Fellowes adds: “Two versions of the CSA have failed thousands of children and their parents to date and the government’s latest plans look set to continue that trend.”

Issue: 7277 / Categories: Legal News , Child law , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll