| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
30 Jan 2006 : Column 262W—continued
British Sign Language
Mr. Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on (a) his Department's projects to support access to British Sign Language and (b) the recruitment of tutors for this purpose. [45242]
Mrs. McGuire: My Department has recently provided a total of £1.5 million funding for:
six initiatives to contribute to establishing a GB wide framework to support the recruitment, training and deployment of BSL tutors, to enhance their numbers, status and levels of qualification; and
four initiatives to promote access for BSL users through awareness raising among employers, among service providers and in the wider community.
Examples of these projects include:
a project which developed a family sign language curriculum that will allow BSL tutors to deliver appropriate training in BSL to the families of deaf children;
and a project providing practical workplace solutions at the point of need for interaction between deaf BSL users and hearing people—an extensive online resource covering BSL awareness for employers and colleagues, including the deaf person's first day in a new job; opportunities to learn BSL from basic signs through to quite advanced levels; and work specific BSL dictionaries to be accessed by both deaf and hearing people.
BSL tutors were involved in developing, piloting and using the materials produced by the projects. A conference was held on 7 December 2005 to disseminate lessons learned and to raise awareness of and promote take-up of project outputs and products.
Child Maintenance
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many deduction of earnings orders were imposed by the Child Support Agency in each year from 1991 to 1994; and if he will make a statement. [44737]
Mr. Plaskitt: The Child Support Agency did not start operating until 1993. The information requested is not available covering the period 1993–94.
Mr. Laws:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what plans he has to give the Child Support Agency powers to use (a) travel bans and (b) passport withdrawal as a child support enforcement tool; and if he will make a statement; [44779]
30 Jan 2006 : Column 263W
(2) what plans he has to tag non-resident parents who are not compliant with child maintenance assessments issued by the Child Support Agency; and if he will make a statement. [44732]
Mr. Plaskitt: The Secretary of State will make an announcement on child support shortly.
Child Support
Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents have been found to be avoiding paying the correct amount of child support in (a) Jarrow constituency, (b) South Tyneside, (c) the North East and (d) the UK in each year since 1997. [21041]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents have been found guilty of avoiding paying the rightful amount of child support in (a) Jarrow constituency (b) South Tyneside (c) the North East and (d) the UK in each year since 1997.
Detailed information relating to committal proceedings is only available from the period from March 1999. Owing to the format in which this data is held, it is not possible to provide this data for the specific geographical areas requested on a yearly basis and only total numbers to date can be provided.
| Number of non resident parents sentenced since March 1999 | |
|---|---|
| South Tyneside | 2 |
| North East of England | (97)41 |
| Nationally | 496 |
(97) includes two sentences passed in the South Tyneside court
These sentences will include suspended sentences, committal to prison or disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff have left the Child Support Agency in each of the last six years; and if he will make a statement. [21855]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff have left the Child Support Agency for each of the last six years.
Please see the table below detailing the number of staff who have left the Child Support Agency for each of the last six operational years.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the latest estimate is of the time taken to action a Child Support Agency case clerically; and if he will make a statement. [21962]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the latest estimate is of the time taken to action a Child Support Agency case clerically; and if he will make a statement.
The latest estimate of the average time taken to clear a case once it has been set up clerically is 16 weeks. This is based upon a sample of a third of the clerical caseload of 15,000 cases.
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency cases there were in each year from 1997 to 2005 in (a) England, (b) Northamptonshire and (c) Wellingborough. [26799]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many Child Support Agency cases there were in each of the years 1997 to 2005 in (a) England (b) Northamptonshire and (c) Wellingborough.
Such information as is available is presented in the attached table. I apologise for the fact that this information cannot currently be disaggregated to the geographical level requested from February 2003 onwards.
Notes:
1. The figures are rounded to the nearest thousand, and are a 'snapshot' at end of February each year.
2. The analysis presented includes those cases with a full maintenance assessment only, as it is not possible to provide disaggregated volumes for pre-assessed cases or those with an interim maintenance assessment.
3. Northamptonshire is based on the following local authority areas: Corby, Daventry, East Northamptonshire, Kettering, Northampton, South Northamptonshire, Wellingborough.
4. Wellingborough analysis is based on Wellingborough parliamentary constituency.
5. Robust information covering the period from March 2003 to present is not currently available.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 265W
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many requests to HM Revenue and Customs for information regarding the income of non-resident parents were made by the Child Support Agency in each month over the last three years; and what the average time taken to respond was. [30001]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many requests to HM Revenue and Customs for information regarding the income of non-resident parents were made by the Child Support Agency in each month over the last three years; and what the average time taken to respond was.
The Agency requests earnings information from two areas of HMRC, they are the Centre for Revenue Intelligence and the National Insurance Contributions Office.
Requests for earnings information originate from the Agency's caseworkers who are familiar with the standards underpinning the Service Level Agreement which details the services to be provided and the timescales for the provision of those services. Where these are not met, caseworkers will escalate on a case by case basis either directly with HMRC via their Trace Champion" or through a central Service Level Agreement Team to resolve any specific issues.
Because of these arrangements the Agency does not generate internal management information on either requests or timescales.
The Centre for Revenue Intelligence does hold information on requests made for earnings from the Agency. These are shown in the table at annex A.
The arrangements with National Insurance Contributions Office are similar to that of The Centre for Revenue Intelligence although caseworkers will go directly to the central Service Level Agreement Team if the service falls below the required standard.
The National Insurance Contributions Office holds information on total Department of Work and Pensions referrals, however this is not disaggregated for the Child Support Agency.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 266W
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the effect of change requests made by Ministers in relation to the CS2 computer system on the operations of the Child Support Agency. [30016]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the effect of change requests made by Ministers in relation to the CS2 computer system on the operations of the Child Support Agency.
Change requests are made by the Agency not Ministers. Senior Agency officials rigorously review the reason for any change request to ensure it will deliver significant operational benefit. EDS are then asked to conduct impact assessments against all aspects of their IT service and provide a documented response. This response is reviewed by senior Agency officials who, based on the information provided, make a final decision on whether to proceed with the change.
Change requests are primarily made to incorporate new or amended functionality. This may be required for various reasons, but predominantly to address needs that could not be foreseen at the system development stage—such as incorporating the requirement to transfer responsibility for payment of maintenance from Girobank to the Alliance and Leicester, for example.
The changes requested have improved the degree of support that the system provides to staff while processing cases and delivering customer service. This has included enhancements to our mechanisms for distributing workload, our automated exchange of information with Jobcentre Plus and the quality of automatically produced customer notifications.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the (a) absence rates due to sickness and (b) turnover rates for Child Support Agency staff were for each month of the last calendar year. [30025]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the (a) absence rates due to sickness and (b) turnover rates for Child Support Agency staff were for each month of the last calendar year.
Note:
The table above shows the Average Working Days Lost to sickness each month on an annualised basis.
Note:
The table above reflects the percentage monthly staff turnover rate for CSA Great Britain. The figures include both internal and external leavers (permanent, fixed term and temporary staff).
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost of compensation payments made to clients of the Child Support Agency for administrative errors was in each of the last five years. [30030]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the total cost of compensation payments made to clients of the Child Support Agency for administrative errors was in each of the last five years.
Financial redress is made to clients in cases where maladministration has occurred. The Agency does not hold robust information to distinguish administrative errors from other acts of maladministration.
The following table summarises the financial redress payments made to clients in each of the last five financial years, as outlined in the Agency's Annual Report and Accounts.
| Financial redress paid to clients | |
|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 3,053,000 |
| 2001–02 | 2,590,000 |
| 2002–03 | 2,478,000 |
| 2003–04 | 2,331,000 |
| 2004–05 | 3,043,000 |
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many stuck cases were held by the Child Support Agency during the last calendar year, broken down by month. [30040]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many stuck cases were held by the Child Support Agency during the last calendar year broken down by month.
There are still a number of defects in the CS2 computer system which can prevent some cases from progressing. The figures in the table below show the total number of cases requiring technical intervention to progress against all identified defects. These figures include cases currently being progressed clerically and cases for which no further action is required but which cannot be closed without technical intervention. The clerical process allows staff to progress these cases off-line to ensure that any money paid in by the non-resident parent is paid out to the parent with care.
Work is ongoing to remedy these problems, and future IT releases are planned during 2006 and 2007 to resolve the various system performance issues and build on the improvements already made.
Mr. Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many (a) face-to-face interviews have been provided, (b) complaints have been received, (c) cases have been referred to the Independent Case Examiner and (d) cases have been raised by hon. and right hon. Members with the Child Support Agency in each year since 1997; what the average cost of each has been in each year; and how policy on each has changed since 1997. [33431]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 1 December 2005]: The information requested is as follows:
(a) Information on face-to-face interviews is only available for 2002–03 for old scheme cases on CSCS, and in 2004–05 for all schemes. Details are included in the following table.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 269W
| Number | |
|---|---|
| 2002–03 | 67,195 |
| 2003–04 | (98)— |
| 2004–05 | 26,136 |
(98) Robust information covering the period 2003–04 is not currently available.
Under the new legislation (introduced in March 2003), calculating maintenance requires less information and is quicker to establish therefore reducing the need for face-to-face interviews. This will have contributed to the fall in the numbers of interviews between 2002–03 and 2004–05.
The agency's face-to-face service was replaced in September 2005 with the Client Interviewing Service. This service provides interviews for clients who require
30 Jan 2006 : Column 270W
assistance. It also uses Compliance Inspector Teams to pursue clients, employers and other parties who fail to co-operate with the agency when required to do so.
Unfortunately, it is not possible currently to provide estimates of the average cost of carrying out face-to-face interviews.
(b) The following table provides information on the number of complaints received by the agency since 1997.
During 2003–04 a three-tier complaints process was introduced. Stage 1 complaints are dealt with by the complaints resolution team located within each of the agency's six business units. Stage 2 complaints are an escalation to the relevant area director when the client is not satisfied with the outcome of stage 1; and stage 3 is an escalation to the chief executive if the client remains dissatisfied.
Unfortunately, it is not possible currently to provide estimates of the average cost of dealing with agency complaints.
(99) While the agency did receive stage 1 telephone complaints prior to 2002–03, their volumes were not recorded, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(100) Although 671 stage 1 telephone complaints were recorded between December 2002 and March 2003, their volumes were not recorded throughout the whole year, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(101) While the agency did receive complaints directly to the chief executive, treat official complaints, and MP complaints to business units prior to 2000–01, their volumes were not recorded, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(102) During 2003–04 complaints sent directly to the chief executive were not recorded separately from those complaints which were escalated to him as part of the three stage process. Therefore, although 7,183 complaints in total were received during 2003–04, it is not possible to separate out those complaints received by the chief executive directly (as opposed to those escalated via the complaints process), thus preventing meaningful comparison with data for earlier years.
(103) In April and May of 2004, the chief executive received a total of 1,435 complaints but it is not possible to separate out those complaints received by the chief executive directly, as opposed to those escalated to stage 3 of the complaints process. From June 2004 to March 2005, after which time such complaints were recorded separately, the chief executive received 4,352 direct complaints and 2,549 complaints escalated upwards from stage 2. Again, these recording issues prevent meaningful comparison of this category with earlier years.
(104) Treat official letters are those received by a Minister from a member of the public, and referred for initial consideration to an official of the agency.
Note:
The agency has a three-tier complaints process which comprises of: stage 1 complaints from clients which are dealt with by the Complaints Resolution Team located within each of the agency's six business units; stage 2 complaints which are an escalation to the relevant area director when the client is not satisfied with the outcome of stage 1; and stage 3 which is an escalation to the chief executive if the client remains dissatisfied.
(c) The following table shows the volume of complaints received, accepted and cleared by the Independent Case Examiner (ICE), together with the annual budget and cost per cleared case.
The ICE can only accept cases that have completed the final stage of the agency's complaints process in the six months prior to the referral to ICE. Cases that concern matters of law, Government policy, have been (or are being) investigated by the parliamentary and health service ombudsman, cannot be accepted. Cases which cannot be accepted are referred back to the agency.
Notes:
1. Figures shown represent complaints received into ICE from Great Britain and Northern Ireland CSA clients.
2. Unit cost is annual budget divided by the volume of cleared cases.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 271W
(d) Unfortunately, it is not possible to say how many case specific complaints have been raised by hon. and right hon. Members. While the information presented in the table at part (b) shows complaints sent to business units by MPs, these can relate to both case specific and general issues, and cannot be broken down to identify the former. In addition, cases shown as being received by the chief executive are from MPs and also other bodies such as solicitors, pressure groups, local councillors and citizens advice bureaux. Again, this information recorded cannot be broken down further.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total amount of compensation paid to clients by the Child Support Agency (CSA) has been since 1997; and (a) how many and (b) what proportion of complaints about the CSA have been upheld by the Independent Case Examiner since 1997. [35395]
Mr. Plaskitt: The following table summarises the compensation payments made to clients in each year since 1997, as outlined in the agency's Annual Report and Accounts.
| Amount of compensation paid | |
|---|---|
| 1997–98 | 1.101 |
| 1998–99 | 4.351 |
| 1999–2000 | 3.075 |
| 2000–01 | 3.053 |
| 2001–02 | 2.590 |
| 2002–03 | 2.478 |
| 2003–04 | 2.331 |
| 2004–05 | 3.043 |
The following table shows how many full investigations were carried out by ICE on complaints raised about the CSA, and the outcome of those investigations.
Note:
Figures shown represent complaints received into ICE from Great Britain CSA clients.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 272W
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many customer complaints were made to the Child Support Agency in each year from 1996–97. [41332]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the requested information.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many customer complaints were made to the Child Support Agency in each year from 1996–97 to 2005–06 to date.
The volumes of complaints received direct from clients, their representatives and MPs to the Child Support Agency or to our Ministers, for which information is available, are in the attached table.
It should be noted that it is difficult to use this information to make meaningful comparisons over time due to changes in the way that information has been recorded. In particular whilst the volume of stage 1 written complaints undoubtedly rose between 2002–03 and 2003–04, this is likely to have been due in part to more rigorous recording of complaints received at the time, and the introduction by the Agency of a three tier complaints process during 2003–04.
It should also be noted that the volume of complaints has stabilised. In the twelve months up to November 2005, the Agency received a total of 54,000 complaints, this compares to 55,000 for the 12 months up to May 2005 (the earliest period for which comparable data for total numbers of complaints received is available).
Further, to put the attached figures into context, the 54,000 complaints received in the 12 months to November 2005 represent less than 4% of the 1.4 million cases dealt with by the CSA.
(105) While the agency did receive stage 1 telephone complaints prior to 2002–03, their volumes were not recorded, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(106) Although 671 stage 1 telephone complaints were recorded between December 2002 and March 2003, their volumes were not recorded throughout the whole year, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(107) While the agency did receive complaints directly to the Chief Executive, treat official complaints, and MP complaints to Business Units prior to 2000–01, their volumes were not recorded, thus preventing meaningful comparison with later years.
(108) During 2003–04 complaints sent directly to the Chief Executive were not recorded separately from those complaints which were escalated to him as part of the 3 stage process. Therefore, although 7,183 complaints in total were received during 2003–04, it is not possible to separate out those complaints received by the Chief Executive directly (as opposed to those escalated via the complaints process), thus preventing meaningful comparison with data for earlier years.
(109) In April and May of 2004, the Chief Executive received a total of 1,435 complaints but is not possible to separate out those complaints received by the Chief Executive directly, as opposed to those escalated to stage 3 of the complaints process). From June 2004-March 2005, after which time such complaints were recorded separately, the Chief Executive received 4,352 direct complaints and 2,549 complaints escalated upwards from stage 2. Again, these recording issues prevent meaningful comparison of this category with earlier years.
(110) Treat official letters are those received by a Minister from a member of the public, and referred for initial consideration to an official of the agency.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 273W
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many child support cases were referred to the special payments department at the Child Support Agency in each year since 2001; how many special payments were made; what the total cost of the special payments was; and how many people were paid special payments. [42010]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer on 16 January 2006]: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the right hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 30 January 2006:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many child support cases were referred to the special payments department at the Child Support Agency in each year since 2001; how many special payments were made; what the total cost of the special payments was; and how many people were paid special payments.
The Agency does not hold sufficiently robust information to give you precisely the information requested. I apologise for this but can give you information on the number of cases referred to special payments, how many special payments have been made and the total cost of special payments between the period 1 December 2001 and 31st December 2005.
I am unable to state how many people received payments from the Child Support Agency because the Agency records the number of payments made and an individual may have received more than one payment.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 274W
1. The Agency does not hold sufficiently robust information prior to 1 December 2001 to provide data over the entire period requested. 2. Compensation payments cover financial redress, which are made to clients in cases where maladministration has occurred. The Agency does not hold robust information to distinguish administrative errors from other acts of maladministration. 3. Consolatory payments are made in support of an apology made by the Agency to any individual. Actual financial loss payments are made in those cases where maladministration has directly caused the customer to incur additional expenditure that would not have been incurred otherwise.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what powers the Independent Case Examiner has (a) to award and (b) to recommend the awarding of compensation by the Child Support Agency (CSA) in cases where the Examiner considers that the CSA has failed claimants. [44231]
Mr. Plaskitt: The Independent Case Examiner has no statutory authority to award compensation. However, she has authority to recommend the consideration of financial redress by the Child Support Agency in cases where she has identified maladministration in the way that the agency dealt with a client. Such recommendations may include the consideration of compensation for actual financial loss and consolatory payments in recognition of difficulties, anxiety and distress caused by agency maladministration.
The agency has agreed to implement her recommendations in all but exceptional circumstances, giving written reasons for not doing so to both the Case Examiner and the client. The agency decides the amount of the award in line with Department for Work and Pensions Guidance.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in how many cases in each of the last five years the Independent Case Examiner has found failure by the Child Support Agency; and in how many cases the Examiner recommended that the Agency should pay compensation. [44232]
Mr. Plaskitt: The following table describes all of the information requested.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 275W
n/a=Not available.
(111) Complaints are cleared by resolution on the basis that the Agency will take agreed action to address the issues raised.
(112) Some cases include more than one recommendation where several instances of maladministration have been identified.
(113) For similar reasons, some cases will include more than one recommendation for financial redress. Financial redress may include consolatory payments, ex gratia payments, actual financial loss, deferment of arrears, advance payments of maintenance, interest payments, or refunds of maintenance paid.
Note:
All figures include the Northern Ireland Child Support Agency.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what account is taken by the Child Support Agency of jointly incurred debts when assessing maintenance payments; [44570]
(2) why an overdraft incurred as a result of being unable to pay maintenance and debt repayments is not considered in Child Support Agency assessments. [44602]
Mr. Plaskitt: In the new scheme a non-resident parent can apply for a variation" to the maintenance calculation to have special expenses" taken into account. In the old scheme either parent can apply for a departure" from the formula. One of the grounds on which a variation or departure can be applied for is where the non-resident parent (or in the old scheme the absent parent or parent with care) has expenses relating to debts which arose before the non-resident parent became a non-resident parent, and at the time that the non-resident parent and the parent with care were living together.
The debts must have been incurred for the joint benefit of both parents, or their children, or for the benefit of the other parent but where the person applying remains legally responsible for the repayments.
Expenses relating to a bank overdraft can be taken into account but only where at the time it was taken out it was agreed to be for a specified amount and repayable over a specified period.
Only the expenses exceeding a certain threshold are allowed. In the current scheme the threshold is set at £10 a week where the non-resident parent's net weekly income is below £200, and £15 a week where it is £200 or more. In the old scheme the threshold is £15 a week for all cases.
A departure or variation is only allowed where it is just and equitable" to do so. Broadly this means that the result of the variation or departure must be fair taking account of all the circumstances of the case, and, in particular, the welfare of any child likely to be affected. This includes the child for whom maintenance is paid as well as any other children living with either parent.
30 Jan 2006 : Column 276W
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 10 January 2006, Official Report, column 611W, on the Child Support Agency, how many outstanding applications from people in (a) Guildford and (b) Surrey were received more than (i) six months and (ii) 12 months ago. [45645]
Mr. Plaskitt: The information is not available at the geographical level requested.
Mr. Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many formal complaints his Department has received regarding the Child Support Agency from people in the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham in each year since 1997. [45960]
Mr. Plaskitt: This information requested is not available at the geographical level requested.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |