| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
13 Feb 2006 : Column 1665W—continued
Child Support Agency
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many Child Support Agency new scheme cases were stockpiled in the year to March 2003; how many of these cases are still waiting to be processed; what proportion of these cases originated from (a) parents with care on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance and (b) parents with care not on income support or income-related jobseeker's allowance; how many are in (i) the pre-application stage, (ii) the application stage, (iii) the information-gathering stage and (iv) the calculation and collection set-up stage prior to first payment being received; and what average time these stockpiled cases have spent at each stage. [19631]
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.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive, as Stephen Geraghty is on leave I am replying on his behalf.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many new scheme cases were stockpiled in the year to March 2003; how many of these cases are still waiting to be processed; what proportion of these cases originated with concern (a) parents with care on income support or income-related job seeker's allowance and (b) parents with care not on income support or income related job seeker's allowance; how many are in (i) the pre application stage (ii) the application stage (iii) the information
- gathering stage and (iv) the calculation and collection set-up stage prior to first payment being received; and what the average time is these stockpiled cases have spent at each stage.
5,500 new scheme applications had a date for first contact with the Agency between 1st January and 2nd March 2003. Of these, 1000 of were still waiting to be cleared at the end of September 2005, where an application is defined as cleared if it:
In 25 per cent. of these 5,500 cases, the parent with care had applied for income support or income-related jobseekers allowance and had been referred to the Agency by Jobcentre Plus, with the remaining 75 per cent. having applied direct to the Agency in a private capacity.
The table below details the current status of the 1,000 cases that were waiting to be cleared—as at September 2005:
There were an additional 500 cases that had cleared the application process, but were still awaiting the first payment.
The average time the 5,500 cases had spent in each stage of the application process, and also the subsequent first payment stage, can be split between cases that had cleared that particular stage and those that were still in that stage. These figures are detailed in the table below:
Notes to tables:
1. The pre-application stage is where a potential application is screened to establish whether it is valid. Pre-application clearance is where the case either progresses to the application stage, a reduced benefit decision (RBD) is applied, good cause is accepted, or the case is closed.
2. A case enters application stage where it has been accepted as valid at the pre-application stage. An application clearance occurs when a calculation is carried out, a RBD is subsequently applied, good cause is subsequently accepted or the case is subsequently closed.
3. A case enters post calculation stage where clearance at the application stage results in a calculation being carried out. Post calculation clearance is where a collection schedule is set up, an MD arrangement is set up immediately after calculation, a RBD is subsequently applied, good cause is subsequently accepted, the case is subsequently closed, or the calculation is classified as being a nil liability meaning that no further action is required.
4. The first payment stage is the time between a collection schedule being set up and a first payment being made to the PWC, or a Maintenance Direct arrangement being put in place. Additionally, there are a small number of cases where payment was made to the PWC prior to a schedule or Maintenance Direct arrangement being agreed (i.e. voluntary payments), which have been excluded from the analysis aforementioned.
5. There are 161,000 cases received via the Jobcentre Plus interface for which we do not currently have sufficient management information to decide how many of them would or would not fall within the scope of this analysis.
6. Figures are rounded to either the nearest day or hundred cases.
13 Feb 2006 : Column 1667W
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his latest estimate is of the total pensions liability for senior civil servants at the Child Support Agency; and if he will make a statement. [30014]
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.
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 his latest estimate is of the total pensions liability for senior civil servants at the Child Support Agency; and if he will make a statement.
The latest estimate of the total pensions liability for Department for Work and Pensions senior civil servants working in the Child Support Agency, was calculated at 31 March 2005, to be
| £ | |
|---|---|
| Total Pension | 165,239 |
| Total Lump Sum | 428,634 |
| Total Cash Equivalent Transfer Value | 2,297,143 |
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how many court cases have been commenced by the Child Support Agency in respect of non-payment of assessed maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland in each of the last five years, broken down by parliamentary constituency; [39539]
(2) how many cases are under consideration for court action by the Child Support Agency for non-payment of assessed maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland, broken down by parliamentary constituency; [39540]
(3) how many cases of non-payment of maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland have been reported by the Child Support Agency for prosecution in each of the last five years, broken down by parliamentary constituency; [39541]
(4) how many of the cases of non-payment of maintenance reported by the Child Support Agency
13 Feb 2006 : Column 1668W
in Scotland for possible prosecution in each of the last five years have resulted in proceedings being commenced; [39542]
(5) for what reasons proceedings have been dropped in cases reported by the Child Support Agency for prosecution due to non-payment of maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland in which no prosecution has been commenced in each of the last five years; [39543]
(6) what the average penalty imposed against non-resident parents for non-payment of assessed child maintenance where prosecutions have been commenced after report by the Child Support Agency in Scotland was in each of the last five years, broken down by parliamentary constituency. [39544]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is matter for the Chief Executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Questions about enforcement activity in the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive, as he is currently on leave I am responding on his behalf.
(1) You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many court cases have been commenced by the Child Support Agency in respect of non-payment of assessed maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland in each of the last five years broken down by parliamentary constituency [39539].
It is not possible to provide historical information according to Parliamentary constituency as this could only be provided at a disproportionate cost. The information provided covers all cases held which fall within Scottish legal jurisdiction, that is where the non-resident parent is domiciled in Scotland irrespective of where the parent with care is resident within Great Britain.
The commencement of civil debt recovery action requires that a liability order is obtained from the Magistrates courts in England and Wales or the Sheriff courts in Scotland. The liability order is legal recognition that the debt exists and enables the Secretary of State to use enforcement measures to recover the debt.
The table below shows the number of Liability Order applications submitted to the Sheriff courts in Scotland during the last five years.
| Liability Order applications | |
|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 116 |
| 2001–02 | 110 |
| 2002–03 | 282 |
| 2003–04 | 459 |
| 2004–05 | 731 |
| 2005 to November 2005 | 827 |
| Total | 2,525 |
(2) You asked how many cases are under consideration for court action by the Child Support Agency for non-payment of assessed maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland broken down by parliamentary constituency [39540].
As at 22 December 2005 there were 15 cases under consideration for liability orders through the Scottish legal system. The following table breaks the information down by Scottish Parliamentary constituency area and is based on the domiciliary address of the non-resident parent resident in Scotland.
Note:
The reason for the low volume of cases awaiting action is due to there being an internal target in place to have any case progressed within 2 days of receipt by the Enforcement Directorate to ensure swift commencement of legal proceedings.
(3) You asked how many cases of non-payment of maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland have been reported by the Child Support Agency for prosecution in each of the last five years broken down by parliamentary constituency [39541].
There is no difference in the total number of cases reported for committal or disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence, and the total number commenced for which figures are shown in my response to the next question.
(4) You asked how many of the cases of non-payment of maintenance reported by the Child Support Agency in Scotland for possible prosecution in each of the last five years have resulted in proceedings being commenced [39542].
Detailed below are the number of non-resident parents who have been issued with a citation to attend an initial hearing date in the Sheriff Courts in Scotland for commitment to prison or disqualification from holding or obtaining a driving licence.
(5) You asked for what reasons proceedings have been dropped in cases reported by the Child Support Agency for prosecution due to non-payment of maintenance by non-resident parents in Scotland in which no prosecution has been commenced in each of the last five years [39543].
Cases withdrawn or dismissed from court will be at the Agency's request either as a result of the debtor entering into an agreement to pay or settling his debt in full or as a result of the non-resident parent providing information which allows the Agency to reassess his liability which wipes out his arrears.
(6) You asked what the average penalty imposed against non-resident parents for non-payment of assessed child maintenance where prosecutions have been commenced after report by the Child Support Agency in Scotland was in each of the last five years broken down by Parliamentary constituency [39544].
In the period to the end of November 2005 there has been one suspended prison sentence, two suspended driving licence withdrawals and two suspended driving licence sentences. The information is broken down by Parliamentary constituency in the table below.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the compliance rate for deduction of earnings orders issued by the Child Support Agency were in each reporting period since 1 January 2000; and if he will make a statement. [41370]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is the matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
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 compliance rate for deduction of earnings orders issued by the Child support Agency were in each reporting period since 1st January 2000; and if he will make a statement.
To place these figures into context, it should be noted that, whilst the general trend in the compliance rate for deduction from earnings orders has been negative, the rate of compliance as a whole has been stable since April 2004, with the Agency obtaining some form of payment from 70 per cent. of cases in which maintenance was due via the collection service, with the remainder of non resident parents not taking any financial responsibility for their children.
Notes:
1. Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number.
2. Robust information covering the period May 2003 to February 2004 is not currently available.
3. The above includes those old scheme cases with a full maintenance assessment, and those new scheme cases with either a full maintenance calculation, or a default maintenance decision. Old scheme cases with a punitive interim maintenance assessment (an imposed assessment due to the non co-operation of the Non Resident Parent), a small number of which would have deductions from earnings orders in place, are excluded from this analysis in line with the Agency's target definitions, as are new scheme cases being processed clerically.
4. Compliance is defined here as all those cases that are currently open and have paid money via the collection service over the preceding quarter expressed as a percentage of all those (currently open) cases with a collection service maintenance liability over the same quarter.
13 Feb 2006 : Column 1671W
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer of 30 January 2006, Official Report, columns 274–75W, in how many of the 5,673 cases in the last five years where the Independent Case Examiner found failure by the Child Support Agency and recommended that the Agency should pay compensation, the Child Support Agency paid compensation; and in how many of those cases the amount of compensation was in excess of £1,000. [48894]
Mr. Plaskitt: The Independent Case Examiner makes recommendations for the award of financial redress, but has no authority to specify the amount of such payments. This decision remains the responsibility of the Child Support Agency. The following information reflects data held by the Independent Case Examiner's Office.
| Financial redress recommendations | Awards made | Awards over £1,000 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2000–01 | 1,117 | n/a | n/a |
| 2001–02 | 1,080 | n/a | n/a |
| 2002–03 | 868 | 1,306 | 126 |
| 2003–04 | 1,004 | 1,163 | 104 |
| 2004–05 | 1,604 | 1,800 | 160 |
Notes:
1. Information on awards made is only available from 2002–03, since when ICE has collated relevant data from information provided by the Child Support Agency.
2. Case review may lead to more than one recommendation should multiple instances of maladministration be identified.
3. More than one award can be made on a case, in respect of different types of financial redress.
4. For similar reasons, case resolution/reports may include more than one recommendation for financial redress. Financial redress may include consolatory payments, ex-gratia payments, payments for actual financial loss, deferment of arrears, advance payments of maintenance, interest payments, or refunds of maintenance paid.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |