dadsuk

Exposing the corruption of Family Courts.
Home
DADFINDER
BOOK
About Us
Contact Us
Mad and Bad Mothers
*KIDS TAKE ON JUDGES*
Press articles
Past protest pictures
Court fees
Associated groups
Live media interviews
Corrupt Expert Witness
Mums killer boyfriends
CAFCASS
Historic Injustice
CSA
Families Need Fathers
The nanny state
Judge Dread (for dads)
MATT O'CONNOR (F4J)
Pervert Judges
                      
 
The Child Support Agency is probably one of the most powerful and unjust Government inventions of modern times.
 
A man can have his wife/partner leave and take his children and set up a home with another man, yet the Dad will be forced to fund a new life for the mother and children that will keep him on almost benefits levels until his youngest child is 18-even if he did not want his family to split up.
 
If the Dad is on benefits (ie; Jobseekers, incapacity, etc) he'll pay something like £5-£10 per week, taking Dad below the poverty line, meanwhile, if Dad's a Premiership footballer or other top earner, his child will certainly cost many thousands of pounds a week to keep-so in the eyes of the CSA, the big earners' child obviously eats and consumes a lot more than the benefits Dads kid does!!
 
Now no Dad minds supporting his children, but the best form of financial support a separated Dad can give his children is by sharing the parenting, that way mum pays for the time she has the kids and dad pays for the time he has them. Simple really.
 
Shared parenting needs no enforcement for payment, no government intervention. Of course, if a Dad does not want to share the parenting of his child, then some form of maintainance payments to the mother for the welfare of his children would be fine, no man would really mind.
 
But no, the CSA (like the family courts) with it's jackboots on almost always treat the mother as 'with care of' while Dad is the cashpoint-no matter what the child care arrangements.
 
The case of Lawyer Dad Michael Cox from Hampshire proves this to be the case beyond any doubt.
 
Michael and his ex share the care of their sons equally, have done for years, there simply are no issues with contact and residence. Mum pays for the time the boys are with her and Dad does the same.
 
The parents get on fine.
 
But no, the CSA deem that because the mother receives full state help by way of the Child Benefit and Child Tax credits, (in full for each and every day of the year) while Michael, with a good job, cannot have any of the state help towards bringing up his kids, has to pay his time looking after the boys fully AND the mothers time IN FULL, despite her only having to support them 50% of the time!
 
Yes, you've read it right. Mum gets 100% Child Benefit (because the law states it cannot be split) 100% of the Child Tax Credits (because the laws say only the parent receiving Child Benefit gets Child Tax Credits) but only has to financially keep the children for 50% of the year.
 
Meanwhile, Michael has to financially keep his kids for his 50% of the year while receiving no state benefits at all-AND the CSA have ordered he pays the time Mum looks after the kids too. 
 
So, in case this absurd situation still seems unclear, Mum receives 100% state help, but only looks after the boys 50% of the time, Michael looks after the boys the other 50% of the time, receives 0% child benefits and is being compelled to pay the entire 100% care.
 
(It must also be said that the Mum in this case has NOT asked the CSA to intervene, she never sought any payments through them, the CSA have imposed themselves upon this family in doing this).
 
Michael Cox is a lawyer, he tried to take this injustice on through the legal system. If there was any legal means of overturning this kangaroo court law, he would have done it. But there was none, THIS IS THE LAW.
 

READ ON;                                                                                       



 
From