Compensation for Maladministration
Many people who have suffered actual financial loss contact Durham Legal Services requesting our help with the recovery of monies due from the CSA. In order to assist you, this section looks at instances of maladministration which could mean a compensation payment would be considered.
Court Order cases - delay in assessment of liability resulting in loss of child support maintenance
When at the time that a PWC applies for child support maintenance a court order for child maintenance is already in place, the effective date of liability for child support maintenance is two days after the date that the assessment is completed. Thus, in court order cases, any unreasonable delay in the maintenance process will put back the effective date of the maintenance assessment or calculation and may lead to a loss of opportunity to receive maintenance or may cause the NRP to pay more than he might otherwise have been required to do.In court cases the Agency is allowed 20 weeks to make an assessment beginning from the issue of a MAF to the PWC. It anticipates that barring delays or non-co-operation of the PWC or NRP most cases will be assessed within that time. Where this is exceeded and the Agency accepts that the delay in assessing the case was due to its failings, a special payment will be considered.
Any special payment is paid at a rate equivalent to the difference between the level of the court order and the maintenance assessment or calculation made by the Agency:
- if the maintenance assessment or calculation would have been higher than the court order, payment is made to the PWC in recognition of her lost opportunity to receive higher support for her child(ren)
- if the maintenance assessment or calculation would have been lower, payment may be made to the NRP - providing evidence shows that he was complying with the court order. This is in recognition that he lost the opportunity to reduce his liability.
In both cases payment is subject to adjustment to take into account any benefits that would not have been made had the NRP's liability been assessed sooner.
The Agency sent the PWC a MAF on 4 March 2004 and received it back on 13 March 2002. She gave details of an existing court order for child maintenance under which Mr X (the NRP) was paying £15 a week. No further action was required on the MAF.
The Agency sent a MEF to the NRP on 26 March 2004, which he promptly returned confirming he was the father of the child and the court order for £15 a week which he said he was paying.
The Agency failed to act in a timely manner on the application and did not make an assessment until 2 December 2004. The NRP was then found to be liable for child support maintenance of £38 a week from 4 December 2004 and the court order was superseded from that date.
Impact of error
But for Agency error the PWC could have expected the Agency to make that assessment by 22 July 2004. The court order would then have been replaced by a maintenance assessment from 24 July 2004 rather than 4 December 2004.
The NRP would have then been required to pay an extra £23 a week from 24 July 2004. The PWC lost the opportunity to receive that from the NRP and the Agency will make good that loss. A special payment is made:
- from 24 July 2004 to 3 December 2002 at £23 a week
- less any benefits that the Secretary of State paid to the PWC in that period that would not have been paid if child support maintenance of £38 a week had been in payment at the time.
Consideration would be given to adding interest for the loss of use of this sum.
Should you require any additional information on compensation and the amount you would be entitled to, please feel free to purchase an advice voucher and speak to one of our compensation specialists.
