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.
Unreasonable delay in the issue of a Maintenance Application Form (MAF) to the Parent With Care (PWC)
Any delay in the issue of the MAF to the PWC puts back the point at which the application for child support maintenance can be made. This, in turn, affects the date from which the non-resident parent's liability for child support maintenance begins. The issue of a MAF should not, therefore, be unreasonably delayed.Since 1 April 1996, the Agency has accepted that if, without good cause, a MAF is not issued within a month of it being requested then, although it is not legally required to do so, redress should be considered.
The Agency recognises that unreasonable delay in these early stages can cause the PWC to miss the opportunity to obtain some child support maintenance that they might otherwise have received. In recognition of this the Agency will make good any loss caused by its failings by way of a special payment.
The PWC requested a MAF on 20 October 2004. The Agency should have issued one by 20 November but without good cause did not issue one until 12 December 2004 (three weeks late).
It is reasonable to assume that had the MAF been issued three weeks earlier the PWC would have returned it as soon as possible and her ex-partner (the NRP) would have become liable for child support maintenance three weeks earlier.
If his first liability was assessed at £25 a week the PWC could have expected to receive £75 from the NRP in the three weeks concerned and the Agency would make good that loss.
If the NRP had made any payments during that period, the PWC will only have lost the difference between the amount that she might have received from the NRP and the amount that she actually received from him. In those cases the special payment will be the amount actually lost.
In example 1 above the PWC was calculated to have been due £75 in the three weeks concerned. If in each of those three weeks the NRP had paid her £15 voluntarily, she would have received £45 in total rather than the £75 that she might have received from him. In this example, the Agency would pay £30 to the PWC to make good the shortfall.
Similarly, if the PWC was receiving any benefit that would have been reduced if the NRP paid child support maintenance then the special payment will be adjusted to make sure the PWC's position is properly restored to the position that it would have been but for the Agency's failing.
If the PWC was calculated to have been due £50 a week for five weeks the Agency would consider that she had potentially lost £250.
But, if during those five weeks she had been receiving income based Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA (IB)) and the amount of the MA is more than the JSA (IB) that had been paid, the loss will be equal to the difference between the amount of the assessment and the benefit in payment.
If the JSA (IB) would have been reduced by £30 a week, the PWC would have stood to gain only £20 a week by the NRP paying child support maintenance (rather than the full £50 a week). In those circumstances the Agency would pay her the five weeks at £20 a week to make good her losses.
Consideration would be given to adding interest for loss of use of the 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.
