• Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: Variation and Pension allowed

Annual Review 1 month 1 week ago #111723

  • actd
  • actd's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 11431
  • Thank you received: 1772

MWall66 wrote: no worries, the freedom of information info is really good, I am sure that CMS would rather not have to share this, another poster increased to 36% with no questions asked, but I have got my facts ready, in case I get yet another man hating and non-resident parent hater on the phone, when I contact the CMS, as I generally do, assuming all fathers are trying not to pay etc

Regulation 71, 2012/2677 Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulations 2012, deals with the issue of "diversion of income", in case your ex disputes, or applies for a variation, or if you just get a person at the CMS with an attitude

Case Law, DW v Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission and (CSM) 19-02-2010, in case you want a bit of light reading

for info

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

I am not qualified and any information given should be checked with a professional.

Whatever your situation Zoom counselling with qualified counsellors can help. You might like to be in touch for your secondary school aged children, or it could be you need support for yourself. To find out about costs or whether you qualify for funding (for example if you are on a low income or benefits) leave your details on this link and we will be in touch:


Annual Review 1 month 4 days ago #111902

Hi, apologies but I can't see the thread leading up to this. Would you be able to inform me if there is a way of increasing my pension above 12% so as to offset an unfair imbalance in my future payments?

The P60 that I assume the CMS are going to use to calculate my payments is overinflated by about 20% as I was hammering overtime the last financial year in order to pay off a massive bill (and bills of my ex-partner). The next P60 (and the ones after that) will show a drop in salary by 15-20%, but as I understand it this drop will not be taken into account as it isn't a "25%" drop? thanks

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Annual Review 1 month 4 days ago #111916

Hi Bruce Out, how old are you and roughly how long have you been paying into a pension

this will have a significant effect on the percentage that is deemed acceptable by the CMS own internal guidelines, which under a freedom of information request, is now known, much I assume to their annoyance

the 12% is a starting point and refers to a person in their early 30's, the two legal cases in this matter have clear instructions from the judge, on the "other" reasons that need to be taken into account

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Annual Review 1 month 4 days ago #111943

thanks for the reply

I'm 38. My pension contributions have fluctuated from 0% to 5% over the past 15 years but for the most part they have been 0%. But with a 5% contribution from my employer.

The 12%, 20% etc guide figures quoted in the CMS guidance doc I assume refers to my contributions + my employers contributions?

According to the government online pension calculator I stand to be in a pension shortfall of £18k if I continue to contribute 5%, depending on my retirement age. Even if I retire at 70 I'll still be in a shortfall.

Even if I up my contributions to 20% then I'll still have a shortfall when retiring at 70. Christ this is depressing.

OK I'm going to up my contributions to 22% (not including my non-pensionable overtime pay) and if its challenged then I have the data to back it up. That's if CMS even take a look at my pension contributions

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Annual Review 1 month 4 days ago #111945

Hi, so will increasing your pension contributions to 22%, take you over the 25% variance to request a recalculation? I have not included my employee contributions and see how that goes, at worst, you will take off their percentage

You have the back up of the calculator, showing a shortfall, even with the increased contributions, as I have, so I see there can be no challenge under S71 of diverting income and any request for a variation from the ex, should really be blown out at first request

let us know how you get on

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Page:
  • 1
Moderators: Samantha Downes