For those of you that are at the end of your tether with the conduct, inaccuracies and tardiness of the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), and you want to escalate your matter(s) to the Independent Case Examiner(s), the ICE is currently taking several weeks to respond to claims, and over 12 months for a case examiner to assess the case (after going through the initial ICE review).
As of today (24 January 2024), the ICE is working on registered cases dating back to October 2022. And while the ICE office is, by their own admission, slowly catching up (due to having more resource), the wait time for a case examiner to review the evidence provided by both parties is likely to exceed the typical six-month period for some time yet.
The ICE deals with issues or concerns relating to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which includes the CMS. It probably comes as no surprise that complaints against the CMS account for the 'majority of complaints' made against the DWP.
In speaking with an ICE representative in October 2023, they are also receiving 'dismissive' and 'incomplete' information from the CMS (presumably the complaints team), so the problem relating to the CMS' conduct is systemic.
I don't necessarily think there is a lot wrong with the CMS' operating systems, it's how their rules are interpreted by some (albeit quite a large number of) individuals working for the CMS. In many instances, there's a lack of common sense and fairness applied by case handlers and complaint handlers, which makes decisions seem overtly biased.
One of the biggest problems relating to the CMS is their response times. For example: If a claimant makes a claim (whether legitimate or not), is it often dealt with in several days, but if the payee makes a request, it takes at least several weeks, sometimes even several months and without effective resolution even after all that time.
Another issue that is wholly unacceptable is when the CMS hounds the purported non-resident parent for money on behalf of the claimant, yet when the sum is later found to be incorrect (e.g., not due or overpaid) based on the CMS' case handling inconsideration / oversight(s), the CMS steps away completely and says that the payee must deal with the claimant. They won't write to the claimant to instruct them to return the money to the payee. Now that is a two-tier system, and it happens on a regular basis.
#TimeForChange