Because in the judgement delivered on the 23rd February 2007 my ex-husband was very specifically told, in writing, he was to have full financial responsibility for our son. I was to receive no spousal maintenance and there should be no pension sharing. My pension was already being paid and was to be the main source of my future income, that alongside incapacity benefit. All monies requested in the form E for our sons financial provision, that of 8840 per year were assigned to my ex-husband. The CSA have interfered with the court order by taking my pension into account as income and have incorrectly registered the change of circumstance date some two years after the changes of joint property ownership and joint rental income.
The 9 pages of judgement and 2 of financial calculations are recorded and signed by the judge as well as the order.
Perhaps the Judge should never have made this ruling knowing both parents had a legal and financial liability... but he did and this was the basis of the financial settlement. - This is why I believe the estoppel principle applies in my case.
subsequent to the judgement delivery my ex-husband applied to the csa for child maintenance, Our son was living with him, but at the time the child benefit was in my name.
I also believe the most child maintenance I should have paid was £5 per week, but instead due to a catalog of errors I have in part paid £109 per week and a deductions from Earnings order was issued by magistrates reducing my pension income to below that of protected earnings.
In total over £20,000 child maintenance.
At one point the CSA stopped collecting the £5 per week after about 3 or 4 months back in 2007.
A tribunal hearing in late 2008 made a decision based on data that was 2 years out of date and the CSA were tied by that decision. Any real life changes of circumstances in 2007 and 8 could not be corrected.
The ancillary relief form E I completed back made no references to the CSA as they do now. And funnily enough one of the D11 application in November 2009, was heard by Judge Segal, who I now understand has an Order named after him in order to try to smooth over the problems which arose from these past anomalies.
Sorry if this is too much or not enough detail, but I hope it helps shed light on this particular situation.