Is it true about the Army Pensions office and the CSA?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Mac982, Jan 13, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. My husband's ex-wife is trying to get his Army pension included in her child support assessment. We've been told that the Army pensions office don't have to (and won't!) disclose any info to the CSA, due to a loophole in the law. Does anyone one know if that is true?
  2. I would hope that the Army pensions office have to..and do ..fully
    cooperate with the CSA 8O
    A mans first financial commitment must be to the children of his first marriage. Subsequent marriages and children are luxuries should he then be able to afford them.
  3. So are some children more important than others?

    And do some deserve better standards of maintenance than others?
  4. There's only so much money to go around within a family.
    A man shouldn't go creating babies with a woman he promised to be committed to for life through marriage then simply abandon responsibilty for supporting those children upon divorce and move on to make fresh babies with his latest squeeze.
    Fathers need to take responsibilty and support the children they father and not expect the rest of us to pay extra in taxes to let them off the hook.
  5. It does work both ways. Emotive subject that may have hit a nerve.
  6. Not just the fathers responsibility

    Equality when it suits.... Pah!
  7. That is a terrible statement. So leave the subsequent families to fend for themselves? You truely are bonkers or your ex is doing the same with you?. And before you go off on one, this is not the AAC Mafia ganging up on you. Your statement is total garbage.
  8. "I would hope that the Army pensions office have to..and do ..fully
    cooperate with the CSA
    A mans first financial commitment must be to the children of his first marriage. Subsequent marriages and children are luxuries should he then be able to afford them."

    I think this is the most twisted statement I have ever heard! And am enraged by the ideas behind it.

    As a woman I take great exception to the implication that I cannot fend for my children and myself.

    If you want to provide luxuries for your children, get a job....

    Under the new tax credit system you have up to 80% of your childcare paid for you. So get a job! If you died your husband would be in the same situation you are in, get on with it!

    How dare the suggestion a man should pay anything he may not be able to afford as a penance for not loving the mother anymore! Men are as emotionally attached to children as women, how many guys on this site are in second marriages to women who came with children? Do you refuse to care and provide because they are another mans off spring? I'd be surprised if you said yes....

    Revenge is an ugly twisted thing.... for the sake of children to make money the priority?! Disgusting!

    It was a joint decision to have children, if not then surrender the child to the parent that did plan the pregnancy then pay him maintenance! Lets see how much you can bleat over this idea.

    As to the laws governing the rights of information and disclosure of any ex-forces pensions details.... Watch this space, I'll get the info for you ASAP mac982....

    And can I say I hope it is in his, his childrens and your favour.

  10. I am so glad there are a vast majority of women who do not feel as you do, you're arguement is that of a woman bitter and scorned.

    To sad to fight, you're to bruised already.
  11. I consider this a simply a discussion- not personal.
    The vast majority of women left supporting the children of the marriage alone would feel that the father should continue to support his children financially.
    Are you suggesting that a father should not support his children?
    I fail to understand your reasoning.
  12. Why should he maintain the ex wife? Children yes, joint reponsibilty either in time or fiancially or both

    new family seconadry if you remarried and had another child you would treat the first lot differently..... bet its great in your house
  13. Absolute b0llocks

    Kids yes, ex wife? Fcuk her and let her starve. Once divorced the welfare of the ex wife is her responsibility. There are too many fat, lazy divorced scroungers that live their lives by fleecing the ex husband via the CSA on the false pretence that all of the money is "for the kids"

    This "for the kids" money then inevitably goes towards paying for their cakes and special brew.

    And before you ask, no I haven't fallen foul of them but I have a couple of mates that have who's lives have basically been ruined by a faceless bureaucracy that doesn't actually give a t0ss about the welfare of the kids and will blindly listen to the bleating of the sponging, bitter ex spouses.

    The quote above is the typical sort of garbage drivel that I have come to expect of that bitter, twisted loony tune Blondedick
  14. A veritable can of worms has been opened!

    It appears the initial reply was sent by someone who feels strongly and has per chance fell foul of the system. It is expected that from her perspective the emphasise is on the ex-husband. While the wife has the finiancial burden of the children even after the man has moved on to a new relationship.
  15. What a single minded self centred cow. Just because your old man done the decent thing and legged it.......there's no need to hate us all.