Child Support Agency put things right, but Independent Case Examiner (ICE) missed an opportunity

What happened

In early 2012 the mother of Mr F's son asked the Agency to review the amount that Mr F was paying in child maintenance. (It had previously done a calculation and he paid her directly.)

In spring 2012 the Agency told Mr F that the amounts had increased and that this was effective from the end of 2011. Mr F did not pay the arrears that had accumulated from late 2011 and so his son's mother asked the Agency to collect the payments from him. It sought evidence about how much Mr F had paid during that period and then tried to recover the arrears.

Mr F complained to ICE, which told him that it was satisfied with the Agency's view that he had not provided sufficient evidence of all of the payments that he said he had made.

What we found

ICE's view in terms of the payments was a reasonable one. ICE had not properly considered concerns that Mr F had raised about budget difficulties when the Agency took so long to make a decision and then backdated it. We looked at that and found that the Agency had taken six weeks longer than its published service standard to complete the reassessment. We noted that it had apologised for that before Mr F complained to ICE, which we considered to be a reasonable remedy.

We did not, therefore, consider that any of the injustice that Mr F claimed linked to ICE's error.

Putting it right

We made no recommendations because the Agency had already corrected its mistake, while ICE's error did not link to the injustice that Mr F had claimed.