Child Support Agency failures meant man accrued maintenance arrears

What happened

An error at the CSA meant that Mr N was told his maintenance liability was lower than it should have been. For five years Mr N paid the maintenance the CSA had told him he owed and a payment towards the existing maintenance arrears. At the end of five years, the CSA told Mr N that the amount he owed in arrears had increased because the figure it had told him he owed had been too low.

Mr N complained to ICE, which reviews complaints about the CSA. It said that Mr N's complaint about the CSA was justified but it said this error had not caused Mr N a financial loss.

What we found

We partly upheld this complaint. The CSA's failure to give Mr N an accurate figure for his maintenance liability meant that he spent five years believing he was meeting his maintenance liability and paying off previous arrears when he was doing neither. When Mr N learnt that the arrears had actually increased, this would have caused him surprise and shock. The error meant that Mr N lost the ability to make well‑informed, fact–based financial decisions about how much he could afford to pay towards the arrears each month.

ICE was correct to say the error had not caused Mr N a financial loss but there was no evidence it had considered the non?financial impact on him.

Putting it right

CSA apologised to Mr N and paid him £500 in recognition of the shock, stress and loss of opportunity he experienced as a result of its error.

ICE also apologised to Mr N.