The murky waters of child support

District Judge Roger Bird reports on another fine mess for child support cases

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, a person would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at the government's latest predicament over child support.

Consider the background.

In 1998, in the introduction to a consultation paper, the prime minister conceded that the system of child support was in a dreadful mess and promised to introduce a scheme to meet the needs of children and families.

This new scheme turns out to be the old system with a new formula, based on a percentage take of the net income of the non-resident parent.

This formula was to be so simple that anyone could work it out; all you would need was a calculator or a ready reckoner.

Parliament approved the proposals, the primary and delegated legislation came into being and a grateful nation waited for 5 April 2002 when the new system would start to roll (see [2001] Gazette, 22 March, 46).

Six-month wait

However, there was just one problem.

The new 'simple' system was too complicated for the Department of Social Security computer which, metaphorically speaking, blew up under the strain.

One sympathises with the unfortunate secretary of state who has just had to tell the House of Commons that the new formula would not, after all, be introduced on 5 April; there is to be a delay while the boffins get the computer to work and, in the meantime, it is business as usual.

So where does that leave family lawyers and others with a vested interest in child support? The first question must be: how long a delay do we have to look forward to? The official answer seems to be: as long as it takes to get it right.

The computer will have to be mended and then tested quite extensively.

It is difficult to see the new system being introduced for another six months.

The inevitable next question is: what will happen to maintenance calculations in the meantime? Will they be based on the old or new formulae? Information is not as easy to come by as one would have hoped, but it seems that the old formula is to continue, with the rates updated to take account of new social security rates from 5 April 2002.

Therefore, there will be a new set of figures and calculations to master which will probably only last a few months.

Twelve-month oust

The other major question for family lawyers concerns the status of court orders.

To recap, court orders (inevitably by consent) for children made before 5 April 2002 have the effect of ousting the jurisdiction of the Child Support Agency in 'private' non-benefit cases.

This will change in respect of orders made after that date, which will only have that effect for one year.

Therefore, there has been a last-minute rush to secure consent orders by the appointed date; has it all been a wasted effort? Again, no specific authoritative statement has been made, but the better view seems to be that the new provisions will take effect as planned from 5 April.

The appropriate statutory instruments have been approved and made and if the new rules were not to take effect another statutory instrument or order would be required.

This has not yet happened.

In the meantime, the new nomenclature (non-resident parent, maintenance calculation, etcetera) has been introduced by statute and is part of our law, whatever else happens.

Therefore, it seems that we are not in the same position as we were over the Family Law Act 1996.

The new child support regime is definitely going to come in (which is a relief for textbook authors).

The only question is when.

Benchmarks will bring you the news as soon as the position is clear.

District Judge Roger Bird sits at Bristol Combined Court Centre