Paying maintenance to a parent but the 18 year old child has moved out

hi,

think it will be difficult with CMS as they will just tell you to keep paying maintenance as long as the mothers receiving child benefits. you could contact child benefits and show proof that child benefits should stop.

Posted by: @jrb

I have been paying maintenance for the past 18 years but my son no longer lives with his mum. I have contacted the CSA to inform them but they told me I have to continue paying because she said the child still lives there. She has put many messages on Facebook wishing our son all the best with his decision to leave home and move away and then saying how much she misses him now that he has moved away

How can I formally prove that he doesn't live there when she is still claiming benefits for him in that address.

You could take screenshots of all of her facebook posts and tell her you are reporting her to the benefits office for fraud in claiming child benefit unless the stops claiming immediately - it might ellicit a quicker response from her than actually reporting her.

This is a massive loophole and needs to be sorted out, not only does it apply to this case but also if your child leaves full-time education. As long as the child is in full-time education or up to the age of 20 the PWC can claim child benefit. Because child benefit is being paid the nrp is entitled to contributions. The only way to stop this is to report the PWC to the DWP for fraud. When doing this you do not get an answer as to the outcome. You can report a fraud to the cms and all they do is telephone the PWC and ask if the child is still in full-time education, they conduct no other checks. The nrp has to provide evidence which is ultimately ignored as they take the PWC answer and because child benefit is still being paid. Even though this process can take months, the PWC can get away with it for months, the nrp even if it is proven that the child has left full-time education would have still had to pay maintenance, which is non-refundable.

Yes, there should be a penalty for claiming both benefits, and thereby fraudulently receiving child maintenance, dating back to when the child is no longer eligible, possibly doubled (as HMRCS does with tax). That would start to become a deterrent in the first place.