New service provides help for men in crisis

Published Date: 29 November 2010

A NEW group providing support services to men in crisis has been formed in Northern Ireland.

Mensaid NI claims men here are being disadvantaged in many areas of health, social welfare, housing and the family courts.

The new group will also offer victim support services to men
who are suffering all forms of abuse in domestic situations.

ADVERTISEMENT

Although the province's well-documented domestic violence inflicted on women is the source of much concern, Pete Morris of Mensaid said there are also male victims being damaged who fear losing their children if they can't persevere.

Mr Morris said: "Because society expects men to live up to some kind
of macho image, it is unbelieveably diffcult for men who suffer psychological or physical abuse in
the home to seek help.

"For anyone who's never experienced it it's hard to explain, but when a man reaches the point where he can't take anymore, it's only then that he confronts the reality that the mother of his children holds every ace in the pack."

The group's spokesman said they have "hit the ground running" and have already had face-to-face meetings with various Stormont departments and committees, the housing executive and several family law experts.

"The lengths some fathers have to go to have any contact at all with
their children is beyond belief and that is why many abused men try
to put up with their situation," Mr Morris said.

Parental alienation is the term used for the greatest fear of those fathers who have a strong bond with their children but fnd themselves
facing a family break-up.

Mr Morris said: "We have been contacted by men who face all kinds of diffculties, but parental alienation – the bond between them and their children being broken while they fight for access through the courts – is one of the worst.

Another is the fnancial hardship of the maintenance payments which
are sometimes impossible to meet by the time someone pays for a roof
over their head."

Mensaid is currently seeking funding to establish a drop-in centre and eventually aims to provide a refuge for male victims of domestic abuse.

Further information is available via the website www.mensaidni.co.uk or by contacting 07512462375.

Meeting with CMED Officials

Today, I attended a meeting with John Miller Operations manager CMED, Denise Ferguson Business development Directorate and Gerry Boyle Head of Benefit Secruity Services.

The background to this meeting was to act for men who have contacted us via RFFJ. Brief of meeting below,




Today the attendees at the meeting were myself ( RFFJ ) two men with
horrific cases, Jim Curran and Leslie Ardler.

From CMED was John Miller ( Operations ), Denise Ferguson
( Business Development Directorate ) and Gerry Boyle ( Head of
Benefits Security Services )
We began by introductions and highlighted issues we were there to raise.

Issues

Blackmailing of men
Two separate systems
Loss of correspondence ( Postal system within CMED)
Housing costs within assessments
Arrears collections
Legislation
Advertising

We raised the issue of Blackmailing, where a man was told to drop his
appeal or CMED "would come back ten times harder on him". John Millar
was astounded to hear this and explained that the staff member has
concerned has no remit for such. We had a debate over the term
"blackmail" whereby John said it was a very defamatory term. I put it
to him to answer what this treatment was: Blackmail or intimidation,
regardless of which ever, it constitutes a criminal offence on behalf
of staff member.

Leslie presented himself as the being the person who was
"blackmailed". John listened to him and gave his word that he would
look into this matter and call him personally on Friday.

John explained the CMED, from the initial CSA. The IT system used is
one derived within GB. For N Ireland to implement their own would cost
millions, so this system is used here. He admits that GB got it wrong
and that this system was not the best.

In 2003, it changed to the CORN system. This system is based on
percentages ie first child-non resident pays 15% of salary, 2nd
child-20%, 3 or more children is 25%. Currently, there are 35,500
cases within CMED. 13000 on the live system have been assessed to pay
NO maintenance, 15000 pay full maintenance, with the remaining 7000
not paying. The current outstanding debt is £80 million. This is from
17 years previous to date.

Several changes have been implemented within CMED, of which people are
not aware of. Where a resident parent claims benefits then maintenance
payments from non resident parent are paid to them. This means the
payments do not affect the benefits and not taken into account as an
income.

Non resident parent has their assessment based on a period of time,
usually 3 months salary. We highlighted cases where people have
commissioned based incomes and these vary throughout the year, thus
meaning an assessment within their busiest time makes a high
maintenance payment, which continues for the year. When these people
have reduced commission at quiet times, it is hear that they suffer
financially as assessment does not change, and same payments are
required.

This will be fixed with a new system which is coming in in 2011. This
system will see the current two systems put onto one, with the
earliest people on the old system being transferred onto it first.
This system is based through HMRC, which means assessments will be
done through their data, which in turn should help people with
commissioned based pay.

Initially, two systems were meant to be amalgamated, but the GB
Government went against it.

I highlighted cases where arrears are collected, which cause severe
hardship. These arrears are from men who are WILLING to pay, but seek
fairness in doing so. An example is :

Earn £800
Rent £400
CMED take £400

Leaving zero balance living costs.

I explained that this needs addresses as men are losing their homes. I
proposed a set rate scale for arrears: £800 per month take home the
CMED collect 20%, for every further £500 then payments increase 5%.
This would ensure CMED collect SOME arrears yet still allow person to
cover rent, living costs. This proposal was listened to as was how men
are losing homes through CMED. The current legislation governing CMED
does NOT allow for housing costs to be taken into account within an
assessment. We highlighted our intention to challenge this
legislation.

Leading on from this was the staff attitude to men " not my problem",
"don't care" etc when men highlight the difficulties they are going to
face with required payment requests. John Miller has said he will
speak with staff, and after I proposed more customer care focused
training, Denise pointed out that there is a training programme about
to be implemented.

Ref Lost correspondence. I asked John how their postal system works.
He explained that when post arrives at CMED office, it is logged on a
system as being their, thereafter handed out to relevant department. I
asked for a system to be put in place whereby the department receiving
items ALSO signs for receiving such. This would ensure a paper trail
of all correspondence and, we feel, would rule a lot of the " didn't
receive" comments.

There are 4 business departments within CMED, with each having a part
within each case. There is no "one case officer" who oversees each
case before payment requests go out. I asked if this could be adapted
into their system.

Another issue raised, was the lack of understanding of CMED and how to
work with CMED by men after a break up. We highlighted how a lot of
men have paid in person to ex partner, but then ex partner then denies
such , causing CMED to chase father for thousands in arrears. I
brought up the possibility of the CMED being prosecuted under Article
14 ( Discrimination ) of the Human Rights Act, as they have been
accepting the word of an ex partner over the word of a father. I will
explain this.

Father pays for some time, in person to mother of child. For whatever
reason, mother then tells CMED that she received nothing in person.
CMED accept this and pursue father. Father tells CMED he did pay, but
they ignore him. Thus taking females word. I advised that ALL
allegations of previous person to person payments have to be
investigated fully by CMED. It is not up to the father to prove
himself, it is up to CMED to use all resources to verify what he says.
They must STOP accepting the word of a mother over a father as this
clearly breaches afore said HR ACt.

There is a department within CMED, known as the CMISS or Child
Maintenance Information and Support Service. This service is set up
alongside the Family Court Mediation service, whereby if two parties
can come to an agreement, CMISS will write up a contract like document
which both will sign, and CMED will not become involved. The agreement
can be as simple as one parent getting uniforms, paying for trips etc.
As long as both are happy, then CMED will not be involved.

This is an excellent system, and will rule out past issues of personal
payments being denied. I am fully supportive of this system and have
asked for literature to display. I also asked Denise to have
literature placed in Family Courts as this is where most CMED cases
emanate.

Denise mentioned several groups wre involved in consultation, but men
wre not supported. She found it hard to find mens groups, and hard to
contact men's groups. We have gave our commitment to fill this gap and
work with CMED and CMISS. New advertising of their service will be
forthcoming in the New Year as well as presentations to Law Society,
Solicitors, etc. They also want to present this service to midwifes,
nurses etc so the vast majority of the community can be advised
throughout all services.

I highlighted to John, that we wre planning to protest outside CMED in
Belfast, due the conduct of their staff to men, and publicly name
staff concerned. I also explained the context of our banner we had
printed for this, but advised him that we refrained to give CMED to
take our issues on board seriously. The two people with me have been
told by John that he will look at their cases, which for me was a
great effort on his part, and a relief to the guys in question, as one
is the one who was blackmailed into dropping an appeal and now faces
losing his home.

Gerry Boyle kept trying to pass issues to the SSA Policy Department,
but after several attempts, he finally realised where we were coming
from in relation to frauds. His retort was to say any person who has
claimed benefit when they shouldn't, will be asked for payments back.
This is in reference to people continuing to claim Child Benefit after
losing child. Other benefits fall in line with Child Benefit. I asked
Gerry for his department to push forward with us for Court Issued
Benefits Order, whereby a new resident parent can get this Order and
present to benefits office. Thus cutting out waiting times on
investigations, investigating entitlement etc. He again wishes to pass
this to policy department, which we will gladly put to them

All in all, this was a very good meeting. I am happy with responses,
and I will take Johns word on his commitments. Meeting Denise was an
excellent opportunity as we can advise men on a lot of changes to
system, and the proposed system for 2011. We will also, when John
forwards the legislation to me, challenge the legislation governing
CMED to get them to include housing costs in assessments.

We now have a contact, highly placed within CMED, whom we can
highlight any cases of ill treatment to. We also have a contact within
the Business side of CMED whom will keep us informed of new changes.