The government plans will see all cases managed by CMS, allowing them to better monitor payments and act swiftly where there is non-compliance.  It is estimated the new system could lift a further 20,000 children out of poverty annually.

Both receiving and paying parents will incur a 2% charge, rising to 20% for the paying parent if they do not make the scheduled payment.

Understandably, some paying parents who have successfully managed a direct pay arrangement feel they are unfairly penalised by the new charge.  To address this, the government plans to invest in resources to help parents better understand and set up their own Family-Based Arrangements, where no CMS intervention is needed.

Given the positive outlook, why is there such a mixed reaction from parents?

A major concern is the deep-rooted lack of trust parents have in the child maintenance system. While reforms and adjustments are not new, without meaningful investment in staffing and training, the system will continue to suffer from poor decision-making, costly errors, ineffective communication, and a weak enforcement framework.

Staff morale is another critical issue. Limited resources place enormous strain on employees, and the proposal to transition all cases to a managed system risks exacerbating this pressure. Our own interactions with CMS staff reveal a concerning lack of training—despite being expected to handle the frustrations of parents struggling financially due to flawed calculations.

Even with efforts to simplify the scheme, the calculation process remains overwhelmingly complex for parents. They are expected to understand historic and current income, identify where variations apply, and navigate the exclusions for additional income. On top of that, they must grasp effective dates, supersessions, and revisions. It’s a system that demands expertise and knowledge far beyond what most parents can reasonably be expected to manage.

For parents without the benefit of a cooperative relationship with their ex-partner, the CMS must be more than just a calculator; it must be fair and reliable. Unfortunately, the CMS is often quick to impose collection fees based on its own miscalculations, yet slower to act in cases of clear non-compliance and non-payment.

The new system promises quicker enforcement, stronger oversight, and a more consistent experience for the families who need it most. While our optimism remains low, if these improvements are truly delivered, a 2% fee could represent genuine value for money for parents.