Right First Time UK
Search Get Help
Home›Guides & Information›Child Maintenance Service›WHAT THE OFFICIAL EVIDENCE NOW TELLS US ABOUT THE CHILD MAINTENANCE SERVICE

WHAT THE OFFICIAL EVIDENCE NOW TELLS US ABOUT THE CHILD MAINTENANCE SERVICE

This is no longer simply about what parents say online. Official DWP publications, Independent Case Examiner findings and an Upper Tribunal judgment provide important evidence about data quality, human error, administrative error, CMS complaints and decision-making.

About this guide

This is no longer simply about what parents say online. Official DWP publications, Independent Case Examiner findings and an Upper Tribunal judgment provide important evidence about data quality, human error, administrative error, CMS complaints and decision-making.

OFFICIAL CMS EVIDENCE • AUGUST 2026

This is no longer simply about what parents say online. Official DWP publications, Independent Case Examiner findings and an Upper Tribunal judgment provide important evidence about data quality, human error, administrative error, CMS complaints and decision-making.

Evidence — Not Rumour

Why This Matters

Child maintenance calculations can affect thousands of pounds of family income.

A calculation can influence the amount somebody is expected to pay, the amount another parent receives, arrears, Collect & Pay charges and potentially enforcement.

That means the accuracy of the information entering the Child Maintenance Service system matters enormously.

INCOME / CASE DATA → MAINTENANCE CALCULATION → PAYMENT SCHEDULE → ARREARS → FEES → ENFORCEMENT
Official DWP Publication — 7 August 2026

DWP Has Classified CMS Administrative Data as a “Medium Risk of Data Quality Concern”

On 7 August 2026, the Department for Work and Pensions published a detailed Quality Assurance of Administrative Data report covering information used to produce official Child Maintenance Service statistics.

DWP's assessment states that CMS administrative data is regarded as having a medium risk of data quality concern.

DWP explains that administrative data depends upon the accuracy of information entered into the system and identifies a number of weaknesses and limitations.

Human Error DWP identifies manual processes involving information supplied by customers and entered by caseworkers as being open to human error.
Manual Checks Can Miss Mistakes DWP acknowledges that manual checks are more susceptible to human error and that mistakes may go unnoticed.
Automated Checks Have Limitations DWP says automated checks may fail to identify subtle inconsistencies or observations that do not logically make sense.
Potential Inconsistency The report identifies a risk of inconsistency because some checks are performed manually while others are automated.
Fraud & Administrative Error Risk DWP identifies the potential for fraud and administrative error because the system relies upon information submitted and verification by operational teams.
System Workaround Certain enforcement outcomes rely upon a system workaround. DWP identifies the longevity of that workaround as a weakness.
Enforcement Discrepancies Where duplicate or conflicting enforcement outcomes are identified, staff may need to consult the enforcement team to determine whether an entry is correct or an error.
Exceptional Cases The report explains that Exceptional Case Handling cases are excluded from one financial dataset because those clerical cases cannot be loaded onto SIEBEL.

One of the most important official statements

DWP's published assessment expressly identifies “the potential for fraud and administrative error” because of reliance on information submitted and verification by operational teams.

This does not prove that fraud or error has occurred in every CMS case. It does, however, officially recognise that these are risks within the administrative-data process.

Important context: This DWP report assesses administrative data used for production of official CMS statistics. It is not an audit finding that individual maintenance assessments are generally wrong. DWP ultimately assesses the CMS statistics at A2 — Enhanced Assurance. The significance of the report is that DWP itself has documented the risks and weaknesses that exist within the underlying administrative-data environment.
Independent Case Examiner

66% of CMS Investigation Reports Were Upheld or Partially Upheld

The Independent Case Examiner provides independent review of complaints about DWP services after the relevant complaints process has been exhausted.

Its 2024–25 annual report provides striking figures for Child Maintenance Service complaints.

1,827 CMS cases received by ICE
693 ICE CMS investigation reports issued
459 investigation reports upheld or partially upheld
66%

Upheld or Partially Upheld

459 of the 693 CMS cases resulting in an ICE investigation report during 2024–25 were upheld or partially upheld.

This figure needs to be understood correctly. It does NOT mean that 66% of every CMS case in the country is wrong. It means that among CMS complaints which reached an ICE investigation report during that reporting year, 66% were upheld or partially upheld.

Another 248 CMS cases cleared by ICE during the reporting period were recorded as having been resolved or settled to the complainant's satisfaction.

ICE Also Explains an Important Collect & Pay Safeguard

In its 2024–25 report, ICE explains that where CMS is told that a parent is not paying according to the payment schedule, CMS can move a case to Collect & Pay.

But ICE also states that before doing so CMS needs to contact the paying parent about the alleged missing or short payments.

ICE further says CMS needs to consider whether either parent has reported changes that could affect the amount of maintenance due.

BEFORE FEES AND COLLECTION ESCALATE, THE UNDERLYING INFORMATION MATTERS.
Upper Tribunal — Published 21 August 2026

ROE v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & IAL — [2026] UKUT 283 (AAC)

A significant new Upper Tribunal decision concerns a child maintenance variation based on alleged diversion of income under Regulation 71 of the Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulations 2012.

The First-tier Tribunal had decided to make a variation to the father's maintenance liability.

However, it had also found that the father was subject to a freezing order.

The Upper Tribunal held that the First-tier Tribunal needed to adequately explain how, despite that freezing order, it was satisfied that the father:

Control of Income had the ability to control the amount of income he received or which was taken into account as gross weekly income;
Unreasonable Diversion had unreasonably reduced income that would otherwise have been taken into account by diverting it elsewhere.

The Upper Tribunal concluded that the First-tier Tribunal had failed to provide adequate reasons on those matters and allowed the appeals.

Why this matters

This judgment does not establish that CMS routinely uses imaginary income.

What it does demonstrate is the importance of properly establishing the factual and legal conditions required before attributing diverted income and changing a maintenance liability.

A conclusion needs evidence and adequate reasoning.

So What Does All of This Actually Show?

We need to distinguish evidence from allegation.

These publications do not prove that every CMS account is wrong.

They do not establish that CMS deliberately invents income.

And they do not prove that every parent who disputes a maintenance calculation is correct.

But the official evidence does establish something important:

Data-quality risk exists. DWP itself assesses CMS administrative data as having a medium risk of data-quality concern.
Human error is recognised. DWP expressly identifies human error as a weakness in manual processes and checking.
Administrative error is recognised. DWP identifies the potential for administrative error.
Automated checks are not infallible. DWP acknowledges that subtle or logically inconsistent data may not always be detected automatically.
System workarounds exist. DWP identifies a longstanding enforcement-data workaround as a weakness.
CMS complaints are being upheld. 66% of CMS cases resulting in an ICE investigation report in 2024–25 were upheld or partially upheld.
Decision-makers need reasons. The Upper Tribunal has demonstrated that legally required factual findings must be adequately reasoned.
Independent scrutiny matters. ICE investigations and Tribunal appeals provide mechanisms through which administrative and legal failures can be identified.

IF WE NEVER EARNED IT — HOW CAN WE PAY IT?

Right First Time UK believes that where a parent provides credible evidence that the income, payments, shared care, arrears or other information on a CMS account may be wrong, that evidence should be properly investigated.

A government computer record should not become unquestionable simply because it appears on a government computer.

CHECK THE SOURCE. CHECK THE EVIDENCE. CHECK THE CALCULATION. EXPLAIN THE DECISION.

Investigate the Evidence Yourself

We encourage people to read the original evidence rather than simply taking our interpretation of it.

These official sources allow you to examine CMS statistics, independent complaints, Tribunal decisions and Parliamentary scrutiny directly.

OFFICIAL EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT ERRORS AND DATA-QUALITY RISKS CAN EXIST.

SO WHEN SOMEBODY CHALLENGES A CMS FIGURE, THE ANSWER SHOULD BE TO CHECK THE EVIDENCE — NOT SIMPLY ASSUME THE COMPUTER IS RIGHT.
← Back to CMS Information Hub All Guides & Information