Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Child turned 18 and not in full time education

My Step Daughter has turned 18 and her Mother has said she is still in full time education though she is not. We lodged an objection to which CSA has asked for evidence to which we have none. We asked for payments to be upheld as we will never see the money again if we pay and CSA learn the truth. Apparently CSA cannot uphold the payments until we can work out some way we can get evidence. Has anyone got any suggestions or had any experience with this?
No, but i wouldnt pay a cent because youll never see it again. the burden of proof is on the mother. also if the kid has a job you can ask to submit her tax file number so she looks like is self supportng,the tax department will supply them with her earnings.  
you can also cntact the school and get proof that she has not attended or is signed out


Han Solo routine "We're all fine here, thanks. How are you?" *weapons fire* "It was a boring conversation anyway!"
How can you prove nothing? Do you have to get every possible school in the country to ensure that she isn't registered with them? I would suggest that the the mother should have to prove that the girl is in full time education.

Perhaps the CSA should send in some of the 120 or so investigators it has taken on.

Perhaps ask the CSA what proof they have and if they have none they can give you, that they made be acting outside of the APS legislation by not acting with care and diligence in ascertaining that they have the correct data.

I'd contact them again and give them a chance to re-consider their actions. However that's me, perhaps wait to see what other advice is given.
also csa are lazy!!!! why shouldnt they bother to investigate, thats their job after all


Han Solo routine "We're all fine here, thanks. How are you?" *weapons fire* "It was a boring conversation anyway!"
We can not ask any questions of Education Queensland because she is 18 and we have no rights to ask….according to Education Queensland policy. We have been arguing with CSA for weeks. The Principal of the school she was attending apparently in April said she was in Full time educaiton however he then told us in May she was no longer in full time Educaiton and had completed her certificate 3 but now she is 18 we cannot ask if she is at any school. CSA's response is we have to show proof. We sent them the email from the Principal however that does not prove she isn't at another school. CSA have been terrible each time asking us to prove she is not in school even though they have no proof she is in school….Strange
Annie, below is a link to the CSA Guide, of interest is the paragraph headed "MY CHILD IS TURNING 18".

Of particular note is the following extract,

"For that to happen, the other parent must apply to have the assessment extended when the child is 17 and prove that the child will be in full time secondary education on their 18th birthday."

I assume that "other parent" means the payee, if that is the case I would be onto CSA and asking what proof has been given.

Separated parents - Department of Human Services

I notice you say you have lodged an objection and they have asked for proof.

I take it that means they have not made a decision yet, not even a decision to consider the objection.

I agree with MikeT that it is hard to prove a negative, and you should not have to.  It is the mother who says the child is in school, it is for her to prove that.  As the  parent with whom the child lives, that should be very easy for her to do if the child is in school, close to impossible for you if she is not.

I suggest you write to CSA pointing out that as the person receiving the payments,  the mother should have to prove she is still entitled, and also pointing out that it is easier for her to prove than for you as the non-resident parents.

Send a copy to the ombudsman complaining about being  required to provide the proof when it should not be your problem and is so much easier for the other parent.  Include the fact that you have written to the Ombudsman in your letter to the CSA.  I know others have had no success with the Ombudsman, but I have found the simultaneous letters approach helpful, so why not.

If you really want to just provide proof yourself because that is quicker, perhaps you could ask CSA what proof the mother gave of school enrolement when the liability was extended beyond age 18. 

If they have proof of enrollment at a particular school, ask the school for written confirmation that she is still enrolled or written confirmation of the day on which she left. If you get confirmation that she has left that particular school, the information on which the agency made the decision to extend the assessment beyond 18  is no longer valid and surely the burden would then be on the mother to prove that she is in another school.

Hang in.

The School that originally wrote the letter are running scared as they thought it was for Centrelink which it probably was as well for her to get the Youth Allowance however she is no longer enroled at that school full time. The senior year has now changed, you can also be enroled in Tafe to which she was but completed the Tafe course so therefore she is not in full time education which is what the CSA legislation states but because the last school wrote a letter saying she was in full time education, that is all CSA have to go on which is fair enough, but we spoke to the step daughter  a couple of days ago and she said she had finished…We have no objection to paying for her if she is getting educated but she has not even completed any of the course requirements when she did go. I would hate to believe it but I am starting to think they are just dragging this all out so they get more money and then when it is provern to be false it will be impossible to get tje money back again. This girl really needs psychiatric help and it would be so good to be able to use the CSA money for good use, that would benefit her rather then helping her to sit around all day. Oh by the way she didn't even attend school. I am dreaming of next year when hopefully all my court cases will be over and my step daughter is able to contribute to society positively. Funny how things all happen at once!
Hi Annie

Sorry, I was still writing my last post when you put yours up, so sorry about the contents which were of course completely redundant by the time the post appeared.

You really have got a dilemma happening, and it could be sorted so easily with a little co-operation.

Have they made a decision on your objection yet?

If not, I would try writing and asking for a decision, pointing out that you need a written decision so that you can take the matter to the SSAT as it is clearly unfair to ask you to prove a negative when the other parent could so easily prove a positive if it were true and thereby make the whole objection go away.

Point out too that as you say they are potentially creating an overpayment situation by ignoring your simple request that could so easily be resolved. I know that worried them enough to completely override natural justice principles in my case, so you might get some action.

I honestly don't know what is happening here - as a payee I was always required to prove such things and even when I had written proof of enrollment and written proof of the last day of term, and even when CSA themselves had spoken to the school and confirmed both of those details, all the payer had to do was say he did not believe the date which the school had put in writing was correct and they demanded that I, not he, provide further written proof.

They were hysterical at the mere thought that there may be an overpayment, accepted his word over my written confirmation on school letterhead and their own conversation with the school, and expected me to provide the additional written information. Why they are doing it differently in your case I really don't know.

The essential difference between your situation and mine is that the information on which the decision was based has changed. How would you feel about telling them you want to take the decision out of their hands by referring it to the SSAT since what they ask from you is plainly impossible?

Thanks for your other message.

I will be there for you in a non-corporeal sense in July.


PS - The reason I put so much of my own story into this is to highlight the inconsistency.
Perhaps this is another area where the overworked SecSPCA might work with CSA towards a more consistent approach.

Uhhm perhaps you could do a statutory declaration stating that the girl told you she is no longer at school, that being your proof, which they are entitled to then disprove by obtaining the attendance records.

Would that be possible BR?

Could your partner ask for the attendance records? Perhaps them not giving them could be considered proof as I believe a parent unless specifically not allowed in a court order has a right to such records.
Yes Mike, in a different situation where they  required me to prove a negative rather than have the payer prove a positive as he claimed that is exactly what I did and it worked.

Good or Bad news not sure what. We demanded to speak to a supervisor and she contacted the Principal who originally wrote the first letter ( of course case manager told us they would not do this). We emailed the Principal again saying what is happening and he replied he will not deal with us as he would deal directly with CSA so fingers crossed the truth comes out. Thanks everyone there is some great advice here.
Annie, also bolster your case with the statutory declaration.

Here's a word document you can modify, get a JP to witness it (although others can as well, doctor, lawyer, nurse and more) :-

If there is no joy in CSA contacting the Principal directly, here is another approach.

You need to find out who is in charge of the school district (the person who looks after a bunch of schools in the area that the child/other parent live). This person may be more legally savvy and may contact CSA directly, advising if the child is enrolled or not. Just request this in a letter. You can find out the school district by looking on the education queensland website.

I will have a look at the FOI policies on tafe colleges - I'm sure enrollment would be FOI. If you cannot find her at school or at a TAFE - she is not in further learning.

Interesting tangent on this - how would apprenticeships work? Presumably the 18 yr old would earning an income and it wouldn't apply???

Junior Executive of SRL-Resources

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (Look for the Avatars). Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Artemis said
Interesting tangent on this - how would apprenticeships work? Presumably the 18 yr old would earning an income and it wouldn't apply???

The full time education must be secondary for administrative assessment though CSA to continue, so apprenticeship is a no go without a court application.

In Tasmania, TAFE is tertiary, so that is also a no-go, but I believe it may be considered secondary in some states.

VET (vocational education and training) courses run through secondary colleges are secondary here so they do qualify for child support, but they don't pay like apprenticeships.

We just got the objection back. There is no proof she is in full time education but no one can get hold of the truth due to FOI so they have just said we will have to pay. It isn't a long time but still. I am on both sides of the fence and it amazes me that the person paying has to always find the proof yet they cannot find the truth as they do not have access to any of the child's medical or education documents.

Hi Annie, you may not have seen this, but there is discussion on another thread about a 16 yr old who has had a baby. Some of the points about defining self-subsidising may be helpful in your partner's response to this objection.

If the "child" has a car and/or is living a lifestyle that indicates they are self-supporting, you can use this to counter the argument that she is in full time education.

Junior Executive of SRL-Resources

Executive Member of SRL-Resources, the Family Law People on this site (Look for the Avatars). Be mindful what you post in public areas. 
Yes I have been reading that topic with interest. My Step Daughter does not work she just sits at home. I personally think she has a disablity as she cannot leave the house apparently! The money is irrelevant its the fact that if she doesn't get child support she may go and get a job and benefit herself and society.
Annie I'm pretty sure a disability is a reason to get CS beyond 18.

Here it is :-
CSA Guide said
Can a court make an order for a child over 18 years? (Section 66L FLA)

A court can make a child maintenance order for a child over 18 years, or extend an order past a child's 18th birthday, if satisfied that it is necessary:

    * to enable the child to complete their education; or
    * because the child has a physical or mental disability.
Found here The CSA Guide 3.1.3
Yes Mike you are right. I have researched that one but there has to be evidence that she has one. that is just my personal opinion from what I see of her but her mother has never worked a day in her life so maybe she just sits around for no other reason then that is what she sees as okay. Even if she has a disability there are still lots of jobs out there that could help her become more confident as a person. The mother hasn't submitted any evidence that she has a disability just that she is enrolled in full time education with no evidence. I have to say a bit thank you to the other post you replied to about post separation income. They told us today we had to submit a change of assessment but I mentioned that I was told different from a reliable source that all we had to do was apply and the CSA person then went and did some investigating and yes it can all be done over the phone not as COA.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets