Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Question; child support and school fees

I was previously the PAYER, paying child support to my ex, now due to change in care levels i am now primary carer and do not have to pay anything. I pay all the school fees etc for my children. NAP were refused by my Ex

A question about child support and school fees;
I have previously been the PAYER paying child support to my ex, now due to change in care levels i am now primary carer and do not have to pay anything.
I pay all the school fees etc for my children I always have, I tried to claim these costs as a non agency payment to be credited as CS but at the time due to the care level they had to get permission from my ex; she said no.
My question is now that I do not have to pay CS and I am not receiving any CS from my ex ( ex is unemployed), Is there anything i can do to get money from my ex regarding 50% of school fees etc?.
Seems unfair that my ex isn't paying anything towards the children's education, what can i do ?
Mike T can you help? :thumbs:

Acacia there appears to be no agreement in regard to the schooling, therefore it appears to be a unilateral decision that the school fees are incurred that is unless you are simply talking about normal fees associated with a public school.
 
If there were agreement you would go the way of a reason 3 change of assessment application (high costs of caring for, educating or training the child in the manner expected by the parents). Even then considering that the other parent is on income support, then such a claim could well be considered unjust and inequitable and or improper due to the lack of financial resources available.

I'm pretty sure that Non-Agency payments cannot apply as they are for payments made that effectively count as payments of child support, as you are the recipient then they are not available.

Normal fees for a public school are considered in the cost of children and thus an assessment would cover these.

The only other options that I can think of would be to either get the other parent to make some form of voluntary payment/agreement or to try taking the matter to a court who can basically make whatever decision they wish, however they would very likely take heed of the Child Support legislation and the financial situation of the parents, so this may itself not be fruitful.

You ask about fairness, if this was a unilateral decision, then in my opinion it would be unfair to financially burden the other parent. Should this be allowed as a norm then I have little doubt that there would be a spate of such decisions being made based upon vengeance rather than concern for the child or children.

Not that I'm aware of any statistics but I would guess that it us not a common occurrence, in an intact family, that private schooling is an option where one of the parents is on income support.
I still believe it to be unfair when the other party has the ability and the time to work but CHOOSES not to, She just uses her boyfriends money to get by.
The other party only has the children 21% of the time and has never put a cent towards her children's education.
Public schooling still costs a fair amount of money there are the fees,uniform,school bag ,lunchboxs, shoes etc. Can cost over $1000 per child ( we have 4 children).
If I didn't pay for these things my children probably wouldn't even go to school.
There should be a law put in place , If a person has children they should be responsible for that child in all respects including financially, to choose not to work because you cant be bothered in my opinion is a form of child neglect.
I'm also struggling with the apparent fact that Centrelink and the CSA see nothing wrong with the payee's who choose not to work and are on a pension, which means the payer has to pay more because of it. I am not sure how this is justified…..
Acacia,
          basically I agree and I think most would consider any parent shirking their responsibility to their children is neglecting those children and also abusing those children. If that's the case then yes that aspect is unfair, to the other parent, to the children and to the rest of the majority of society. However I would have been irresponsible myself to make the assumption that this was the case from what you originally said.

Babushka,
             I'd very much like to explain the justice in the dilemma you are struggling with, hey but I can't. I wonder if anybody can?
Not always practical, but I would think that one easy way for both parents to contribute without financial and CSA difficulties, to their children is to have equal time and responsibility.
However, like I said, only if both parents live within proximity to make this a workable solution… If living far apart.. maybe an option to have the children live with one parent for a year and then the next year, the other parent's turn…

Agree

I must say I am in 50/50 arrangement with my child at the moment and when the other parent is not dedicated to the interests of their child and its just about money, CSA etc. make it extremely hard to have a fair go and I don't think it works out best in the childs interests.

If you are still friendly with your ex and distance is close and communication good then 50/50 is great.

Otherwise the confusion and conflict it puts the children under is not worth it. My daughter has been severely affected by her mothers complete dis-regard for her well being and only concern of how many benefits and how much money she can get from me.

I believe CSA needs to be a bit more flexible and realistic when it comes to parents claims and when evidence can be produced that by normal contract law is admissible then it should be… the old "I'm sorry but if your ex did not agree that these payments were for child support then they can't be used" is just not acceptable.

The worst I have heard of all is "There is no way we can force your ex to contribute to school fees/books/uniforms. If you are worried about paying for everything and not being able to claim then don't pay" this said in relation to my query about how I can get my ex to pay half the costs.

CSA basically says send your kids to school wihtout books and uniforms or just pick up the responsibility of your ex and pay. I'm sorry but the fact that I already have my child 50% of the time and probably finacially support her close to 75% (sports, clothes etc.) and then on top of that am still required to pay a substancial amount of child support because my ex quit her job to ensure maximum benefits is JUST RIDICULOUS. So MOOT unfortunately your suggestion can create more dramas as once you are 50/50 non agency payments won't even be considered for school fees etc. But in civil circumsatnce where both parents can agree MOOT is on the money, although in my experience the two homes need to be very similar in terms of rules and discipline otherwsie like in my case the transition each week is very traumatic for the child… I'm in the middle of preparing for court and going for 80% custody so fingers crossed…
cik1 said
… I'm in the middle of preparing for court and going for 80% custody so fingers crossed…
Is that because you want more money or some other reason?


Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
 

court

Not because of the money, that doesn't worry me.  Currently my daughter is basically not being sent to school when she is with her mother and discipline and routine are completely lacking. The school has noticed this change from week to week and my daughters behaviour and performance at school has been severely affected. Hence the desire for 80% so that I can have her for the weekdays and every second weekend to ensure she goes to school and she has a balanced organised life that enables her to perform and behave better.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets