Question re child support for the gurus
#51291 (In Topic #8445)
Okay here goes. I have an acquaintance, whose spouse (we will call him the father) pays child support to his ex (who we will call the mother, for ease). The father earns a lot more than the mother, because she doesn't work, and oh, she presented a letter to CSA from her GP that said she had a medical condition and was not able to work. And the letter also asked that the CSA consider this letter when making the assessment. So the father pays not only child support, but all other costs. Okay, so pretty straight forward so far, or so it seems.Well, the mother only has care of her child/ren two nights a fortnight. And she is not eligible for disability pension, because she has a spouse with no dependants, who earns far more than the father. How is that fair? How does that work? CSA have admitted that this is an exception to the rule, and is a grey area.Does the father have any avenues available to him to not require him to pay child support given that he has 12 nights out of 14?Thanks in advance.
Boots saidDoes the father have any avenues available to him to not require him to pay child support given that he has 12 nights out of 14?
According to what you have said the parent in question, according to section 40C, should not have to pay CS due to their level of care exceeding 65% (12nights per 14 = 86%). :
Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 - Part 5Administrative assessment of child support - Division 2The formulas - Subdivision EGeneral provisions - 40C Parents with more than 65% care said40C Parents with more than 65% care
The annual rate of child support payable by a parent for a child for a day in a child support period is nil if:
(a) the parents annual rate of child support for the child is worked out under section 35 or 37 (income of both parents, no non‑parent carer); and
(b) the parents percentage of care determined for the purposes of the administrative assessment of child support for the child is more than 65%.
I disagree, the CSA yet again appear to have shown that they do not understand the very legislation under which they directly act. I would suggest that you make a complaint and perhaps also seek compensation via the "Compensation for detriment caused by defective administration' (sometimes called the CDDA scheme)", especially as the CSA may well find it hard/impossible to retrieve monies already wrongfully collected.
Boots saidCSA have admitted that this is an exception to the rule, and is a grey area.
In complaining I would also recommend informing your local federal MP, the Federal MP who has the DHS portfolio and also the ombudsman.
I would also suggest that you object to the decision to ignore the full extent of the legislation by omitting to apply section 40C of the Child Support Assessment Act and that if they try to say that the objection time limit has been exceeded that such a time limit is negated by an act of deficient administration in not applying the full extent of the legislation as they are required to do (if they need to be informed refer them to 4.1.2 of the guide and tell them to read the paragraph entitled Explanation that refers them to section 2.9.5 of the guide in the case of an obvious error).
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.