Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

AAT Question of Law

Add Topic
I attended SSAT to have my ex's child support increased from zero to his correct income.  He never answered the phone on the day (both home and mobile) and after 30 mins they phoned me back saying they had the authority to proceed with the hearing.  Ex appealed to AAT on procedural fairness - in not being allowed to attend the hearing.  He has a barrister and solicitor to fight it with court.  Judge has made a date stating onus is on him to prove that he wasnt given procedural fairness in relation to his non-attendance.  Child support has remained a party to the proceedings.  A few days ago they engaged a solicitor to act for the registrar. 

This solicitor is now stating that SSAT are suppose to get approval to continue a hearing without a members non-attendance (im representing myself), even if he fails to answer the telephone or turn up.  The decision paper by the ssat does not state that they did this and noone knows what occured without the transcript copy - however noone will pay for the copy as it costs too much money and she doubts the other side (payer) will pay the fees and are hoping that one will fall into their lap.

The solicitor has sent letters off to the other side - not myself - stating they have formed the view that the SSAT had no power ot make a decision to proceed in your clients absence.

I have asked this solicitor for proof - they have none.

I believe that they are making an assumption that this did not occur - as their only proof is that it wasnt written in the final decision paperwork - however I dispute this as my understanding is that without the copy of the transcript which noone has, then its purely speculation as to what may or may not have occurred and the onus is on the other side to get a copy of the transcript to prove this point.

Are there any other cases similar to fall back on or am I correct in standing my ground stating that their all speculating and there is no proof unless they actually get and pay for a copy of the transcript that has no reference to a higher authority making that decision to proceed - case is in a few days time.
Without claiming any expertise on the topic, section 103E of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 seems to be pretty clear that the Principal Member may authorise the SSAT to continue the proceedings in the circumstances.  That would not answer the procedural fairness issue, but it does seem to settle the authority to continue the hearing question.

Senior member

Thank you for your response.  To clarify who is a senior member..  Is it one of the two members who heard the appeal or someone else within ss at?  If someone else are the two members who heard the hearing required anywhere to put their answer in the report they send with their decision?  
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets