MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Inquiry into child support reviews

Filed under: Child Support,General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 9:29 am Tue 1st August 2006

Media release

Inquiry into child support reviews

Parents for Children has launched an inquiry into Inland Revenue’s administrative reviews of child support. Administrative reviews enable departures from standard formula assessments.

“Reviews are held in secret and publication is prohibited”, said Mark Shipman of Parents for Children.

Shipman said this system is hurting parents and children and that review officers are inventing figures from thin air without any justification.

“The numbers of parents seeking help with administrative reviews has skyrocketed. Inland Revenue claims that it is a simple process, when in reality it is a complex area of law.”

“Parents, mums and dads, are being financially crippled by the decisions of these bureaucrats. Proposed changes to the Act will make the situation worse, not better.”

“Politicians have failed to hold an inquiry into the Child Support Act 1991, and mums, dads and children continue to suffer by the application of a crude formula based approach. Parents for Children has begun an inquiry into the administrative review process as the first of a series of inquiries into the Child Support Act 1991,” he concluded.


Contact Details

Mark Shipman 021-982222
Jim Nicolle 021-800586

Please make your submission as an email. For a postal submission 8 Copies are required – address details can be obtained from Jim or Mark on the phone numbers listed above.

Please keep your email down to pertinent points .The Inquiry Board members are donating their time voluntarily and have committed to read all submissions.

Please indicate if you wish your submission forwarded with the Inquiry report to Michael Cullen, Minister of Revenue.

Please refrain from swearing and abusive language. Inquiry Board members fully understand the level of dissatisfaction with the Child Support Act 1991 and its administration by the IRD

If you wish to make a verbal submission in Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch or Dunedin you must include a contact address and telephone number.

Suggested Structure for a submission

Brief introductory paragraph providing contact details (address and phone number) and the
a brief description of your situation.

e.g I am a paying parent, I share care 3 nights a week, I pay for two children and have been doing so for 16 years.

Followed by the body of your submission.

Submissions Close 1 November 2006

For further information email [email protected]


  1. Would love to give you my admin reviews but i can’t under section 124 of the Act 🙂

    Comment by Graeme — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 11:21 am

  2. Graeme – the Inquiry is not asking for your administrative review decision.

    This does not stop you commenting on the outcome of the review, the process, IRD adminstartion of the review system. Your understanding of the law that was applied to you and how it affects parents and kids.

    How did the departure order affect you, your ability to parent yourt children…..

    Have you been placed in debt by the review process?

    Do you want decisons published?

    Can you understand the reasoning of the decison?

    Did you review the cases the review oficer applied to you and cannot understand how the cases relate to your circumstances?

    Should you have been able to take a lawyer to your review?

    Were your new partners imcome figures obtained by the review officer without your partner giving permission?

    How were you treated by the review officer.


    But a few areas that do not require anyone to break the law but are in need of inquiry.

    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 12:17 pm

  3. Thanks and In the Inquiry should be included the complaints section of child support, this would show how disfunctional it is.

    Comment by Graeme — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 12:23 pm

  4. If you think that this needs to be included in your submission then include it.

    How this Act and its administraton, by IRD, impacts on the lives of Parents and Children needs to be inquired into.

    The politicians have continually ignored the call for a review.

    This is the first of a series of inquries into The Child Support Act 1991 to be organised by Parents for Children.

    To manage the size of the task faced the National Executie of Parents for Children has decided to “eat the elephant one bite at a time” .


    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 12:37 pm

  5. I have been through 42 of them… They are not much fun especially if you are the liable parent.
    I have had some very interesting departure orders.. What are you to do, go to Family Court… Even more of a joke than the admin process.

    Comment by SNMP — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 2:08 pm

  6. These issues need to be brought into the light and air of public scrunity.

    The Inquiry findings, will be published and made widely available.

    If submitters agree we will publish the content of the submission.

    Look forward to your submission SNMP.

    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 2:16 pm

  7. brilliant idea. i think presenting findings of the submissions will tend to open up public perception and awareness of these processes.

    Comment by starr — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 3:03 pm

  8. Great stuff gentlemen.

    Having some knowledge of the unrestrained lawlessness with which:

    a) The podgy teletubby David Udy (one hopes his physical stature reflects his cardiovascular health);

    b) All past (incl. Ian Webber whose ruddy complexion one again hopes is symptomatic of a laboured ticker) as well as the present “principal review officer” (it should be of no surprise to readers that the principal review officer is actually an employee of Inland Revenue and thus beholden to the executive – the constitutional conerstone of separation of powers apparently doesn’t apply when it comes to administrative reviews…); and

    c) Virtually all of the review officers (many if not all of them lawyers holding practising certificates and who therefore are officers of the Court. Again, judging them by their deeds one could be forgiven for thinking these “lawyers” are in fact officers of the Executive)

    have acted in conducting administrative reviews, I would think that it would take something akin to South Africa’s “truth and reconciliation commission” to out the corrupt practices of this lot.

    Granted that some of the review officers are either too arrogant or thick to be cognisant of the fact that they are essentially standing in the shoes of a Family Court judge, that they are officers of the court, and that their job is to apply the law… not the policy of the government of the day!

    The several departure order decisions I’ve read would have been hilarious were it not for the consequences to the liable parent.

    I honestly cannot understand how they can do it – I blushed just reading them, god knows I’d throw myself off the harbour bridge if my name was ever at the end of such a document.

    Your task is vast, take strength from the more than three decades, including 26 years in custody, it took before Mandela was able to triumph over the tyranny that was apartheid.

    Comment by John Self — Tue 1st August 2006 @ 9:24 pm

  9. Have got 3 letters from IRD each stating the information on my salary has been provided by my employer.. fine that’s not a problem.. the error though is the quoted amount on each of the letters. They differ vastly with a difference of $15g’s between them and non of them are anywhere near my true salary. These letters are each dated within 2 weeks from each other…

    Does this require a review?.. or some control here.. it appears the IRD/ CSA are playing games or just plain incompetent.

    Comment by starr — Fri 4th August 2006 @ 7:46 pm

  10. Star see new thread.



    Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Fri 4th August 2006 @ 10:53 pm

  11. Currently awaiting a review.
    1. 2 children involved, each parent has one. One parent in Austrailia with oldest child who is working full time and receiving a student allowence. Parent A – (Austraila)Earns high income less living costs and does not pay child support for 2nd child living in NZ.

    2. Parent B – earning just alittle more then the working child who lives with Parent A – However Parent B is paying child support incurring interest (which CSA advised they would not charge due to fininancial position of Parent B, IRD NZ will not remove the penality fees even tho CSA advised they have not charged them, Parent B has incurred exchange rate cost which puts the monthy payment up by an extra ($30.00 odd dollars + late fees.

    3. Both IRD NZ and CSA know that Parent A owes a large amount to Parent B and CSA will not look at changing the amount to reflect the child who is working full time. NZ IRD have spent two years looking at a calender to see what year might be good for Parent B to start receiving support for the child still living in NZ. Parent A refuses to help with any extra costs incurred in the upkeep of child B and special needs of this child.

    Parent B is now going to seek a departure and needs help in preparing this for submission to CSA and NZ. any ideas>?

    Comment by Rob — Thu 13th November 2008 @ 11:58 pm

  12. This is not the place for such discussions. IRD monitor this site and strategy needs to be prepared in private.
    [email protected]

    Comment by allan Harvey — Fri 14th November 2008 @ 9:31 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar