Govt seeks to improve child support provisions
Media statement
For immediate release
Tuesday, 8 April 2008
The government is looking at ways of improving the child support scheme to make it more responsive to factors such as the complexities of shared care, the income levels of both parents and the costs of raising children, Revenue Minister Peter Dunne said today.
“These are the most commonly identified areas of concern of the many people who write to me and to other MPs about their child support problems,” Mr Dunne said.
“The standard formula for assessing the amount of child support to be paid by a liable parent is straightforward, easy to understand and in most cases provides certainty for both parents.
“However, it is solely based on the economic circumstances of the liable parent and his or her ability to provide financial support for the child involved. It does not take into account the income of the principal carer of the child.
“Nor does the formula take into account all the parental circumstances surrounding the shared care of children and the associated costs of raising them, and at different ages.
“It is timely to reassess the formula, to ensure that it is flexible enough to reflect the complexities of raising children when the parents are separated and both parents contribute to the care of their children.
“Since the current child support scheme came into being in 1992, there have been many changes in New Zealand society that make it timely to reconsider aspects of child support law.
“For example, family law now places far greater emphasis on both parents being actively involved in their children’s lives and sharing responsibility for their welfare.
“Moreover, more women are now in the workforce, which has undoubtedly led to the more active involvement of fathers than occurred in the past.
“Many liable parents consider the current assessment of child support liability to be unfair.
“In trying to retain a significant role in their children’s upbringing they incur considerable costs in providing for them during what are often significant periods of contact, although those costs are not recognised under the standard child support formula.
“Some say those costs affect their ability to make the child support payments required of them, placing strain on other financial commitments.
“Ultimately, however, both parents are responsible for supporting their children, and it is the child’s interests that must predominate.
“I have asked my policy officials to examine a number of options for updating the child support system to deal with these and related concerns.
“One option is to make relatively minor changes to the existing definition of when the care of a child is shared — at present, to share care ‘substantially equally’ a liable parent must care for the child or children for at least 40 percent of nights — or if less, prove that he or she meets the shared care test in specified other ways. This is one of the most contentious features of the child support scheme.
“To make things easier, the wording of the definition could be amended to extend the specified circumstances in which liable parents who do not meet the 40-percent-of-nights test but who do undertake significant care of their children on a daily basis can have the associated costs recognised.
“A second option is to reduce the shared care threshold from 40 percent of nights, which would allow a greater number of liable parents to benefit from the shared care provisions and pay less in child support.
“A third and more fundamental option than changing the shared care provisions is to adopt an approach that takes account of both parents’ income as well as the costs of raising children. Such an approach has recently been adopted in Australia and is in use in Norway and part of the United States.
“The third option is a more complex way of assessing child support liability because it involves taking into account the costs of raising children as a percentage of parents’ combined income.
“Both lowering the 40-percent-of-nights shared care threshold and adopting an approach based on joint parental income and the cost of raising children would require a great deal of information, much of which is very hard to come by.
“It is expected that some of the necessary information will result from the current Families Commission survey of 10,000 people — a sample of recipients of Working for Families, recipients of child support, and payers of child support. The survey is looking at patterns of post-separation care of children and the costs of raising children.
“Initial research results are expected in June and should help in the consideration of the options for ensuring a more flexible approach to recognising separated parents’ contributions to the care of their children.
“I hope that by next year the government will be in a position to present for consideration some soundly based proposals for improving the system.
“All decisions on child support liability are a question of finding a balance between competing interests. For every liable parent who pays less in child support there is a custodial parent who will receive less in child support payments.
“Although it is impossible to come up with child support rules that will satisfy all separated parents, the government wants to devise rules that will meet the concerns of a greater number of separated parents than the current rules do,” Mr Dunne said.
Sounds like United Future propoganda. It must be election year. The truth is that Dunne has used the Families Comission research to sideline the issue until after the election and hedge his own personal interests so he can be considered as Revenue Minister for whatever party gets in at the end of the year. Cynical, you bet. Mr Dunne has a history as a father basher wearing his Revenue Minister hat and has had plenty of time to propose and act on changes if that was his real mindset. Allan Harvey
Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 8th April 2008 @ 1:03 pm
If Dunne wants to use the Word Father again he should try praying for forgiveness. When fathers stood in the margins of the electorate, Dunne stood on the stage of Union of Fathers and tickled the worm with the words family and fathers. If we achieve nothing else this election but to wipe this confused chameleon off our political stage it would be a good start. Review of Child support — yeah right. I wouldn’t believe this guy anymore than I would a talking fish who told me he’d leap into the boat if I just took the hook out his mouth. A Dunne tactic is not a Dunne Deal, it is just more bullshit in progress, and we should make sure he doesn’t get away with it again this election.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Tue 8th April 2008 @ 1:51 pm
Sounds a bit like Rachaels hair shampoo ad.It won’t happen overnight but it will happen.
Yeah when????
If Dunne gets into power this year,he’ll still be uttering the same words in three years time and he’ll still have the same hair style.
Comment by rosie — Tue 8th April 2008 @ 6:25 pm
Sounds excellent, maybe 17 years late?
Peter Dunne makes it all sound so difficult, when Australia has had these types of provisions available to all parents for several years.
NZ has had these provisions for shared care for 17 years, just it wouldn’t allow all parents to use them, to keep down the administrative costs using the magical 40% figure.
When these changes are implemented and actually available to reflect the real world situation, there will be less perverse incentives to artificially manipulate and control the time children spend with the other parent.
Then children will be more able to access the best that both parents can provide!
Remember though, it is actions that count, not talk just before an election.
Dunne may be braver than 40%, but can he get past 5%?
Given his history of talk and inaction, or action in the opposite direction, I would like him to explain why we should believe him this time and how we can take him seriously enough to consider voting UF?
Cheers, MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Tue 8th April 2008 @ 11:51 pm
Interesting, could this perhaps be a preemptive strike against National who I am aware are quite interested in a rethink on this issue? At least it’s finally being recognised as a significant problem.
Comment by Scott — Thu 10th April 2008 @ 3:28 pm
No Scott its not being recognised. Mr Dunne has supported the covert operations of the IRD child support division, but now they realise to their peril, that their time is coming. It is nothing more than a plititude to keep Dunne in government, but its too little too late. At 0.5% United Future is now only half a dead duck, and they are getting what they deserve, an undignified exit.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Mon 14th April 2008 @ 8:37 pm
Mr Dunne is just another sad politician unable to understand what is happening and unable to get a proper job.The real targets for criticism are the IRD workers who continually lie and cheat for their own perverse pleasure.4 years in a row I did everything necessary by having my daughter for over 146 nights.The IRD would never have a bar of it.They kept assessing me as having her for 139 nights.One year even the mother assessed it as 150.Now they have issued bankruptcy proceedings against me despite the fact that I am owed huge sums of money by them.Because of this I can never return to NZ and will probably never see or hear anything any of my 3 kids again.
Comment by whanga — Tue 15th April 2008 @ 2:52 pm
Hi there – My partner and I are about to undergo our second administrative review, requested by his ex-wife, on Ground 8. Is there anyone out there who can help us draft a reply to the ex-wife’s letter? Is there anyone who can suggest a lawyer skilled in this field in the Wellington area (the lawyer we used last time appeared to be as “green” as we were)? Thanks and regards, Sue
Comment by Sue — Tue 15th April 2008 @ 3:40 pm
I concur. I recieved a Colmar Brunton (Families Commission) survey form, and the first thing I thought was, damn, the government have a way to avoid or put off any questioning on the current Child Support regime up to and beyond the elections. Bad timming or clever tactic?
The survey form was poorly set out; the biggest problem for me being that it didn’t allow for EQUAL Share parenting, requiring me to insert many hand-writen comments to make sure the statistitions were well informed. My concern is that; should those making sense of the forms be confused about the the care and/or financial situation of a family, they may disregard the form or make it “fit” into a predetermined slot.
What will come of the Colmar Brunton research? It will likely be ignored just like Law Commission recommendations.
Comment by xsryder — Wed 16th April 2008 @ 1:38 pm
Hi Sue, I went through my first admin review last year and am also about to go through my second one. I learned quite a lot from the experience, and this site and talking to various people and it might be worth talking to each other. Leave your email contact and I’ll get in touch.
Comment by GM — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 12:39 am
Hi – thanks for your reply. My email is [email protected]. Any info would be most appreciated.
Comment by Sue — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 1:02 am
GM and Sue I am also in Wellington, and in the same boat and have just responded against Grounds 6 and 8. My ex is on a benefit but has asked for a review based on the title of my job and that my son has a mild form of ASD. She requires an increase so SHE can travel to courses. She does not provide evidence to back up her claims, yet I have told by a person in the review dept that I should supply my financials, yet she has made it clear that she will only provide it the review officer. She does not recieve any of the extra if it is upheld, recieves extra funding from WINZ which I would not, to have access to the extras for these courses.
I responded as to why I believed there were no special circumstances, was it equitable and fair, and was it proper as stated in their propaganda.
Scrap gave some good advice, which I based my response on, do it logically and use no emotion. We can only stick to the facts and hope that we get a fair deal.
Do the applicants and review officers not realise that this only hurts the child, in the way that what money will be available during access with these children.
I feel that through my first review my case was not heard, and again it wont be taken into consideration against the mothers need for more money (or revenge)
The system needs change, natural justice and equality. Just like the review hearings, I doubt that all involved in the system will get it.
Comment by Jason — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 1:18 pm
I’m more than happy to help with applications to the Family Court for departure orders, suspension orders and objection to IRD decisions for people in the Wellington Region.
Allan Harvey, Union of Fathers (Wellington)
We now have a toll free number 0508 2255323 (0508Call Dad) for you to leave messages on.
Comment by allan Harvey — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 5:31 pm
Have you read the comments on this website about Mark Miller?
I do not believe any of you can expect the IRD workers or the so called lawyers they hire to listen to anything you say.If everybody however were to take their cases to the next level however then something may happen.I am not saying for a moment that the district court judges will make any change to the decision.(unless you bribe them in some way!).However it will assist in blocking up the court system and this may get noticed by someone somewhere.In 2 straight admin reviews my medical records and reports from specialist doctors went completely disregarded by both Miller and the District Court.The fact that I was unable to work for most of the year was completely irrelevant to them in making their decision as to how much I could I eqarn that year.The only thing they could come up with as relevant was my age and the degree I got at University.In another year I challenged the amount set after a large sum was mistakenly ripped out of my bank account by the IRD and deposited in my ex’s account.The case officer woman set the amount of my income deliberately at the point where there would be no reason for my ex to have to repay the amount.The case officer even went so far as to ignore my 3 year old daughter who had lived in my exclusive care for the whole of that year.She assessed me as a single man without dependents!This was despite me having been assessed as having a dependent the previous 2 years and the year after.She gave no reason for this breathtaking decision.These people are a total law unto themselves and have made their decision long before you speak or write anything so do not bother wasting your time.Do the court though.Take some action.If everybody went to the court (it does not cost anything) then someone will notice.
Comment by whanga — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 5:40 pm
Hi Allan – I’ve sent you a rant – whoops, sorry – an email!!
Comment by Sue — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 6:49 pm
Hi Jason
I thought that both parties had to supply financials, and that the Review Officer could not consider anything that had not been supplied to the other party?
My partner’s ex-wife is a teacher, and was financially supported by my partner whilst in training. She now earns considerably more than my partner, and yet this isn’t taken into consideration at all!!
I do think that some ex-wives take the Review process as an opportunity to seek revenge, and find out what is going on in their ex-partner’s life with their new partner.
Comment by Sue — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 6:57 pm
Whanga
It’s so sad that you may never see or hear from your children again – hopefully they will make contact with you as they get older. 🙁
Comment by Sue — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 7:00 pm
Sue could not agree with you more. After posting my last comment I now have been asked by the mother through her lawyer to suspend access over the upcoming holidays, due to his anxiety (alleged by her) when he comes back.
I honestly believe that child support should be based on parenting orders whether agreed or court ordered. The link to access counselled or mediated if there are any problems, at this point a decision made to the fault of the party who has infriged more than once on the agreement. In the case of the paying parent, forego child support for that period , increased payment/s or bond for the paying parent.
Hurting people in the back pocket when there is not a good enough excuse, is acceptable.
Not reviews based on emotion, and what the payee wants.
It may be hurting the child, but if both parents care about their child, then the child should not be affected, and if all parties cannot agree then penalties should be incurred at that stage, to act as a deterent to help us stop hurting our kids.
When will logic not emotion get recognised in this debate
Comment by Jason — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 8:24 pm
Jason
Sorry to hear that you might not get to see your son during the school holidays!
My partner put in a parenting order, that was not agreed to by his ex, and the next step was having lawyers for the childen appointed. My partner pulled out at this point, as he didn’t want to risk his children possibly being upset by having to have to talk to a lawyer. He has not seen his daughter (14) since last June, when she abruptly cut off all contact with him – his ex must know the reason, but won’t tell him. My partner sees his son for 2 hrs during the week and every 2nd weekend from midday Sat till 7pm Sun (but not in the school holidays cos his ex is a teacher, and apparenly sees this time as time she can spend with the children, even if it is a scheduled “dad weekend”. We have son for less that half of school holidays, and less than two weeks of the Christmas school holidays. It totally sucks that my partner stopped the process to the benefit of the children, and it has turned around to bite him in the bum!
Comment by Sue — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 10:18 pm
Hi All.
Im a friend of Rosie.and have looked at alot of the trouble that the IRD have caused over the years.I might be wrong in my thinking but I thought that the IRD were collectors of revenue from wage and salary earners,self employed and alike.not only do I see the Mothers using the Children for financial gain.but also the IRD use them too.My question is were does Peter Dunne and the IRD get off telling the paying parents what is good and not good for the Children?Dont you think that an intependant body ort to be set up whereas the two parties can sit down and nut it out between them.leaving the IRD out of it all together.
there Ive had my say.I would like to thank Rosie.
Cheers All.
Comment by rosie — Thu 17th April 2008 @ 11:06 pm
Sue
I hear your frustration, in your partner doing the right thing.
Rosie your comments have merit, we need to have someone with enough fortitude to look into these options instead of always following some other process from around the world.
We are the unwilling participants in a review hearing, to increase the child support paid, with a probable outcome of paying more.
Action is better than no action at all.
My situation now is to pay it and have a couple of bucks in my back pocket I had helped my ex boss for a handful of sundays. Asked if I could bring him back earlier on Saturday night, not the usual sunday arvo drop off. I was denied access because it wasnt at the time as stated on the order, although it was earlier.
I cannot now help out my ex boss, have extra funds for my sons holiday with me, and my son gets hurt in me trying to do the right thing.
I soon will recieve an application to suspend all contact.
My money is good enough but I am not.
A good reflection on the state of the nation when all this can happen.
We need change, and people willing enough to say no more.
How do we change this, I now want to add my voice!
Comment by Jason — Fri 18th April 2008 @ 9:44 am
I am happy to report that I called my 12 year old’s school today and she is doing fantastically.She is the youngest in her class but is the class leader.She is top of the class,doing extension study,captaining sports teams,doing ballet and drama and generally a model child.All with almost zero input from me.You see its not about us the adults.Its about the kids.I can and do put my energy into kids who are not doing so well through groups such as stepUP.Kids live day by day.They do not care about whether they see their parents or brothers and sisters.It is not necessarily something they think about.If they are doing well us adults should just leave them to it.
Comment by whanga — Fri 18th April 2008 @ 4:54 pm
Hi all
we have an admin review meeting with IRD next Fri. My husband has been assessed to pay $1128 for 50/50 shared care. His daughter (14) now tells him she no longer wants to be in our care 50/50 which we are currently fighting thru family court. Before the final mediation conf scheduled in July we already have a letter from IRD saying that shared care has ceased??? Unbelievable – so the payments if we dont get this sorted will go up to $1500 a month. My husband and I are at our wits end. Weve seriously decided for him to give up his job – not that we can afford him to with our mtg payments so we are now looking at selling our house. If IRD cannot help us on Fri (we are going because his ex wife is assessed on the minimum payment of $749 a yr when we know she is working more hours and doing hairdressing cashies at home)then we will hand them our keys to our house. We dont know where to turn and reading all the posts on this IRD arnt going to give a rats if we sell our house and have to rent.So we figure if we have to sell our house and we have no mtg then there is no reason for my husband to work AND then the ex wife finally no longer benefits from us slogging our guts out to make these hideous payments to her!!!!!!IRD will however care when my husband stops working etc etc and his ex wife will be getting the minimum back of $749 a yr!!!!and I bet you know she will no longer want to have the kids because she no longer is getting an income off us!!!!! Any advice out there????????
Comment by Karen — Tue 22nd April 2008 @ 2:21 pm
If you try that tactic IRD will “deem” your husbands income to be same as last years plus 10% and assess you on that figure. You end up no job, no house (indeed open to a further review for earnings on the capital from your home) and still the same IRD Child Support amount. Give me a call again and lets talk about more sensible options. First one I would suggest that if you meet Robbie Laven as your review officer you tell him that you refuse to have a review done by him. Perhaps you should ask IRD before next Friday.
Allan
It may be that Robbie has been stood down as Review Officer given the number of complaints against him. He also faces a Law Society Disciplinary Hearing for incompetent work as L4C. Hey when the Court staff take a case against a L4C you know it has to be bad.
Comment by allan Harvey — Tue 22nd April 2008 @ 3:28 pm
VERY VERY IMPORTANT NEWS HOT OFF THE PRESS TAKE SPECIAL NOTE
Be very careful I had a Review done In Feb 2006 which was assessed at 7% of what I had just sold my property for, inspite of having already spent the money on another purchase. I have been fighting that decision ever since and so far legal fees are $45000, although the review decision was $12000 for one year.IRD jumped in on the act and my ex of 10 years together with IRD have made a retrospective claim which has recently gone to the High Court. Judge Gendall has yesterday made a decision that retrospective claims can now be made and granted by the family court. My claim has been referred back to the family court ( another $10000) for a decision.
Men in this country are losing the battle.Gendall obviously supports women. He’s “C—t struck”.
Has any one his private address? We need to protest outside his residence.
This is a test case decision which now has major repercussions for all Review claims.
Men you were warned but you have been too busy worrying about trivier.
This judgement will be media fodder in the next few days.
Mens groups should be putting all resources into the BEST legal minds in the country to fight this decision as now assessments can be based on assets not income ie as soon as you sell a property IRD will do a Review on you and assess you at your potential to earn from investing the sale money and back date it.
Comment by Agrieved Father — Wed 23rd April 2008 @ 9:57 pm
If I owned a tin shack valued at $100-000 and I sold it for a loss of $20-000,how much in child support would I have to pay on my loss???
Comment by kenny — Wed 23rd April 2008 @ 10:55 pm
Question: why is it when someone applies for Working For Families and are in a shared care arrangement 122 days is considered shared care and IRD only allow shared care for ‘paying parents’ at 146 nights????
Comment by Karen — Thu 24th April 2008 @ 2:05 pm
I have just received the other parties letter from IRD regarding our pending Admin Review. Where do we stand when her stated income is $43k and we only receive $773 (minimum c/s). She also claims Working For Families and when taking into account her income plus they include the c/s as income she is on over $55k…..Ive worked out WFF should be around $400 not $780????
Comment by Karen — Thu 24th April 2008 @ 2:14 pm
Hi all
We are going to our first admin review hearing in two weeks. We applied against my husbands ex on grounds 8 and 9. My husband had to go to court in order to get shared care of my step-daughter (6yrs) because his ex refused it for no particular reason other than the fact that she would receive less child support from us. After the parenting order(which includes a section stating that my husband and his ex will halve all the costs for their daughter – this is now legally binding) for shared care was agreed upon by both parties and signed his ex then proceeded to go straight to IRD and claim against him for child support. My husband had already left 100% of the matrimonial property to her for the benefit of his daughter but despite this his greedy ex is continuing to work the system to get as much money as she possibly can out of us. This situation is clearly inequitable and IRD have acknowledged that however they have been incredibly slow at solving the problem. It got worse – his ex had a child to her new partner and as soon as she had the baby and went off work she claimed against my husband and he ended up having his assessment increased to compensate for her lack of income due to having a baby even though it is to her new partner and he is financially supporting her! Yet if we were to have a child together and i was to go off work my husbands assessment would remain the same! Then there is the fact that we are punished for having higher incomes than the ex and her new partner. We have both worked hard to earn the money we get only to be forced to pay it to my husbands ex and this is despite the fact that we have SHARED CARE, we have the same day to day costs for the child because we have her equal nights, we halve all the expenses (such as schooling) and yet my husband is forced to make double up payments supposedly for the ‘support of is child’ BUT since his ex does not have expenses over and above ours then these payments can’t be deemed ‘child support’ and the money is certainly not being used for the support of my stepdaughter the ex is saving it for her upcoming wedding in Rarotonga! Why are we not able to spend any extra money we get on activities when we have my stepdaughter? We are being financially punished because the ex and her partner earn less! Does anyone have a similar situation? Have you applied for or been through an admin review against the ex?? When the situation is clearly inequitable will the review officer change the assessment or are we heading for a departure order in the family court? HELP!
Upset wife
Comment by Chch dad — Wed 30th April 2008 @ 9:50 pm
Well upset wife that is the way Child Support works. Tell it to Peter Dunne and your local MP. It won’t do any good but it may make you feel better.
It is almost impossible for a guy to win on ground 8 and ground 9 depends on how good your paper work in the property settlement is. It needs to be super explicit that the settlement envisaged provision for the child and continuing support. I haven’t seen a ground 9 matter stick in the many revoiews I have helped with.
Child Support is designed to smooth continuing incoime between seperated parents. Basically she will always be a heavy ball on the IRD chain he carries around till the child turns 19.
Comment by allan harvey — Wed 30th April 2008 @ 11:14 pm
Allan
Thanks for your feedback. We have been to the MP, his assistant was actually really helpful, partly because i know her thou! I had no idea about that ground 9 stuff and we were silly to trust the IRD admin review support staff – they were the ones who suggested my husband apply for a review under those grounds in the first place when we questioned why the assessment was so inequitable. We figured until the legislation changed we would not be able to do anything and apparently we were correct! However it is my understanding that often IRD review officers are bound strictly by legislation whereas the family courts (depature order process) is more likely to consider general inequities?? particulary in our case as my husband is clearly making double up support payments (we have the paperwork evidence for this – its on the parenting order my husband is legally bound to pay both).
Any ideas?
Also since it will make me feel better to tell everyone – Three IRD staff members on separate occasions (one at a meeting at their offices in the city) explained that yes this situation is incredibly unfair for us and suggested we should “just have some kids of our own, the more the better’ because that will mean we will pay decreased amounts of child support to the ex as our living allowance will go up – Nice one IRD!
Upset wife
Comment by Upset Wife — Thu 1st May 2008 @ 11:00 am
Hi Upset Wife
Your husband will be very lucky if he gets any of the money back that he has payed twice.The IRD are there to be ruthless not fair.What they are doing is to make things so unfair until the liable parent refuses to pay anymore.Then they slap them with penalties which go towards paying for Helen and her mottley bed mates new BMWs.
My only advice is to be as devious as your husband’s ex is.I know that’s rather hard to do but you won’t get anywhere by being honest.
For the IRD to suggest to you that you should have some kids of your own and the more the better,shows you how heartless they have become now.
Helen Clark and the IRD would be more at home in Zimbabwee
Comment by rosie — Thu 1st May 2008 @ 6:32 pm
Hi Rosie – I agree with you
We do not expect them to pay back any of the money or to drop the child support payments altogether (after all that would be the ethical and fair thing to do!) But we are wondering if they are likely to decrease my husbands assessment? We have not yet received the other parties financial details or application against us and we are 7 working days out before the review. Hopefully they won’t get their act together in time but regardless this review is happening. If we don’t get a decrease we will force a variation to the parenting order and probably apply for a departure order through the family courts. My husbands ex hates people knowing just how unethical she is being and when pushed by a mediator and reminded that the only person she is punishing is her daughter she sometimes backs down, but i won’t be crossing my fingers. She doesn’t think of anyone but herself.
Comment by Upset Wife — Sat 3rd May 2008 @ 5:08 pm
HI again
Just received a copy of the response letter and supporting documents from my husbands ex for the upcoming review. She has not supplied her statement of financial position (probably because she does not want the review officer seeing all her savings , assets and her partners income) but has included a very poorly written letter of response that in some paragraphs actually confirms and supports our argument for having the child support decreased. Will be very interesting to see what the review officer comes up with. However again i will not be crossing my fingers.
Comment by Upset Wife — Tue 6th May 2008 @ 6:56 pm
Yeah I have heard that Robbie Laven is bad.But what about this guy Mark Miller.Surely no one cold be as biased and incompetent as Mark Miller.Why the IRD do not simply assess on the tax you paid in the previous year is beyond me.I genuinely made a loss and was ordered to pay $12,000.I was sick and unable to work for much of the year plus made a couple of bad investment decisions.Where am I supposed to find this money? On a tree??
Comment by whanga — Thu 8th May 2008 @ 12:45 am
Media statement
For immediate release
Tuesday, 8 April 2008
“For example, family law now places far greater emphasis on both parents being actively involved in their children’s lives and sharing responsibility for their welfare.
SHOULD READ
“For example, family law now places far greater emphasis on restricting the non-custodial parent being actively involved in their children’s lives and sharing responsibility for their welfare.
Comment by cb — Thu 8th May 2008 @ 9:43 am
well i made a big mistake wheen she walked out on me ended up with a tent and stuffed car half from sale of house $16,000 lost my job due to stress
ird had first go with $900 a month child support interesting to note my children in rags she in pub sciting that each month her and her partner have a holiday with child support money
ACESS TO CHILDREN DENIED app $10,000 on layers plus loss of income finaly got an order to see children not so traveld 300 km to pick them up for weekend only to find she had taken them away back to layer only to be told i would have to do this 3 times then i could take her back to court . so lucky to have friends that aranged secret phone contact with children
three years of living in borrowed caraven and my partner now wife decide to give australia a go. mabey there is life beyond the ex bi##h
doing well paid off dets best of all my yougest son decided he wants to live with us
On plain back to N.Z 4 weeks later $3500 layers bills over 10,000 cost’s for wife and I eg loss of income accomadation travel etc my son lives with me
panic stations need to get out of caraven into house ring IRD i have one son she has i son can you please amend my child support accordingly
no worrys can do that for you F##k them went from paying $800 a month to over $1000 a month a 1/4 of my net income
I ESTAMATE MY SON COSTS ME $120 A WEEK WHY CAN’T THEY SAY EACH CHILD AT ??? AGE COSTS x AMOUNT PER WEEK YOU PAY 1/2 TO A MAX % OF YOUR INCOME
can any one advise me of any loop holes eg hp martgage
Comment by jim waters — Thu 8th May 2008 @ 10:36 pm
We have just been to review hearing and have basically been told yes the situation is unfair to you (my husband) but its just too bad cos thats the law.
No matter how unethical the situation is and whether you have shared care or not the child support assessment is based on your income and they are not accepting any other factors until the law changes. We are now off back to the courts to have the parenting order changed so we do not have to pay half the expenses for my stepdaughter and child support on top (although the assessment will still be unfair even with the parenting order changed as it is based on income and not the cost for support of the child). The current legislation is all IRD consider. No matter what Dunne says until it goes through parliament there is nothing the liable parent can do to change an unfair assessment, admin reviews don’t change anything – don’t waste your time on them. Unless you have specific details in writing you won’t get anywhere particularly with ground 8 and 9. Even the fact that my stepdaughter misses out when we are forced to pay tax to my husbands ex makes no difference. Funny because the IRD supposedly strive to ensure the childs best interests come first. What a joke!
Comment by Upset Wife — Mon 12th May 2008 @ 2:15 pm
The Child Support system was set up to help women whos partners had disappeared.Those who refused to contribute towards their children’s care.
It was a way for the government to recover money that was paid out to women through the DPB.
But along the way a system built on greed stepped in,when the government realised that they could make alot of money out of children.
They are not concerned at all about the poor little children whos fathers are unable to work due to sickness or injury.It is the children whos fathers have worked hard all their lives that they can make the most money from.
When any of these hard working fathers die,the government quickly lose interest in the welfare of their children.
When the Nazis herded the Jews into trains,they told them that they were ‘taking them for a ride’ The government of NZ learnt well from the Nazis and they have been ‘taking men for a ride’for the past 20 years.
Most fathers in NZ want to support their children,but what they can afford to contribute is never enough to satisfy a ruthless government.
The concentration camps existed for 5 years.Fathers in NZ are sentenced to 19 years of hard labour.
They are given the choice of course of applying for an admin review for good behaviour.These reviews were invented to set their hopes up then let them down again with a great thump and to ensure that men will never ever be permitted to have any rights when their ex’s grow tired of them and throw them out.
What an admin review almost always results in,is a jumped up little jerk who has a failing practice,making a decision on something that they have no idea of.
They are mostly always in favour of the greedy fat slobs who sit at home doing their cross stitch and milking the system for all it’s worth.
Comment by rosie — Mon 12th May 2008 @ 6:34 pm
Hi my name is mark and after reading all the above i now feel like s!!t.
I have just gone thru 10 years of family court matters,in the last 12 months
which was hell, i finally got custody of my two young sons.
The whole affair has cost me a large fortune ($110,000.00 +) but the court awarded me my two boys. it was worth it in the end.
I payed out the Ex, her share of the family home, which you can only imagine
was a fortune based on house prices in Auckland.
My self and my two sons moved back into the family home which my ex had occupied for quite some time, the morgage was high on the family home which
i had to take over $180,000.00 plus the loan i had to take out to buy the ex out $110,000.00 added up to a $290,000.00 morgage.
This was all ok as i have a good job which i love, and could work 6 days a week every week so as to pay the morgage and live happly ever after.
Bulls**t ! after 6 months in which both my sons had about 2 short phone calls from their mother, as she was out living it up with all her cash,my youngest son asked me if he could go and see his mother.
This was all ok to me as i feel for the two boys and she is their mother and i have always wanted them to have contact with her but since we had no idea of were she was it was up to her to make contact with the boys.
Anyway my young son went to see his mother and when i seen him latter that day he asked me if he could stay with her for a couple of days, this was no problem.
Untill i seen him again 2 days latter where he wanted to stay with her for a week and she was close to his school and as he had not seen her for so long i did’nt have a problem, as having been awarded full custody by the court i thought all would be good.
Next thing i know the Ird was calling me, asking me wher my son was i told them he was with he’s mother for the week and the circumstances of why he was there.
The ird said ok thern hung up, i smelt a rat,and tried to call my son on his cell phone but no answer, you can now imagine i was starting to worry,my other son how is 17 years old went over to he’s mums place to see if he’s brother was ok.
When he returned he told me that he’s mum had purchased a xbox360,a flat screen tv,,a stereo system, a high tec computer etc,etc for his brother,and that he’s younger brother was not comming back home, this is a long story but the shorts of it is , i get full cusody of my two sons from the family court, i buy the ex’s share out of the family home my ex goes out and has a good time with her money then reappears to buy the young son ‘s love then goes to the ird to get child support which i get a letter from them stating i now have to pay $601.00 a month ,,WHAT!!!.
I tell these guys my possion in life, and that i am up to my neck in morgage,power bills,rates and phone bills plus general living expenses,, they dont give a rats a**e,this ex of mine has no dept heaps of money in the bank a good job,,she can loose custody of her children in a family court get payed out a large sum of money only to come back into to my life and completly destroy it with help from the ird who dont even bother looking at her financial possition or take into account the courts directive orders.
This sucks badly i have had many phone calls from and to the IRD but they only are looking at me and now it looks like i will first have to start selling the car then the family home ,,, i can not work any over time to try and pay for this crap as they will only take more from me, my ex knew i was working 6 days a week to pay for the family home ,,only to bide her time and use cash to lure the young one to her side, and no court or lawyer can help,how can any solo parrent survive the ex’s out there who use the currupt ird to their advantage to destroy the other, if my ex gets hold of my other son i am doomed for doing the right thing in the family courts eye’s but not in the IRD’s eyes, i have spoken to many in the ird but can never get the same person so as to deal with one person only,i just keep on getting all these random ird workers talking to me and no one helps ,,, just seems they all get a fair go at you to see who can stuff up your life and the children involved,,what a joke they are! can some one give me some advice that may help my sons and me,,cheer’s mark
Comment by mark — Tue 24th June 2008 @ 1:52 am
Mark, sympathies, no doubt I will be facing similar issues with IRD again as my ex now is desperately capping my access so that she can go back to IRD and say that I no longer have 146 nights. I have been trying since March 07 to get shared care thru the courts.Been there again today as she wanted to take the children to Australia for a holiday, fine but she never discussed it with me or the impact on my access.See that old chestnut messages
How did you get custody? any tips?
Comment by Bruce — Tue 24th June 2008 @ 6:19 pm
I thought you said you had 146 nights Bruce.If not that makes my previous advice a waste of time.Sorry.
As for Mark you have been well and truly shafted(I mean outfoxed).
When you say you “got custody” how many days do you have and how many days does she have.Did you get an order barring her from making applications to the court for 3 years or some such other period.If not it seems your so called lawyer has sold you well short.
If so then simply go back to the court and enforce the order.Go to the ex’s house.Get the kid and his toys and go back to your house.
Nothing she can do.
You asked for advice.My advice is act strongly and act now.
If you get an order like this aftr a long battle the court is sick of the sight of you and wants to give you an order barring more applications by either side for some time.You should always ask for that.
Comment by whanga — Tue 24th June 2008 @ 7:08 pm
Hi guys , a short reply to Bruce and Whanga, Bruce hang in there mate its a crap road to travel and at times will try and break your sole,children are just that children, and it is extreme for them when this all comes about between two people who at one stage had dreams and loved one other, i have my eldest son now 17 has gone thru this for 10 years with me full time and i am always concerned that all this bullshit between myself and the ex has hurt him in some way, he don’t say much about how he feels but deep down i know he must miss being a family as at times i do miss all the good times.
Any way Bruce, i was lucky to get custody of my sons as the ex used three of her good mates to file affidavits against me,,after that i was known as a drug supplier a major king pin in the criminal world who was abusing everybody i meet .
in one week alone i had six police cars in my driveway who where there to arest me ,, they all left without me in any of them,, , why ?? the police realized i was just a dad looking after his sons and that the ex was the abuser etc she abused every single police officer who would not handcuff me and take me away all in front of my sons, f**ken crap.
Anyway to cut a long story short , my many contacts with police in a week and the many phone calls with the police about how they could not find any criminal past on me they relized i was not what the 3 girlfriends said i was and were making false statements about me, so in return i found out that one of the acussers was in fact known to police as a women who had made false statements to police in the past and was warned by police if it happened again she would be prosecuted,,,this was excellent to know as her affidavit had been filed to the courts.
The other women who filed a affidavit against me was working for WINZ and was using her position to employ young men to work for a business which WINZ would fund and pay for most of their wages ,,ie: WINZ subsidize,,but the major problem was that i met a guy who had a WINZ subidized job which was crap, working for this guy i knew was the other womens (WINZ officer) boyfriends business and bugger me !! he showed me this document he had with her signature on it (WINZ document)employing him to work at her boyfriends business,,yep he gave me this document and i gave it to my lawyer,.
The other one who filed a affidavit against me was already known to me to be a tax dodger and was done over by the IRD and fined $10,000.
so in the end these people turned up to family court one day and my lawyer consulted with the ex’s lawyer telling them that they would be put on the stand in front of a judge and questioned about their affidavits and the evidence that i had against them,,,my ex’s lawyer quickly approched my lawyer and told my lawyer that they no longer wanted to continue the custody proceedings,,in the short hearing i had in front of the judge he thanked the lawyers and questioned the serious things that had been written in the affidavits and that he wanted to hear it out in the court that day as it was very serious and damaging to others in this court room,he awarded me full custody of my sons and wished them the best for the future, all this time he never looked at me only looked at my ex the whole time.
Whanga thanks mate for that bit of info i will be talking to the family court tommorow about enforcing custody order, but i dont want to drag my son out of his mums place i feel that very soon in the future he will come back home to his brother and me in his own time,i can only hope that the courts can give me an order of some sort barring her from making applications so i can use this to try and make the IRD see that my son sould be with us as in court orders and that the ex should not be trying to claim child support for him as she lost custody in court and was payed out by me for a fortune she has,she should be content to get weekends or holidays with the boys not use them to suck more cash out of me as i am and have moved on with my life without her in it as she wanted it to be.
cheers guys Mark
Comment by Mark — Wed 25th June 2008 @ 1:21 am
Mark you can apply for an order barring someone from making further applications at any time.Then you know where you are for say the next 3 years and so do the kids and you can get on with your lives without fear of further drama
Comment by whanga — Wed 25th June 2008 @ 1:44 am
Thanks Whanga for your reply,,just been tryin to contact my lawyer to question it about this order on barring someone from making further applications.
But yet no reply???strange,,you pay them a shit load of cash and they never return your calls.
I have a feeling that the lawyer forgot to make an application and feels that they may have let me down in this department.
But still keeps me thinking that you can have a court document stating full custody of that child and that your the legal custodian of the child but it means jacksh*t to the IRD.
I thought that for the ex to get full custody that she would have to go back to family court and go thru the process again,so as to get full legal custody and then she would have a leg to stand on ,, but it sure don’t look that way.
Makes me feel like i wasted a lot of cash doing the right thing the legal way only to find out that if i had let the ex buy me out and get custody of the boys, i could have done what she did and flash the cash at them and now have both boys togeather,,, but then again that’s not my style i prefer them to be with me for the right reasons not paid or brought.
I will call the family courts tomorrow and see if i can get this barring order myself and then if i can, try and convince the IRD of that,maybe fax the IRD this barring order and see if this can stop all c/s against me ,then i can maybe get my son back home to his brother and dad.
cheers Whanga
Mark
Comment by Mark — Fri 27th June 2008 @ 1:05 am
Gentlemen – Reserve some $ and energy for when the Family Court gives you what you want – They are only the first line of defence for a system designed to destroy the family – They are doing that very well by empowering women to power they in general can’t handle and creating a huge bureacracy and contractors to enforce the decrees of in most cases ignorant MP’s
Onward
Ration Shed – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Fri 27th June 2008 @ 8:25 am
Mark.Technically she has to apply for a new order.What she is doing is in breach of the order.
Basically there is very little you can do about that.Women are pretty much a law unto themselves when it comes to Family Court matters.So what you need to be doing first is applying for enforcement of the order.
At the same time apply for an order barring her from applying again.
If you are going to do something about it then you should do it quickly.The longer you leave it the more chance that she wil have of disrupting the previous order.
The problem may come for you if they interview your boy and he says he wants to be with Mum.Thats what happened to me when my ex broke our court order.
I got a warrant of enforcement but of course the cops refused to do their job and go and pick my daughter up.The cop detailed to do it said there was no chance of it happening.I got that on voice recorder and sent it to the PCA but have heard nothing!
I was only trying to enforce an access order that let my daughter and I see each other once a month!The mother did what she wanted and just brainwashed the child against me.The mother applied for the warrant to be voided and for the original order for access to be removed and got a feminist nazi lawyer for the child called Maria Hamilton from Hawkes Bay to tell the court that my daughter did not want to see me.
This was complete BS of course.
My daughter was 10 so they do these interviews pretty young now.It used to be that they only did them from 12 years old but they freed that up a couple of years ago.
By the new law the Family Caught is obliged to take into account the child’s views as expressed through the lawyer for the child.Whether the child actually says this is anyone’s guess.
They get the lawyer for the child to interview the child with the mother.Of course the child is going to say what the mother tells them to.
I was not consulted or interviewed and the child was not interviewed in my prescence as well.
This was despite the fact that I was innocently trying to enforce a court order that the mother had breached several times.
Done and dusted and I have not seen my daughter once since then,nearly 18 months ago.Talked to her on the phone a couple of times though so we should count our blessings I guess.
Isn’t life great Mark!
Comment by whanga — Fri 27th June 2008 @ 11:35 am
Hi Whanga,,
Yep our hands are tied,, you can have it all court orders giving full custody stamped and signed, pay a lawyer a small fortune to obtain this and the IRD will not even look at it.
Kids will go with the flow,, and if a ex is dishing out the party favourites the child will go with it all but only for a while ,one day our children who are with the ex’s will one day want to know the other parent.
Personaly i have now just given the ex a bit of a shock ! it thinks it’s getting $601.00 a month,,,,,wrong!!! sorted my sh*t with the IRD, even though it’s taken a couple of weeks to do so , i called them and asked them to explain their calculations on my child support payments.
Well they bassed it on what i earned ? fair enough ! but what about my 17year old son who is a dependant and lives with me??? Oh ! we at the IRD have no knowledge of that!!! well heres his name and ird number,,! Oh he is your son we dont have you listed as having any dependants ?? but now see that you do !! Ok we will do a calculation with the dependant!! Ok now your child support is $408.00 per month !!OK i said now am i able to claim chid support for him as he is a dependant and earns no wages ?? yes the IRD man said and by looking at what she was paying for the youngest son (14years) to you before your yongest went to live with his mum,, she would now be paying you that amount again for the 17 year old son!!!cool i said and what is the difference??? oh you will be paying about $2.50 in child support??
But personally i feel i have to see this on paper as the min amount of child support you can pay is $30.00 a week??? so may be they may offset the $2.50 and make me pay a min of $30.00 a week and make the ex pay $30.00 a week ???? who knows?? the IRD can do any thing to at least make a buck or two,, and if any body out there thinks why dont you both forget it all and one look after one son and the other look after the other son,, dont be silly my ex is not about that she is in it for the money,and if it is a fact that all i have to pay is $2.50 she will take it.
Me i am not into this child support thing to make money out of my kids or to take money from the ex as that was sortted out in the settlement agreement in courts, so i only claimed for my youngest so as to offset the huge dept i am in by buying the ex out of the family home and if i was into making money out of my sons i would have claimed for both sons and she would have been paying a lot more and i would’nt have had to work 6 days a week.
So i wait and see what the great IRD do for me , or do to me ,,
Whanga life is great, and over time it will get better for all of us and our children will be parents themselves one day and thats were we will shine in our childens eyes, buy not only being excellent parents but also being excellent grand parents to our childrens children,,stay fit folks you are going to need all the energy you can muster when that day comes.
Be happy and keep smiling guys it aint over till the fat lady sings or i learn to spell,,,?
cheers mark
Comment by Mark — Wed 2nd July 2008 @ 12:18 am
OMG!!! What have we done??? My husband has been paying child support in a private agreement with his ex for the last 7 years, Because my husband found out that his daughter left school at the end of last year and is now working, he asked for proof of the hours his daughter is working each week as he is not aligable to pay if she works over 30 hours a week, the ex told him it was none of his business and wouldn’t supply anything, from that we took that they had something to hide,we rang IRD for advice and the advice was to STOP PAYING IMMEDIATELY!!! which we did 3 weeks ago. Today we recieved a letter in the mail from IRD to say that the ex has applied for them to claim child support on her behalf. We were paying $130per week privately, my husband rang IRD after he got the letter and was told that he has now been assessed at $213 a week. After reading these posts about IRD I am freaking out, We can NOT afford these payments!!! we barely have our heads above water now and we will lose our house that we have both worked our butts off to get(that will make ex happy!!). Now I am starting to think we have just been shafted big time by IRD and their advice..The only thing that is keeping us from crumbling right now is the fact that the ex didnt tell IRD that their daughter is working when she applied. But after reading some of these posts it sounds like IRD can be totally unfair toward the paying parent and it really doesn’t matter how many hours she will work we just still have to keep paying. The thing being also is that the daughter is paying her mother board from her wages also which means she is self supporting herself, so her mother is sitting on her arse, (never really had a job) taking money off her daughter and us, to top up the benefit that her and her husband get, we work our butts off and we are going to lose our house. How is it fair that kids from seperated families can go to work and still get money from a parent and then the likes of my daughter that my husband also supported while she was at home has to go out and earn the money to support herself. My daughter sees it in the way that my husbands daughter still gets money from us (not that she sees a cent of it) and she doesn’t. How can the system say it is ok for one child in a family have to earn a living and another child in the family only has to work part time and get given a $130 top up from the folks?? When they are both capable of working, just like us, Where can I get a top up from, I only work part time because I also have a family to care for, so why can’t I get $130 top up. My husbands ex knows that if she keeps her daughter working under 30 hours a week and she can still get the child support.(their daughter is only working 25 hours a week she said, so what is another 5 hours to a 17 year old, I work more than that and I have a family) so far she has been getting it on top of her benefit because she didnt declare it to winz that my husband has been paying her privately, shes creaming it sitting on her arse. Why would she give her daughter any incentive to work???
Please Please if anyone can give us any advice on what to do now, I have just lost total faith in the IRD system, and we don’t know what to do now.
Comment by becka — Wed 1st October 2008 @ 10:20 pm
You HAD Faith in the IRD system????
Even my accountant doesn’t have that!!
(Many of his best staf are ex-IRD too)
Sounds like you have encountered some ill-informed official
Don’t panic
Do what I do.
1
Comment by John Brett — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 9:07 am
You HAD Faith in the IRD system????
Even my accountant doesn’t have that!!
(Many of his best staff are ex-IRD too)
Sounds like you have encountered some ill-informed official
Don’t panic
Do what I do.
1 Put on your serious business face.
2 Find the name, rank and serial number of the official demanding this money. If you cannot, address your letter to the Commissioner of Inland revenue, or whoever the top dog is these days. Make some phone calls to find out if need be. MAKE IT A PERSONAL LETTER
3 Write a formal business letter, all ‘third party’ (“it has come to our attention… your staff are claiming…..it appears that you may be acting outside existing provisions of the acts under which you work.. etc.)
Do NOT use the words like ME, I, Can’t afford, unfair, ripoff etc
4 Request that they justify their claim with copies of the relevant legislation, and information on the details of the situation that requires that they need to claim this support.
5 Suggest or hint that you may need to seek legal advice on this if they don’t reply within 28 days.
6 Sit back and watch them squirm.
(You will find that they have lots of computer generated threatening letters,, but very few real people who can write individual letters, take responsibility where legal action is threatened, or deal with real people who take them on)
Comment by John Brett — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 9:17 am
The minimum wage for employees aged 16 or over is $12 an hour.
$12 X 30 hours = $360 a week.
The unemployment benefit for an 18 year old is $153.46 a week.
(I’m unsure if a 17 year old can receive it)
To all you Winz and IRD staff out there who are reading this,can you answer me one thing?
If Beckas husband’s daughter was to receive the dole,would he still have to pay child support?
If the answer is NO,wouldn’t it seem ridiculous that he should have to pay CS now when she is earning approximately $360 a week which is double what she would receive if she was on the dole.
Hey there’s one more question that I need an answer to.
You receive assistance from the IRD in the form of family tax credits until a child is 18.That’s the age when they are eligible to vote and get drunk,so why is it that men have to pay child support until the child is 19 ?????
Comment by Rosie — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 8:41 pm
Hi Rosie, Thanks for your comments, You have just made a very interesting point, and if you don’t mind I will print that off and give it to the admin officer when we are turned down at our review hearing in two weeks, we have applied on ground 8 and see from previous posts that we don’t have a shit show of winning. The ex has wrote a letter refusing to fill out the review form and just made a list of what assets we own compered to the nothing she owns, difference being is we have worked to get the things we own while shes lucky if she has ever worked the total of 1 whole year in her life. But it looks like we are going to get punished for that.My hausband said even if they agree to pay the remaining amount so his daughter is getting covered to a 40 hour week, rather than give the ex $775 a month, that in no way gets spent on his daughter.
Comment by becka — Fri 17th October 2008 @ 12:06 am
#53 If it is your aplication and she has just responded not cross applied then you can’t punished. You may not get a reduction but the admin officer cannot increase your payments in a review you have initiated.
Allan
Comment by allan Harvey — Fri 17th October 2008 @ 12:47 pm
Hi Becka
That law of having to pay child support when an under 19 year old worked less than 30 hours a week was made when the youth rate of pay was between 6-8 dollars an hour.Now some of these kids are earning more than their parents.
You don’t pay child support when an under 19 year old receives a benefit or a student allowance.The only reason that I can see for why that law hasn’t been changed is so the government can make more money.I can’t imagine anyone being happy about paying CS when that child is working.So when they don’t pay you know the old story…another increase in the MP’s wages.You can’t expect them to be concerned about your children,afterall they’re not making money from them.
Best of luck with the admin review.
Comment by Rosie — Fri 17th October 2008 @ 8:32 pm
#55 Rosie, the situation is that it is virtually impossible for a child to get a student allowance if one parent has modest earnings and even two parents on low wages can stop a student allowance. I know of Admin Review decisions where Cs was deemed payable till a child was 21 years of age and at university. It is a weird and largely unfettered world out there in admin review land. Lots of weird and unique decisions and virtually unchallengable.
Allan
Comment by Allan — Fri 17th October 2008 @ 11:21 pm
Hi Allan, thanks for your comments, We do know we only have about a 1% chance (if that) of things leaning towards us at the review, but it also shows the ex that we are not going to just sit back and let her rob us lightly. I can go to the review as a support person for my husband but it says in the letter we recieved Im not to say anything. That is going to be really hard for me because my husband is a softie and he has a tendency to not defend himself, I also know that it is best for him, for me not to say anything as I have a tendency to get on my high horse and start ranting. But I will bite my tongue (hard!!) and just let hubby sort it. I know for me to start ranting won’t help my Hubby…lol.
Can you answer another question for me?? I was talking to my sons father today and he told me because he hasn’t been able to work for the last 6 weeks due to repairs on an essential part of his livelyhood, and also alot of the winter he could not work due to the amount of rain fall which also effects his job.He said that he is about 6 weeks behind in support for my son and his daughter to a previous relationship. I didn’t even realise he wasn’t paying as the payments go into my sons account and we don’t go into the account very often. But anyway, I suggested that if he promises me that he will put a weekly amount (Pretty much the same as my son got collecting through IRD) in my sons account directly, including the arrears (without penalties) when he can (meaning if he doesn’t have the work one week he is to catch up when he does) so that he doesn’t keep getting penalties and the government doesn’t gain from it.(huge part of why im doing this!!) I rang IRD to find out what I had to do to cancel it and was told to print them off their site and fill in the forms, He also told me that I can have the arrears and penalties wavered and request that IRD are not to collect them from my ex, which I have also done. The only thing I am worried about is the fact that he will still be paying for his daughter through IRD, Will they put his child support for her up because I am not collecting through them anymore? I don’t want to put him in a worse situation than hes in now and I also don’t want my son missing out on his payments either. It starts getting quite confusing when there are children from different relationships…lol Thanks Allan (and Rosie re: above comment)
Becka
Comment by becka — Sat 18th October 2008 @ 2:34 am
Yes it can get confusing with CS. You and he can enter into a private arrangment but you do loose the protection of IRD as a bully collector. IRD work like the mob collecting protection money. The charge 38% interest in year one and 27% each subsequent year. Pretty effective and if the customer chooses to shoot themselves, just like the chinese prison service, they make the family pay for the bullet to do the job.
If you have a written private agreement signed by you both it should protect against a review officer using the removal of one child to increase payments for the other child.
Aallan
Comment by Allan — Sat 18th October 2008 @ 2:10 pm
Awesome, thanks for that, I will get it sorted with the ex to get an agreement made up between us. Its a bit tricky when we live in different cities 4 hours apart.
Comment by becka — Sat 18th October 2008 @ 11:02 pm
Hey, Just thought I would give let you know the outcome from our review, Because my Husbands ex went into the review telling them that their daughter is on a years break from school and plans to go back to school and uni next year (which I think is a load of rot!!) they see it as she is saving toward her future, fair enough if this is the case, we are all for her going back to school and then on to uni and we are also happy to pay child support while she does so. But we will be looking at another review if she does not start school again at the beginning of the next school year. But all is not lost for us, they did see some of my hubbys point and have now lowered his support from 18% to 12% of his yearly imcome he has to contribute toward her upbringing. until we see what Feb next year brings we are happy with that.
Cheers for the ears and helping me get some things off my chest, it was good to be able to vent on here with people who don’t know me but know and experience the ups and downs of living in seperated families.
I wish you all well, and will definitely keep reading the posts that are on the site, I find it all very interesting.
Kind regards
Becka
Comment by becka — Tue 18th November 2008 @ 11:09 pm
Ahhh … yes your payments can be increased. Not directly but my payments were increased after my last review.
Comment by steve — Thu 19th February 2009 @ 7:50 pm
University studies and the continuation of child support!
Hello
Do I still have to pay child support when my child goes to university? According to IRD CS I do. My child lives with the other parent and has done for about three years. There is no animosity between my daughter and I it’s just that she wanted to spend time with her other parent. When she heads off to Uni. she won’t qualify for a Student Allowance as our combined incomes are above the threshold. I checked with IRD today and was told that although she won’t be living at home and will be in a different part of the country, because she doesn’t qualify for a Student Allowance she will still be considered dependent so I will have to pay, to the other parent, Child Support for essentially nothing!
Has anyone else been in this situation as it doesn’t seem quite right to me?
Comment by Adam — Tue 22nd June 2010 @ 7:08 pm
Till her 19th birthday only.
I have seenm cases where it went beyond this but they are rare.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Tue 22nd June 2010 @ 9:58 pm
Thank you for your reply.
It doesn’t make sense. If she’s not at home with the other parent and not being supported by the other parent why would I have to pay them child support? I was intending to fund her in the halls of residence ie pay her board, but paying child support and supporting her seems a bit of an ask.
Comment by Adam — Wed 23rd June 2010 @ 8:10 am
OK I’m gettin the idea now. If you aere supporting herr at hall of resodence then we will be happy to accept your application for Child Support against the mother.
Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Wed 23rd June 2010 @ 6:19 pm
Brilliant idea.
Bwahhhh ha ha ha should cause some howls of protest.
Comment by mits — Wed 23rd June 2010 @ 6:48 pm
Thank you for that.
Actually I am the mother but my name was already taken as a username so I used Adam.
Thanks again for your response.
Kind regards
Comment by Adam — Wed 23rd June 2010 @ 6:49 pm
Ive heard about people who go on the net and switch gender for their own adgenda
You’re the first one Ive actually encountered who admits it.
So your preffered name, nom de plume, nickname was taken and all you could come up with as an alternative was Adam???
Brilliant Idea Bwaaaahahaha yep I can imagine a mum called Adam I mean what else would a self respecting mother coming onto a menz site to question Child Tax called herself.
Adam absolutely no intention to deceive thanks for the honesty and admission
hilarious
Mits (who is a dad by the way but dammitall, Mary was taken when I first signed in)
Comment by mits — Thu 24th June 2010 @ 9:01 am
From now on, I want you all to call me Loretta! (Monty Python)
Comment by Scott B — Thu 24th June 2010 @ 10:34 am
Still a liable parent being screwed by the child tax system.
Yes more dads are liable parents but gender does not stop IRD screwing you over.
Does it matter the gender of adam or is what does matter is a parent is being forced to pay when the child is not living with the other parent?
Regards
Scrap
Comment by Scrap_The_CSA — Thu 24th June 2010 @ 3:43 pm
We’re all angry – male or female doesn’t really matter. The name’s Anne. Also, did a little check on “Ms IRD Officer” seems he’s a man called Adam up north working in the area of support. All I wanted was a sensible answer to my question but there are no women’s versions of “Menzorg”. Not many women have the shoe on the other foot like me. Anyway, for anyone else interested in this discussion it seems that even though a child has left home and in receipt of a student loan YOU (whoever you are) are still liable to pay child support.
Comment by Adam — Thu 24th June 2010 @ 7:37 pm
Good on ya Anne or Adam whatever suits you best.
Im against the child tax not the payer of it so I’m with Scrap on this that the gender is irrellevant
Thanks for the Info as I have Kids that will be soon in the same boat.
I was anticipating some relief from child tax but this is probably not the case then as Mummy will want “her money” even if the child is no longer with her.
Mits (but you can call me Mary) just kidding
Comment by mits — Fri 25th June 2010 @ 11:15 am