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

Benefit Fraud

Filed under: Child Support — rawkusworldwide @ 11:43 pm Thu 15th November 2012

Further to my post re: letter to Peter Dunne querying why CSA does not pass on allegations of benefit abuse to WINZ in the case of a custodial parent receiving voluntary child support payments; I have had a reply back from his office and have been advised ‘a change had been made to the Tax Administrative Act 1994 (TAA) that enables IRD to provide other Government Agencies with customer information from 31 May 2012. IRD officials can provide information within relevant parameters, to MSD where possible benefit overpayment or benefit fraud is identified’.

Based on this information received I made an official complaint to IRD/CSA citing the names and departments of staff including a Team Leader who had categorically told me it was not CSA policy to forward this information. The complaints department dropped the ball and I pressed on to speak with a Team Leader to have this matter escalated. I requested the TL email me the outcome of our conversation for accountability and accuracy. The matter has now been referred to the Commissioner of IRD for comment.

I did not feel it was my responsibility to dob the custodial parent to WINZ when CSA as a government department were armed with evidence of the allegations of ‘double dipping’.

Whilst no joy with the Admin Review process, with the outcome being ‘proceed directly to Family Court’, I feel a certain amount of satisfaction to have pushed my point, challenged CSA, backed it up with a letter from the Minister, made them accountable and have to apologise, albeit it all for a minor battle. Plus they have advised that the allegations have been passed on to WINZ. I may not have won the war, but I won that battle!

We all need to become CSA Terrorists!

My experience with CSA is that alot of inaccuracies and misinformation is passed on. Request under the Freedom of Information your full case history and you will be amazed at the mistakes going on in the background. Document every phone call you make to them, take the names, dates and times of the people you speak to. Don’t give up. Be a toothless tiger. Use this page and forum to get advice and support. Don’t focus on what you can’t do, focus on what you can. It is better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all. Child Support does not just affect the biological parents, it affects new relationships and the families.

And lastly, if you or anybody you know has a voluntary child support agreement, do NOT pay cash, have a paper trail showing the payments made and received. Keep the records for 12 years so you do not replicate my situation.


  1. Do you have a template of request for full case history? Should it be send to Commissioner of IR, PO Box 2198, W?

    Comment by CSA — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 6:21 am

  2. Ron Paul = an old senator who actually sums things up – TRUTHFULLY- he should know because he has been in politics for years and he has seen first hand – its corruption…..yet we the people – the dum masses – keep sitting back and sucking it up – believing they will help us – they WILL NOT.

    Comments from his farewell speech below – could so easily be applied to concerns we have right here in NZ.

    “All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power,’ the congressman continued.”

    “He added that sadly, many people do not realise the value of liberty, noting ‘History has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled,’

    Full comments here …..

    Read it and wake up……the system is not designed to HELP you.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 8:10 am

  3. at times ive asked for peoples names etc so i can refer back most refuse to give it claiming security reason for not disclosing who they times ive even asked for an employee number or something and still get cited the security spiel

    Comment by Ford — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 8:16 am

  4. Have you noticed even the warrants they issue to take your property are signed – with an ILLEGIBLE signature and NO reference to who actually signed it. NO name, NO identify, No title – no anything to disclose who is enacting these draconian laws………on the people.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 8:20 am

  5. Well done rawkusworldwide for your effective campaign. This is a model lesson that many here could usefuly follow. Keeping our cool, keeping good records, putting things into writing letters and persisting with challenges of unacceptable behaviour does sometimes achieve results.

    Another suggestion is that some of us set up a ‘Black Shirts’ men’s group similar to that operating in Australia. Dressed in their black shirts they visit mothers who are flouting Court orders by withholding children from their fathers, and gently encourage those women to change their attitudes and behaviour. They also protest outside the homes of misandrists. I would suggest that one or three IRD ‘Child Support’ review officers as good candidates for a nice polite visit, letting the neighbours know how those officers without accountability drive men to financial ruin and suicide. Mark Miller is one name that has often come up on MENZ Issues as an unreasonable review officer. His place would be a good place to start.

    Comment by Luther Blissett — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 9:09 am

  6. Oh yes-indeed i have . Nameless voices at the end of the phone. some secretive conspiracy. when you ask them why they have suddenly started hooking out extra money, they are unable to explain the rationale. rather, they say they will get back to you and never do. Penalty after penalty despite you doing everything that is asked of you.

    Comment by shafted — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 9:16 am

  7. Im more in favor of a Furious Parents organization – so we dont get caught up in the Dad – Mum division – but a FURIOUS FATHERS group could also be a go.

    Comment by Hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 9:33 am

  8. Well there’s no reason why the Black Shirts couldn’t include women, but the Furious Parents is a good trademark too.

    Comment by Luther Blissett — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 10:50 am

  9. I think we as PARENTS have to UNITE against the current system which is destroying children for money.

    If parents are genuinely caring of there kids, regardless of there differences – they must oppose a system which is now a BUSINESS aimed at making money from CONFLICT and CHILDREN.

    Obviously as a group of PARENTS – everyone must agree – on a few points if we are to work together.

    1. No parent should be deprived of quality time with there child.

    2. NO parent will accept or allow harm – physical, emotional, psychological, sexual harm – to any child.

    Already defined in Acts and Conventions for child already in place – which the system is not currently adhering to.

    The BEST INTERESTS of the CHILD are paramount over all else.

    And part of those BEST Interests mean the child must be allowed to see BOTH parents. No exclusion will be permitted.

    3. For the sake of clarity – No parent will accept the use of a child to leverage property, or money or personal gain or benefit of any kind for either parent or business or organisation.

    If we can get ALL parents on that page, then we are united to tackle the greater good – which is exposing a legal system and a govt business which is DIRECTLY using CHILDREN as LEVERAGE for money.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 1:59 pm

  10. Pointless without – there must be clearly defined penalties and consequences for parents who (with proof) do not adhere to agreements. At no cost to the other parent.

    Comment by Scott B — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 2:04 pm

  11. Scott B, agreed if we were writing the legislation all over again = these points were concerning the UNITING of parents TOGETHER to take the current system to task – if men and women are to work together – I am suggesting above they first must agree on these points. Putting other differences aside.

    United we stand – Divided we all fall down.

    Which is what has happened time and time again. Keep us all squabbling between ourselves and we all miss the point.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 2:09 pm

  12. Well I’m just saying that should be included.

    Comment by Scott B — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 2:10 pm

  13. Scott – Consequences in a parent organisation – if anyone breaches the rules – would be Removal from the group – permanently. Ostracizing is a very good form of punishment.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 16th November 2012 @ 3:07 pm

  14. Administrative reviews are also signed without full name, all letters from IRD child support as well. This needs to be changed. The whole system needs to be changed.

    One of the things that puzzle me is that the majority of the people I know, have complains about the juridical system, mainly about the fact that the court is executing the law and not for justice. This is in contrast to the ministry’s name “Ministry of Justice” that should be “Ministry of law”. What puzzles me is that we inherited a system that was established in the dark ages, yet we are doing nothing to change it.

    Comment by IRD Critic — Sat 17th November 2012 @ 7:57 am

  15. Honestly the more I dig into it I don’t think it is a “men issue”. It is about democracy. Women get hurt from this mafia behavior as well, see my wife.

    It seems like the minister can’t really control what is going on in IRD and it is the time for the public to get involved. We live in New Zealand and not in the US, Russia or China: they can’t behave like that. Today they have the tools, the means and the regulations to destroy people (actually even in US & Russia it is not so bad) – and no one is saying anything.

    I think the way to solve it is to start a non profitable organization “IRD Watchdog” and to start raising issues and demand for new regulations. Human rights organizations would get involved, and I’m not talking only about the NZ ones.

    Comment by IRD Critic — Sat 17th November 2012 @ 8:13 am

  16. Critic @ 15 – see my post to Karen yesterday – that is what is happening.

    Comment by hornet — Sat 17th November 2012 @ 8:18 am

  17. 1: reply to CSA

    Contact CSA and request under Freedom of Information Act your file including all file notes from inception. My advice would be to make this request in writing. You will find the address on the website or call them and ask for the address. You can also go into your Child Support account (register if you haven’t already) but don’t read your statement of accounts, it is absolute nonsense and use the secure email to request this information. Here is a link with the information

    Also the following information taken from the site:

    Contact the Minister, department, organisation or local authority (Mayor, councillor or council staff ) concerned and ask for the information;
    Be as specific as you can in identifying what information you are looking for;
    Requests are best made in writing, but you can ask for the information in person or by telephone too; and
    Keep a note of when, how and who you made your request to (and keep a copy of any requests made in writing).

    Of particular interest to me were the ‘file notes’ which documents all the calls you have made along with outcomes and dialogue between staff about your case.

    If as a group you want to do something collectively to rattle cages, instead of wearing black shirts, why don’t you bombard CSA with a request for your files under the Freedom of Information Act. Give them something to think about and might even be news worthy.

    Comment by bunny — Sun 18th November 2012 @ 11:17 pm

  18. 3. Reply to Ford

    Whenever you have a conversation with ANYONE in CSA always be polite and courteous, leave your emotions and anger in a box, get your diary out, record the date, the time and the name of the person you are speaking with. Every time I spoke with the department I typed notes and believe me it is a very powerful tool to refer back to when you are receiving conflicting information which occurred frequently depending on who you were speaking to. I also mirrored back the conversation and outcomes and asked them to ensure these notes were on their system.

    Reviews – they are a necessary evil to enable you to proceed to Family Court. I have just experienced 1st hand what a sham they are but I am not going to give it any energy, just going to knock the next domino over. At the end of the day, I may not win my case and justice may not prevail but at least I know that I did everything in my power. Karmah is a bitch. Like the African proverb says ‘How do you eat an elephant’ – ‘One bite at a time’.

    Comment by bunny — Sun 18th November 2012 @ 11:31 pm

  19. Bunny – I just spent another $$$$$ to get an opinion on IF I can challenge the latest SHAM review decision – and I have been told to not waste anymore money – problem is, even the lawyers admit the law is COMPLEX ( by design ) and the Govt have turned this into another Business – you will be forever locked into this cycle of SHAM REVIEW Decision, followed by attempts to get Family court to change that DECISION – which from my experience is NOT LIKELY – and if you miss the Small window of opportunity to actually lodge a challenge – you then have to wait up to TWO years before the next CYCLE starts – REVIEW, CHALLENGE, FAIL, PAY. This system is designed to be DIFFICULT, IMPOSSIBLE to challenge – costly, time and to complex.

    As to your Elephant Analogy – Before you start eating = what do you have to do first…………..

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 6:40 am


    Comment by Ford — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 7:24 am

  21. Using lawyers for Child Support matters is a foolish game.
    The better option is to hook up with someone experienced in the Court process and this legislation.
    There are very few cases taken to Family Court a year. Largely because the costs of representation and the difficulty of the legislation make it uneconomic. UoF have often supported over 10% of all cases a year to self-represent. That is a much smater alternative.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 8:42 am

  22. Alan, you have still not answered my question as to your comments that Child Support is BASED in INCOME, and NOT ASSETS.

    Where did you confirm this position. And what alterations can be made around this criteria – because I think this expansion of what INCOME can be – is what is directly causing many fathers concern. ( those having demands made over and above there income )

    I have direct evidence that Child Support is not based on my INCOME – this is NOT the case – they look at property and or assets you have left after separation, and they make demands based on – ” What they believe you could EARN – not on what you actually EARN as INCOME, ( which is totally open to ABUSE – and they are ABUSING this situation – that is a point Union of Fathers need to get answers on – how many dads are being assessed on PERCEIVED INCOME versus actual ) and when you cant pay the demands – how could you if you dont earn what they make up – they come after those assets – and sieze them ( extort is a better word for what it is ) to pay the demands. That is my direct experience.

    They refuse to accept I have a lower income than I once did, im not fudging figures or hiding income like some do, and they refuse to accept that my wife and I have decided she will work while I look after our child . Point blank refusal to even acknowledge this. Direct discrimination = because they are protected from complaint. That is not justice, that is not fair and impartial, not based on facts of INCOME – that is not something any sane person would agree with.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 9:05 am

  23. Alan, if there is SOME other formula they have, which we are not told about publicly, then I think that is why many dads are furious –

    I signed off on agreements ( property settlement, child access and Child Support terms ) in the family court because I was told and I always believed my CS obligations would be based on INCOME – calculated by the online formula as DUNN keeps harping on – what I am horrified to learn is that this is NOT how things are assessed at REVIEW. in fact they dont even look at Family court agreements – which in my case state the method by which CS should be paid – clearly defined in those agreements.

    And yet, a REVIEW person , overrides all of this, and I am then expected to pay more to prove what is already signed off at Family court – at more huge expense to me. This is INSANE.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 9:11 am

  24. #23..i dont really know why they have a family court or court orders and consensual agreemntments when the system can ignore the lot whenever it feels like the end of the day its a load of utter bullshit

    Comment by Ford — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 9:18 am

  25. Someone needs to be held to account for all of this.

    Comment by Scott B — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 10:54 am

  26. Scotty B, I agree, thats why all of us ( all PARENTS ) with similar stories need to take this system to task and expose the lie – the lie is either DELIBERATE or it is a product of IGNORANCE by those at the top as to what is actually happening – and we need to find out which side of the fence they are sitting on……..

    My concern is, all of them are currently just looking at more ways to generate income by penalty – did you notice the rise in Auckland parking announced today – another blanket increase to generate more income – my personal view is this – RATES payments used to cover FREE parking…….like rubbish collection used to be FREE included as a service from rates contributions……but for some reason we let things get repackaged from “free service” to a new userpays COST, because they are so ineffectual, and so mis-managed – which leads to massive debt, that we all then have to pay for.

    Society is its own worst enemy in letting things get so out of control.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 11:08 am

  27. The last four years.

    AUSTERITY in NZ. Which has occurred incrementally over the last four years – so we did not notice the impact…….

    1.. Huge Rises in Rates – moves to rateble Value – gives greater returns.
    2. Rises in Petrol Tax
    3. Rises in vehicle registrations – motorcyclists hit the worst – by stealth – we protested but they just sneaked the same costs in on individuals at each new registration – under the guise of some safety FEE, for a service which at the time was not even established. Hit individuals and they know we have no say – hit the group and they know you will all protest on mass..
    4. Rises in Alcohol taxes.
    5. Increases in alcohol sales locations – and a refusal to reduce the drinking age for the good of society over sustaining INCOME.
    6. Parents – increases in back dated CS payment demands, with huge Penalties thrown in – demands for maximums and assessment which have nothing to do with income – knowing parents cant pay – so they increase the debt and borrow more against it.
    7. Rises in Tobacco taxes
    8. Rises in Electricity costs.
    9. Rises in GST – up another 2.5% ( $2.5 Billion in New revenue per annum )
    10.Reductions and cost savings across all areas of welfare benefits – making it harder to receive, and reducing the numbers who can claim. Huge cost savings in not having to pay.
    11. Pushing all social service costs onto the public. Take for example the Police – many of the free services which we should all expect have been removed – to a user pays system – if you want a criminal matter investigated – you pay for a private eye, meantime the police are now just a form of Revenue collection – I saw first hand the changes to that profession with the traffic merger. Tickets – fines for everyone, all day everyday with quotas of ten stops per day per officer – fact.
    12. Rises in Car parking costs – increases in traffic wardens – we have seen this fist hand since we became park of Auckland – this is just the tip of the iceburg – we have seen increases in fines across all areas for all offences. Changes to Family court and CS – harsher FINES and an expansion of the Parent liability base – is all I see being proposed in the new changes.
    13. Food price increases – we grow most of the stuff here, and yet for some reason a pumpkin is now worth $12 each – are you kidding me. Milk, Bread = because we need these everyday – they take a hiding because we need and want them – Huge Increases in every food product.
    14. Resources – timber, materials – we sell raw logs now – they have decimated all the timber mills which EMPLOYED people – and we have to import the finished product back to where it came from at ten times the price – are we all mental – of just ignorant of what is happening. 15% timber increases across the board a few years ago, because our forests are foreign owned and they want GLOBAL rates.
    15. And lets not forget WATER – huge increases in the costs of Water, with additional hits to business for useage and how they get rid of it.
    16. Compliance costs – massive costs before you do anything productive. Not for any safety reason as promoted – no just to generate more income for nothing in return. And we wonder why so many small businesses have gone from this once great innovative nation.

    And just for all you fortunate wage earners – think yourself lucky we offer you an additional $20 per week in your pay packet – so you can at least buy the milk and bread.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 11:33 am

  28. Yep-and transit NZ is pushing for a further 3c pe litre in petrol tax to cover roading.
    There is a limit to the additional cost impost that an individual can wear. I along ago exceeded my ability to enjoy life. earn over $100k per annum and live on less than a check out operator. Go figure.
    ex has a household income of approximately $60,000 more than me, plus my child support.
    And lucky me, i get to face another admin review next april for another ass f…g

    Comment by shafted — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 12:10 pm

  29. Hi Hornet and others,
    Yes Child Support is based on income rather than assetts.
    However there is some small print to such a statement.
    As many here have indicate review officers have a wide level of discretion.
    For example having a multi-million dollar art work that you purchased with a Lotto win might have some review officers decide that your income could be adjusted upwards by 2-3% of the purchase price. Following FC precedint though if you inherited the art work and decided to leave it on your wall because it was a family heirloom then its “Value” would not be assessible.
    If you wish me to comment on a specific case then write to me privately, [email protected]
    A major problem too many people have with Admin Review matters is they ask for help only after they have already filed far too much information with IRD. Unfortunately after someone has shot themselves in the foot it becomes more difficult to avoid pain.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 4:10 pm

  30. If I ever win lotto, I’ll bury it until the day after my son turns 19. I can live without it until then.

    Comment by Empty Money Bags — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 4:15 pm

  31. Thanks Alan for the response – so that is my point the fkers do not tell you this – we are led to believe its about INCOME only – we are NOT TOLD there are other factors they will use to assess CS further down the track – if I had known I was going to have to pay MORE because I have a few things left after Divorce – then I WOULD NOT HAVE been so GENEROUS in property settlement – and that shits me. There is NO benefit in doing the right thing, in trying to be generous – it has if anything only worked against me at every turn.

    I think parents have an expectation the system is honest and upfront with them from the start – because currently it is NOT.

    I do not believe we should have to accept a system so prejudiced against anyone who has worked hard and who has a few things left after divorce – if we allow this to take hold ( which it has ) then we all open ourselves up to have anything you have worked hard for – taken off you in the future under the guise of child support.

    It should be based on INCOME only – that is Fair to all, and easy to calculate.

    So the penalty for doing everything right, is a kick in the arse.

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 4:55 pm

  32. #30..sorry to burst your bubble but if you won lotto the system would know you have it as youd have to sign for it

    Comment by Ford — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 5:20 pm

  33. Grounds 9 and 10 allow for property settlements to be taken into consideration or decisions to not settle property and forgo (normally on a temporary basis but for some genrous chaps on a permanent basis) an interest in a home that the children and your ex remain living in. However 99% of lawyers are pig ignorant of the Child Support issues and don’t write the agreements to stand up to this in a latter Child Support Review.
    Perhaps it isn’t the CS system you should be angry about but the ignorance of your lawyer doing your matrimonial property agreement.
    The number of lawyers who have more than a handful of Child Support matters they have ever taken to the Family Court or who understand the legislation and it’s complexity are few and far between. With two exceptions those who are IRD Review Officers or who act as legal counsel for the CIR in proceedings.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 6:03 pm

  34. The standard advice for a winning Lotto ticket is you sell the ticket at face value (what you paid for it) into a Trust or other structure that is at arms length to yourself. Then the Trust or other entity claims the prize with the ticket they hold. Dates and timings all important and a nice cut for the legal worker.

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 6:06 pm

  35. 33 and 34 — sorry Alan, but I cant support either of these comments as solutions – because i have found both to be incorrect from experience.

    Sadly the system is only interested in one thing = taking all if can from good parents – and if you dont earn a high income, but have assets or anything left – they will just assess you on more than you earn – and force you to sell what you have ( or they will take it and sell it for you ) so they can take as much from you as possible under the sham that is Child Support.

    That is the reality of the system -……

    Comment by hornet — Mon 19th November 2012 @ 7:52 pm

  36. Doesn’t this come back to the argument we have already had – Alan saying this is the law and hornet saying this is not my experience of the law. If the law has no integrity, if it is without ethics, it is not even black and white.

    Comment by Down Under — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 6:05 am

  37. Allan, Child support is NOT based on income, it is based on whatever the person making the assessment wants it to be about.z How naive of you.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 8:42 am

  38. Down under – my direct experience over ten years – confirms what I now believe – this is now a BUSINESS – the facade is the perception we are made to believe – that the system is designed to help you = and on the face of it that is what we all go in believing – its not till you come out the end asking questions = questions of this industry which NEED answers – why my child has been allowed to be deliberately harmed, why the system has done NOTHING to help prevent this – why agreements at family court level – I paid a fortune over many years to get, are NOT enforceable when breached ( if your a dad ) or as in the case of Child Support Review assessments – how can we be told one thing – that CS is based on INCOME, but the reality is it is NOT –

    The reality is this – Reviews kick in which are NOT based on INCOME, or FACT – but opinion, with bias, and discrimination thrown in to keep you totally oppressed, and none of these decisions are cross referenced against family court orders or your actual INCOME, or your actual circumstances – in fact the system expects you the parent to pay more to prove your case – your guilty until you prove otherwise – the complete reverse requirement of even the Criminal system – as far as the review system is concerned – what Review lawyer states – is good enough – what ever opinion they take is binding – and you the parent – have to try and prove otherwise – an impossible challenge.

    The sham is this – why have a system whereby you do everything you are asked to, you do the rights things by your kids and you still come out the end of this a lot worse off than when you started. This public service industry – is not providing the service you expect at all. They NEVER deliver. I know of NO OTHER business which gets away with this total sham – using kids and conflict to leverage vast sums of money out of good parents.

    THere is NO excuse for this, other than the system and those who write the rules – need a total shake up. There is a direct conflict of interest between those who manage and benefit directly from this system money – it is a business and they have protected it from any challenge.

    The reason I asked Alan for clarification as to CS being about INCOME or ASSETS or both, is because he has confirmed the lie. I believe every parent = every member of NZ, believed this system was based on INCOME – NOT your hard earned Assets – anything you have left after Divorce – assets which should be yours completely – especially since you have already shared half of them in property distribution.

    So you can see why I am aghast to learn = again from direct experience – the systems agents – can CONTRIVE any $$ number they want to – using the totally abusive process of CREATING a number – based on WHAT you have the Potential to earn – do you all realize how subjective that is, how open to abuse that is – and it is being abused –

    How many here are currently being assessed at REVIEW on a MADE UP NUMBER – over an above what you actually earn in INCOME ??? Let me know – because I bet there are many of you. Alan, do you know how many parents get assessments over and above there actual income – amounts far higher than what there Income returns state??

    So based on that LIE – that total fabrication – they will then come after your PROPERTY – to pay this imaginary debt – I have direct evidence of that.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:06 am

  39. I for one have always been assessed at absurd amounts, none have even been close to what I actually earn.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:15 am

  40. For the record – My last reported income has me on $38K per annum, this will decline given the economic climate – I am a full time father looking after my child – a choice my wife and I thought we were allowed to make – but totally ignored – the review persons at each review = have refused to acknowledge this fact in any way. Conveniently.

    I am currently demanded to pay the MAXIMUMS in child Support based on the MAXIMUM income I no longer earn – at one point they had me on MORE than the maximums and I have to pay half the childs private schooling – ( I was demanded to pay the full amount but because I highlighted some facts to the review person about the mothers income and expenditure which she did not disclose initially I had this amount halved – lucky me – in good times I always paid the total costs for schooling).

    This school – the child should not be attending – going directly against the reported facts recommended in the Psychological reports currently on file with the family court – bound over and secret = only to be read in a lawyers office – which details the severe harm the child has suffered at the hands of the mother. Very sad reading for any parent – reading about how there child has been destroyed – deliberately harmed – is not an easy thing. There is NOTHING in these reports about me or my family causing any concerns to the child – nothing. ( but ive had to defend multiple accusations against my character – all unfounded and all thrown out – which did destroy me personally. )

    Family court agreements on property settlement have been directly ignored which stipulate how CS is to be paid based on INCOME as per the online calculator. The Dunn Fiction.

    Rather the CS REVIEW persons have looked directly past me and my actual INCOME – they have gone directly to a family trust set up years before the marriage, ironically set up for the kids. The Review persons have based assessments on the assets in that trust and nothing more.

    Even if they looked at the income of that trust – it does not receive the maximums per annum currently demanded of me personally. One argument I had with them was if you want to look directly at the trust – as opposed to me and my income as an individual, then use the trust income to make my assessments – but no, that was not enough – the trust does not make the maximums in income.

    So you see I have proven categorically this system is not about INCOME at all – the latest decision is Indirectly forcing the trustees to sell assets to pay my CS demands. They have no choice at the moment. They indirectly are being Extorted.

    A very clever form of legalised extortion. And to make things harder on my current family they turn up and steal our family vehicles to pay these demands – just to keep the pressure on a good family – in fact they have come close to destroying that good family as well in the process. I sometimes wonder why my current wife has hung around for all this shit – she is a great woman, equally aghast at the system and how it treats good parents – good people.

    And when I dont have this high income, which I do not – I am not hiding income to lower my obligations – I always paid more than I should have when I had a high income. And I always go out of my way to do the right thing by my children – as opposed to the mothers horrendous behaviour ( supported at every turn by the system ) which has been soley based around using the child to leverage money for the mothers benefit – not the childs.

    And to try and defend my current position – going back to court again, and again – to prove the facts – will just erode more of what I worked very hard for – probably to the point where I will have nothing left for my family and there future – so I will not continue down that path, playing that game which has no end. Sorry Alan but that is the reality – no matter how much $$ you throw at this system – you will never win currently until we expose it and demand change.

    Currently – I will have to sell the few things I own personally to pay this debt. The family truck is being prepared for sale as we speak. This disturbs me greatly – and it should disturb all parents out there. Because this is what is happening. This is the reality – And it needs to be stopped in its tracks.

    This is the system, this is the fact of the matter.

    So parents – are we going to see an extension of this pattern of behavior by the system – creating a more legalised theft of your property to pay off some bogus debt? Its happening now by default – so I am picking this is the next concern facing parents.

    What value of $$$$ ASSETS will be targeted? Why should a persons assets have any bearing on what they pay in CS?

    If this was stipulated up front at property settlement, then at least parents would know there obligations and could plan there lives, rather than get hit with unexpected costs years down the track. Demands for excessive back payments because you have worked hard for a few things – this is totally crazy – but its happening.

    And lastly why should it be permitted to allow a child to invade your privacy to count vehicles or assets you have with a new family. This is abhorrent to me, but the system currently allows this information to make its bogus assessments to support the demands.

    And what do we see, the mother who has been allowed to harm this child, is rewarded with maximums in child support – I do not begrudge my kids anything – but when the money is going to someone who is harming the child – and it is not benefitting the child – I have a big problem with it. The system currently rewards bad behaviour. This is a fact.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:39 am

  41. i was sent a letter of debt by CS because i wouldnt jump when then told me to..i got it sorted but they really can do what they please..they dont care about stressing ppl out and causing problems..

    Comment by Ford — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:51 am

  42. Scott B – thats TWO of us, and that is stronger than ONE – so lets get more numbers and take this system to task – Have you heard of the Declaration of Natural Rights – its a foundation stone, which identifies all the RIGHTS you have – your NATURAL RIGHTS.

    You right to free speech, your right to property, your right to defend yourself – etc.

    As people – as parents we must stand up for what is RIGHT, and for our RIGHTS – if we do not nothing will change.

    bad things happen when good men do nothing.

    Big movements have changed systems – Slavery was defeated, Apartheid was defeated, and this is one of those big issues Our children deserve to be free, not used to leverage money to pay off debt – and that is something ALL PARENTS need to get behind and challenge.

    Currently in Mahurangi = north island, ratepayers refused to pay offensive rate increases – and the council had to all resign. Thats the power of people opposing things which are UNJUST. and NOT RIGHT.

    TWO is STRONGER than ONE.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:54 am

  43. FORD, and that is NOT RIGHT – that must be changed. Currently they are BULLYING good parents, and I hate fken BULLYS.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:56 am

  44. hornet…its all about the money..noone gives a shit about kids they dont even know specially the govt..all they want is money and children are the excuse they use to get it

    Comment by Ford — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 9:56 am

  45. Hornet,
    same argument as yours but different. The act requires (under admin review) that the income of each parent is to be taken into account. My ex has ASSETS AND INCOME in family trust that she failed to report.
    The review officer informed me that the income earned by my ex was IRRELEVANT to the exercse. If i had a company car, the review officer would have taken that into account (i.e. treated it as income). The ex has a company car, company internet and phone, Granny flat earning income via trust,etc etc and that was IRRELEVANT. The whole mother f….g thing makes me FURIOUS.

    Comment by shafted — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 10:08 am

  46. Ford and Shafted, which is my point exactly – we must stand up against this OPPRESSION and this DISCRIMINATION – I have other parents who are in the same situation – Women and men – PARENTS.

    Why should a mothers income and assets be protected over a fathers?? All we are asking for is EQUALITY on that issue. Something which we should all be guaranteed in this day and age.


    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 10:16 am

  47. Shafted, ex has gone gold digging again, found a big stake and is digging hard – but again not relevant apparently when determining CS. Totally one sided and needs to be flushed out and changed

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 10:17 am

  48. Nearly every year I receive a letter saying that I have been reassessed and I now owe (enter farcical figure here) So I am getting assessed twice a year. Why? Cause they can. I have never had an admin review and hope to God I don’t.

    Yes Hornet, the more parents (read male and female) we get behind this the better. I am with you on this.

    If your ex does something bad/against the parenting order what can you do? Pay some money.

    If your ex accuses you of something, what can you do do? Pay more money.

    If the IRD wants more money from you, what can you do? Pay more money, by either defending yourself against them or rolling over and paying, sometimes both.

    If you put money aside so you can fight these kinds of things, what happens? The IRD see it as income and you lose more money.

    Every way you look at it, you lose. The only things you can do as a NCP is either keep paying a tonne of money or walk away. Sometimes you can’t even walk away as you get called into mediation or court, or someone turns up on your doorstep. There is no winning if you are the NCP and only have guardianship.

    Guardian… the most useless title ever invented.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:04 am

  49. Plus where is the incentive to work and earn money? You’re just going to lose it all anyway.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:06 am

  50. Yep-i am waiting for 010413 when she can reapply under review for more money.
    Yet another meeting to look forward to in which some littel hitler will listen to nothing i say and print out her predetermined findings that i should pay more.

    Comment by shafted — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:21 am

  51. Three is better than two………

    What this issue needs desperately is publicity. I can’t believe how much info is out there. Just google Mark Miller! One thing that puzzles me is I would have expected that for every pi**ed-off father there would be a delighted mother. Someone boasting about how her fantastic review officer had “finally” made her loaded ex-husband pay what he should.
    However I have not found a single positive comment on Miller OR the system as a whole. I find that pretty revealing.

    We need to get some media traction behind this, I want John Cambell to doorstep Miller and ask him about bias? Then he can interview Dunne and ask the minister why the IRD’s website states income of the NCP is what CS payments are based on when in reality we as fathers know catagorically that is a LIE.

    Hornet – if you are selling your truck to pay off IRD fabricated debt, use Trade-Me and tell it like it is. We can ramp this into a blitz. Facebook etc… A couple of hours shamelessly promoting a trade-me auction might (just might) get noticed. I am happy to call Cambell Live every day for a year till they look at the story.
    Or One News, Or Herald, Or anyone who will take notice!!

    I don’t want or need the publicity. I am ultimately responsible for my marriage breaking down and my kids now coming from a broken home. I am ashamed for that. BUT if my actions can help in any way to alter what is a destructive, vindictive and down-right shamefull system then I will do it.

    I am so lucky now to have the love and support of a wonderful woman and she is behind me 100%.

    What do you think?

    Comment by Broke Father — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:45 am

  52. Oppression – not something I buy into easily. Discrimination – not going to take it lying down – Extortion – No way. Sitting back and allowing my kids to be used to leverage borrowing – NO WAY.

    So how many we got = 3? Better than ONE.

    Shafted – false hope mate, you know they will not be looking to help you at all. Im in the same boat = but I do not put any faith into a SHAM, a LIE, a FICTION – if I did I would be stupid.

    We have the right to rise up against what is NOT RIGHT. We must oppose things which are WRONG. On many levels.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:47 am

  53. Broke father – so now we are FOUR – Four is better than ONE.

    MAte, never blame the relationship breakdown – just because parents fall apart – does not mean kids can still not be part of a lovig family – all my problems came about after the system got involved. That is my biggest gripe. I did not lose my business because of the divorce – I lost it because I tried to defend my child against BAD BEHAVIOR which ultimately harmed her – and because I had to spend a lot of time and money defending my credibility against – LIES,and UNTRUTHS, which have never been punished.

    I am for a media blitz – but we are NOT going to get it with mainstream controlled media – we will have to plan a different approach. To be discussed, because the TRUTH is harmful to a very good business. Remember the system is very protective of PROCESS over the TRUTH – we have seen this time and time again in lawyers using PROCEDURE to get the guilty off crimes, anyone with half an eye could determine were responsible – so we have seen a huge shift away from TRUTH.

    EXpose the LIES and we will present the TRUTH as to what is really happening – how we deliver that will depend on how many we get together – so we have CREDIBILITY.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 11:53 am

  54. And of course let’s not forget that the assessments have nothing to do with the costs of raising a child or children.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 12:12 pm

  55. My partner pays child support for 2 children, exs are evil, wont let him see kids, false accusations of violence, he lives with me and my daughter frm a previous relationship and our 3 month old son. Ex reviews child support and say he has to support his biological children first. I have 50/50 week on week off custody of my daughter with her father. no money changes hands, no IRD, we pay half expenses. when our son was born, his child support dropped $30 per month. It costs far more than this to raise a baby. Confused, disheartened and our kids we live with are suffering while the exs have 4 incomes coming into their households. Child support for the two children one has, her income and her partners and the other ex has 3 incomes, hers, her partners and the child support from my partner. we have one income. struggle to provide for our kids and IRD dont see this as UNFAIR??????

    Comment by Nickstar — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 4:45 pm

  56. #55..ird dont see it as unfair because they are making money as well

    Comment by Ford — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 5:00 pm

  57. join the movement Nickstar – five is stronger than ONE. PArents UNITED against child fraud = they take Adminstrative fees which is another income stream for them – on top of the leveraging borrowing against the massive debt – which makes everything else pail by comparison. lets oppose the leveraging of loans against children.

    Comment by hornet — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 7:28 pm

  58. the govt and family courts are suppose to frown upon parents using children as tools.pawns yet the govt does exactly that..the govt is very much ‘do as i say not do as i do’..hypocrites

    Comment by Ford — Tue 20th November 2012 @ 8:34 pm

  59. #20 Yes Ford I can read, my experience is that I have always had staff In CSA give me there name when requested. I explain at the onset of the call that I require it to make file notes of the call. Not sure why your experience has been different.

    Comment by bunny — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 1:10 am

  60. is possible the person on the ph is giving out incorrect info and dosent want any complaints..which is highly likely seeing most men have problems with them..and going by your name your theres a point

    Comment by Ford — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 7:35 am

  61. Ford-i agree. additionally, i fail to see why giving out their name is a problem for them given that legislation does not hold them accountable for anything. ‘An officer of the crown cannot bind the crown”- an old convention that provides yet another excuse fo zero accountability.

    Comment by shafted — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 8:33 am


    Surprise surprise – figures out yesterday – the youth of today think its acceptable to Lie and Cheat……now why would that be??

    When you have NO accountability at any level of government (local or national ) and no accountability for the administrators of the Justice system – who are more interested in Protecting Process – over actually seeking the TRUTH.

    Does this not then filter down to our young people – who are simply behaving like their leaders – who are NOT held to account at any level – who can say and do what they like without consequence.

    This is the reality within our current systems.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 8:43 am

  63. Yep-and take it further. Many of us in this forum have the experience of young children having to Vett and filter information that they share with each parent in an attempt to encourage a smoother life. My kids tell white lies to mother about me as they are so in fear of her reaction to anything they say. The court systems does not seem to care and barely comments on thsi behaviour. It is teaching children that secrets and lies and twisting the truth are the best way to avoid conflict, when in actuality, the opposite is true. The truth, however painful, is the best approach at all times. Kids would then be left with a clear conscience. Why is it that the courts and lawyers for child focus on schooling, food and accommodation and entirely disregard devlopment of character. In the event that you “parent ‘ a child, by any means other than wearing a crunchy the clown outfit, you are deemed to be harsh and not a wonderful parent like mummy-who showers them with expensive gifts and holidays that i simply cannot afford. its B…s…t

    Comment by shafted — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 10:04 am

  64. Shafted – agreed – my child is genuinely FEARFUL of her mother – and this has happened – because the mother CONTROLS the child. The mother has discussed every single PARENTAL issue and concern with the child – since the age of 2.

    We have NOT – we made a pack to NEVER discuss adult issues with the child.

    The MOTHERS behavior has NEVER been addressed by the family court.

    All I can do for my child – and I have told her this – is I WILL ALWAYS tell her the TRUTH if she asks me a questions – I will NEVER lie to her – that is about the ONLY THING I have any control over.

    We still protect her as much as we can – but its impossible when the system allows the mother to do everything you are apparently NOT supposed to do to your children. more discrimination.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 11:19 am

  65. The ” INDUSTRY” of false accusation.

    Current changes proposed in Australia – will allow any accusation to be made against you, both in public and in your work place, for any comment which any person believes is discriminatory or offensive to them – which could include any view you speak out about concerning politics etc……….

    And then it up to you to PROVE your INNOCENCE – any baseless or unfounded allegation – sound familiar – for all those who have had false accusations leveled at you in the family court…….and its cost a fortune ( physically and emotionally ) to defend your reputation.

    The same scenario is happening with CHILD support review decisions – Demand payments in excess of your income – your guilty as charged and you can not and will never be able to prove the truth or your innocence because they have designed the system so you cannot challenge them – No person has the time or money – fact. This is an “industry”.


    While we are all being enslaved with more draconian laws, more insanity where we now have to prove our innocence against any baseless accusation…at huge cost and time to us all personally and emotionally…….

    The very govt departments enforcing these decisions – CANNOT be investigated for any breaches of human Rights, bill of rights or direct Discrimination.

    This is a fact in NZ, I have a letter from our Human Rights commission concerning complaints I initiated recently – and I have been told they are NOT PERMITTED to investigate.

    On the subject matter I raised, they receive many complaints – from many parents – but they are NOT allowed to investigate.

    So this very “industry” is protected from any complaint as to how they operate.

    But we are all directly held to account and are further expected to spend a fortune ( time, money,emotional distress ) defending our reputations and our credibility.

    I find this abhorrent. And as PARENTS and CITIZENS – so should you.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 11:44 am

  66. I do Hornet. I am appalled and disgusted.
    Get this-mediated parenting order entered by consent provides for the children to call their mother in the weekend they are with me. I reluctantly agreed to this to broker a deal. It re-enforces the neediness in my children and the omnipresence of mother. Phone call is an interrogation about what they had to eat, what they did, what time they went to bed, what dad was doing blah blah (was he drinking-like i am some sort of alcoholic-sip his drink-What the f…k). My daughter has a sleepover this week end and i get a text at 7am asking that i get the child to call at 10am (after a whole night in my care) because she is “anxious’ to call her. I have raised this as the ballshit that it is in the past, and the courts, lawyer for family etc etc don’t care. It’s BS.
    Noone listens to my concerns or questions the mother’s parenting style. it is just me that is open to absoulte criticism and scrutiny. I am not even allowed a f….g opinion about the upbringing of the children i have created. and rest assured, they will rebel when they are old enough and there will be one person left picking up the pieces-not the court, not lawyer for child, not the ex or her family-BUT ME. at that stage no doubt i will house and clothe and tertiary educate them with no relief from mother.

    Comment by shafted — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 12:30 pm

  67. Shafted – we should write a book – Im sure Scotty B will have something to contribute – look I share the EXACT same concerns with these CONTROL CALLS – this refusal to accept that the child ( children ) are fine in your care.

    I had to get a COURT ORDER ( which was regularly breached and is now totally breached because I get NO call at all now) so tried something different – because when we did call we always got excuses as to why the child could NOT TALK TO us – she is tired, shes not here, shes out playing blah blah blah = and when we called – the mother was sitting over her shoulder watching and listening – so the calls were futile = the child was clearly unable to just talk NORMALLY – like we do when she is with us.

    So I GOT A COURT ORDER – that the child had to call us, so she was free to talk – at an agreed time and date so we were all ready to receive the calls ( important for us all to speak ) – and that the mother was NOT allowed to interfere in those calls . it worked for a short time – but anytime we had the child for an extended period and the child had a good time with us – when she returned to the mother – same shit starts up again – the calls are Shut down for weeks on end – until the re-programming is complete.

    And yet we are expected to go MONTHS without any contact – we even had postal mail returned – I complained to family court – No action. BUT when the child is in my care = mother calls or texts demanding to speak with the child – sometimes daily. Total control.

    Do the courts give a fuck – no, Will they enforce there own orders – NO, can I be bothered spending more time and money in the family sham – trying to get this enforced – NO, we walk away – fuck the system – its a total joke.

    That is why my advice to you is take some time away from this shit, otherwise it will send you insane – put your energy into having a go at the system and the ones pulling the strings – expose them. Wasting time every second weekend will destroy you as it nearly did me – I tried and got no where. Stepping back actually works because you remove yourself from the game .

    Comment by hornet — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 1:16 pm

  68. Any order isn’t worth the paper it is printed on. Guess how many things my ex has complied with over the last decade? Did you guess zero? You’re right! Now guess how many times she has had to suffer the consequences of that? Did you guess zero again? Wow, you guys are smart. Ok now here is a tough one, are you ready? Guess how much money she has had to spend in the family court? That’s right, zero again. And finally guess how much the family court has helped my children? That’s right, zero!

    I’m sure we could all write many many volumes of that one book. I know my story alone could.

    Bonus question, guess how much communication I have with my offspring? Zero again!

    Comment by Scott B — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 1:47 pm

  69. P.S. Hornet I think our exes are the same person lol

    Comment by Scott B — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 1:48 pm

  70. Yep-i actually have given a lot of thought to this. You see, you wear it from all sides. The IRD, her family, her, her man hating retro glasses wearing lawyer and various others she has poisoned on her travels. After much recent soul searching i am going to adop the follwoing strategy.
    1. Be the best i can be when with the kids.
    2.Ignore the maggot attacks. They are designed to inflame me-(and oftentimes do). Its her shit and i will leave it with her.
    3. Treat the $ like a game. Do what i’m told to by the system and occasionally summon the energy to question and fix up the systems blatant mathematical fuck ups.
    4. otherwise stop obseessing on this shit- it wears me out.
    You see, i can deal with the rape of my finances, but i cannot stand to see what is happening to the children.But-there is NOTHING i can do other than accept the situation.
    BEen down the same tracks as you. Just burnt money and made myself ill-LOL
    Have a good week end Hornet.

    Comment by shafted — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 1:48 pm

  71. #70..something a friend said to me the other day..”dont let her live rent free in your head…time to evict her’

    Comment by Ford — Fri 23rd November 2012 @ 3:42 pm

  72. I was lucky enough to get mr miller. There wasn’t even a pretence of calculating income. He just made up a number. A large number. Then back dated it and gave me 30 days to find 30k. My salary was assessed higher than the maximum. He said the maximum was really only a suggestion. Naturally I didn’t have that amount floating around so I got 10% added on day 30. 2 years later I now owe an incredible amount. The ird called me the other day asking why my payments weren’t covering the arrears plus the current. I think she felt a bit sorry for me when she checked the balance. Currently I am waiting for someone to turn up and take the few things I own. Mr miller is certainly a really nice, smart, fair person.

    Comment by Rogered — Sat 24th November 2012 @ 9:02 am

  73. 71 bit hard when the state sets up an corrupt payment demand system – and keeps hounding you till your dying day. I emptied the house of that gold digger years ago, and as far as supporting my child goes – id do anything for her as long as its fair. Currently the system is biased, discriminatory and totally unrealistic…….and its no wonder people react and oppose paying.

    72 – so Rogered are you keen to join the growing number of parents willing to stand up, and present a case which demonstrates parents are being asked to pay more than there INCOME, with penalties to assist in this horrendous debt leveraging exercise…..

    You see = one of us stands up, we will be persecuted – a number of us stand up and make a stand – it gets harder to prove that a number of people are making this up – its obvious the tactic is to demand more than you earn – so they force you to sell assets…..

    My recent letter – from a Communications Specialist – who offers to help me – now thats a hollow offer – the only way they can help is to actually assess me on my INCOME which I would happily pay – to demand EXCESSIVE amounts and impose penalties and then seize my property to pay for it will only be met with resistance. So if you want to help communications specialist – actually visit my home and see that I am a full time father – now theres a thought, actually look at the physical evidence . but that would expose your LIES, and you dont want to do that.

    Comment by hornet — Sat 24th November 2012 @ 3:25 pm

  74. hornet: my partner and I would be keen to stand up against this system!!….I am a female too…not just paying fathers have problems with this, it affects their new families too.

    Comment by Nickstar — Sat 24th November 2012 @ 7:08 pm

  75. nickstar = that would be excellent – A parent movement – because this system is INSANE and totally irrational and unacceptable.

    I know of several women locally – married to good fathers who have also had enough – are being put through the ringer. Good – no GREAT parents – being treated terribly by a very OPPRESSIVE SYSTEM, having demands made of them for rediculous back payments.

    The way in which these demands are being made, the fact you have no right of recourse and the bullying tactics of the enforcers needs to be exposed – this is not a good look for New Zealanders who deserve better.

    I think we have about 7 ot 8 PARENTS now from this board alone – prepared to step up to the plate and take some action.

    Isnt it sad, we all know parents = lots of them have a horror story to tell about how this system is destroying them, and there families and there kids. And the reason why this penalty system is being rammed down our throats – is not for the kids, its to leverage borrowing to pay off more govt debt = and that offends me.

    Ill post some more next week, and perhaps we consider a meeting of the minds in a location which suits all concerned.

    Thanks for making a stand –

    Comment by hornet — Sat 24th November 2012 @ 7:15 pm

  76. link to article by hide on sunday

    Comment by hornet — Sun 25th November 2012 @ 3:48 pm

  77. I would be keen to meet up somewhere if possible.

    Comment by Broke Father — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 2:49 pm

  78. i read the article..about bloody time someone told the real facts

    Comment by Ford — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 2:58 pm

  79. abused children are from benefit dependant households according to the article..women on the dpb… and the killer mums have no history of the article said their crimes go largely unreported..they are in my veiew more violent than men..because there is no recorded history dosent mean they are not violent..they have so far been allowed to blame men for all their crap

    Comment by Ford — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 3:18 pm

  80. Whilst physical vilence toward children is indountedly and irrefutably abhorrent, we seem to totally neglect psychological damage that is perpetrated upon our children. Lawyers for child are concerned with closing files and getting paid, yet oftentimes have no psychological training. My children are undoubtedly damaged psychologicallyhowever my opinions are written off or ignored. I can no longer afford to throw any more money at the system.
    Like i have said before-love them and care for them and pick up the pieces when you have to

    Comment by shafted — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 3:28 pm

  81. 77. I think there are a few of us wanting to to catch up and see what we can do about this, about for of us in AK and one in Palmy. Give me an indication as to when is best and we can arrange a date time and place.

    80 – Shafted – it took me many years and much cost to finally get the court to approve a psychological report – which the mother and her A-hole lawyer tried desperately to prevent – and when the reports came out – surprise surprise, they confirmed everything I had been talking about for years – the kid has been severly psycholigically harmed by the mother and the system which deliberately sat on there arses and did NOTHING to help stop it. And then wait for it – we were actually happy for once, when the reports came out – finally we had someone supporting us – not a regular occurrence in the family shambles – BUT our hopes were destroyed, when we find out the person identified as causing the harm – identified in an INDEPENDENT and very invasive report – was then allowed to CONTEST the findings – FK me – we walked away, we were never going to get this fkn system to help protect a child – they need to hang for this, they are a party to CHILD abuse in my book = if I could file proceedings against them for it, I WOULD< and Id win. They need to be held to task. The Human Rights act, and United nations conventions on child are abused at will by this current justice system and its officers and they need to be exposed. They allowed by child to be harmed – and still have done nothing about it, in fact all they have done is allow more of the same behavior to flourish, and then reward the Villian with maximums in Child support etc etct – Ive done everything right, its got me nowhere – and all me and my wife have ended up with was a kicking and lost lots of money.

    Comment by hornet — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 3:41 pm

  82. feminism including academia has always been silent about child abuse. Anyone who wants to look into it will see that the perpetrators of physical abuse to children are women. Its all there in research, just inconvenient for feminists so best to just ignore the whole subject

    Comment by Doug — Thu 29th November 2012 @ 9:22 pm

  83. I may be mistaken (god knows i often am) but i genuinely detect a groundswell of opinion against the out of control feminist left.
    Notwithstanding that we have yet to get our acts together, we can help matters by openly and courageously questioning the system and pointing out how the balance has tipped too far.
    We have to stand up to the status quo and say “enough”

    Comment by shafted — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 8:20 am

  84. For your info, in case you missed them – Herald on Sunday articles – IRD pushing people over the edge – it will all sound so familiar to what we already know – this is NOT NEW – they have been hounding good people for years – complaints just never get traction – MPS give it lip service, ho hum, another one dead – wait for the smoke to clear, and then carry on in search of new victims.

    These articles highlight all the very same concerns we have , which have affected so many good parents – fk this annoys me, especially since I am seeing the same shit, effecting my good family and causing us no end of stress.

    We have to get together and orchestrate a new plan to deal with this.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 8:32 am

  85. heres another – IRD drove loving man to death.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 8:33 am

  86. This bullshit – this smoke screen article below, which appeared along side the previous two stories, is just that – and it needs to be exposed – a facade to make the general public feel good about it all. ITs not good when you have so many REVIEW staff making up numbers – which you have no way of contesting or challenging. None – thats the reality , so the penalty industry grows.

    Take the REVIEW process, I have been told directly by IRD staff – they will NEVER OVERTURN the first REVIEW decision – so why offer more reviews if thats the case – why give you false hope – they rely on the fact YOU then have to spend money and take them to court to prove otherwise – a totally unrealistic and impossible challenge. They know this and thats why we are all being persecuted hounded and in some cases sent to our deaths………its a total SHAM.

    We all know they are only altering the current system to TAKE MORE, and expand the NUMBERS of good parents they can take from – seize property and help pay off Govt DEBT – this is the SHAM that needs exposing.

    May 6th article about JENKINS death, then this crap below May 7th – the cover story.

    Comment by hornet — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 8:41 am

  87. Kate Shuttleworth from the NZ Hearld really does deserve kudos and recognition for her continued vigilance and exposure of the ineptitude and total lack of accountability of both the IRD and more particularly Peter Dunne. If you haven’t seen her article exposing the IRD’s “security leaks” in the NZ Herald yesterday; you can visit it here…..

    Whilst I try and refrain from ever giving any politician a “hat tip” – at least labour revenue spokesperson david clark had the temerity to finger one of his cell mates with this long overdue gem…..

    “After seven years with Peter Dunne at the helm, the IRD is a shambles,” said Mr Clark.

    Sadly for many good parents; this recognition has come seven years (and many suicides) too late.

    Comment by Bruce S — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 9:07 am

  88. Whats is totally unacceptable, is NO ONE is accountable for this – they are a protected species. And we all have to suffer with NO RIGHT of recourse .

    Comment by hornet — Fri 30th November 2012 @ 1:18 pm

  89. They need to be made accountable! I’m up for any gathering or rally. F…K the IRD. I’m getting shirts made up!

    My Ex and I get along really well, so I dont have all the problems some have in these splits but I dont see why the GOVT should have any say after our separation. I pay all my child support and still have occured pees and penalties that are totally bogus, and no bastard told me they existed to pay them. When they were $7 and $10 I could’ve afforded it but my first letter was at $1800.
    I pay dirrect from my wages and yet I have late payment fees cause I’m paid fortnightly.

    I post this as a warning to others you may think your up to date but it’s easy to get screwed.

    Comment by To Tired... — Tue 4th December 2012 @ 3:00 am

  90. To all the people complaining about Child Support:
    Some of you have potentially genuine isses with ‘The System’
    However a reality check is in order.
    Facts are that raising children costs a lot which cannot be denied.Some of the cost is lack of earning ability by the custodial parent/parents.
    Even if you raised children together with the other parent it will cost.Most people in NZ have financial issues,such as no or little savings.Hand to mouth in effect.That is what it is like for people raising children.This should not be different just because of relationship breakdown.All tax payers should not have to pay endlessly for your poor choice,inablity to commit,alcoholic and other issues or what ever else that may have contributed to this.
    Family Trusts are specifically set up to hide income,assets to avoid tax and allow families thae maximum Tax Credits.That is the real purpose.Dont fudge this one please.They really do not have much to do with children on a day to day basis.
    I brought up children for many years on my own.I recieved Child Support spazmodically from the other unwilling to be responsible parent.We survived and I did my best on a low wage.However I ended up with no savings and a mortgage that will not be paid of at retirement.Is that fair?I dont think so.You would not in the same situation also I am sure.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 2:27 am

  91. @Tracey. 90

    All tax payers should not have to pay endlessly for your poor choice, inability to commit… that leads to relationship breakdown.

    So is this inability to commit really an inability or is it perhaps, a failure.

    A failure to reach your level of expectation, or a failure to fulfil your anticipated and evolving level of entitlement?

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 8:48 am

  92. #90..ive raised my children and it dosent cost as much as some ppl like to lead others to beleive

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:24 am

  93. Good question Down Under but does the answer actually matter?
    Whatever, there is a child or children who needs support. He/she would do much better with love, family unity, lack of parental conflict etc that is undenied. BUT he/she also needs food, housing, warmth, clothing, being made to feel special. That is important for all children.
    How do you propose children from “failed” relationships, “inability” relationships, one night stand relationships, incompatable relationships, dysfunctional relationships, poor parenting, mental health problems etc etc be cared for and provided for by our society?
    Parliment has provided us a Child Support Act to provide a mechanism to attempt that at least as far as money resources. It isn’t perfect by a long way, the new legislation is also not perfect but it is currently all we have at this time.

    My eyes are rolling in their sockets with the kind of drivel that Tracey and Down Under are talking. It’s like about 50% of the phone calls I have to put up with at work every day.

    Get over yourselves and stand up and be parents to your kids!!

    Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:28 am

  94. Down Under
    What ever it is; inability or failure (cant see a differnce myself) the Tax Payer should not have to endlessly pay for it.It was never about my ‘Entitlement’.Parents should pay for their own children.Nothing to do with with paying for me.Although the inablity or failure for the other parent has impacted on me.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:28 am

  95. #90..if you didnt have children you would still have rent/mortgage and all the amenities to pay for yourself..if you do have children why should a man have to help you run your house…and if 2 parents worked out a percentage of what the kids actually use and halved it..the cost of raising kids is aloy less that what most golddigging ,others expect their x’s to pay and it was your choice to take a mortgage..suck it up girly

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:29 am

  96. #92
    We have done the research Mr Ford. It does cost to care for children and the research is there for you to study. Housing, vehicle provision etc have significant capital and maintenance costs. It isn’t just the marginal costs that a child adds to a household.
    If you disagree Mr Ford then you are welcome to challenge the research but it has been done for many ytears and you haven’t provided some different research or analysis.
    Those of us in IRD are simple people and we like KISS. Personally I’m worried that the new variable costs for different aged children will; all be too much for me and my colleagues and our aged computer system.

    Comment by Ms IRD Officer — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:33 am

  97. #94
    Hi Tracey,
    I don’t disagree with you but how is it that we all provide for children via WINZ at one rate and the Child Support rate is very different?
    If the government is saying through the benefit system that WINZ provides for children by adding X amount to an adults benefit and then they reduce that to x plus y (even less) for subsequent children; how come that same “logic” doesn’t apply for Child Support?
    Also if Child Support is about benefit recovery (which is one of it’s primary aims that you seem to accept) how come it isn’t just the child portion that is deducted before any surplus Child Support is paid to the receiving parent?
    There has been debate recently from groups like Every Child Counts suggesting all child support should be paid on to receiving parents. The National Party have rejected the idea outright. Maybe what is needed is some halfway house.
    If Child Support was only for benefit of children and not also for ther benifit recovery of the custodial parents personal WINZ benefit then probably more paying parents would be happier with the system and more children would have more resources available for their support and be in less poverty?

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:44 am

  98. Tracey and Ms IRD Officer: If we had a fair child suppport system worthy of its name then many more fathers would pay. If we didn’t have a ridiculous, money-grabbing penalty system that drives many men into insurmountable debt, insanity and suicide, then many more men would keep up to a reasonable degree with payments. Child support would not be necessary in most cases with a presumption of equal shared care. If one of the parents chose not to provide equal care then his/her contribution should be based on the realistic basic expenses actually required for children and for the the amount of unequal child care provided by the other parent. However, if both parents are willing to provide equal shared care this should not be allowed to be decided against by one of the parents, or indeed by the state except in the most extreme situations. The idea that ‘child support’ should pay for a custodial parent’s rent, phone, car and electricity is wrong because both parents will have about the same expenses if they are each to have the children stay with them at all. The idea that one parent should have to pay for the choice of another parent to trash their children’s family unit or to reimburse the state for its foolishness in paying parents to do so is simply unjust, a form of slavery and exploitation mainly of men. The idea that when a mother trashes her children’s family unit, the father should be made to share resources to ensure he doesn’t have a richer lifestyle than she does, is deeply flawed as far as the long-term best interests of the children go.

    Comment by Luther Blissett — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:51 am

  99. Many paying parents feel they pay normal tax which includes our soietal share for all benefits. Then a portion of people pay additional child tax. In some cases this tax goes straight to other households that are much wealthier in terms of income and assetts. In other cases it is absorbed fully by the state as benefit recovery, in some case paying parents pay so much that it covers all the the state pay in support for the children and also the support of the other parent and then a few crumbs trickle to the other parent who can choose to spend it however they choose.
    One parent is needing to pay for the benefit once through their normal taxation, and twice through Child Support and then has no say on what happens to any surplus and their own situation is acknowledged by a “generous living allowance” of about $14,000pa.
    Wierd system?
    Many think so!

    Comment by Allan Harvey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 9:51 am

  100. Ford
    Paying rent or a mortgage is the same thing in cost tems except with a mortagage you can provide a stable home environment.And hopefully a legacy to your family with any luck.Also when you need to update your 30 year old car you can remortgage.Dont worry Ford I am sucking it up.I know I have done a good job without much financial and other support.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:05 am

  101. #100..i bet you’re sucking it up..dollar by dollar and every cent you can get off your x to help support you and YOUR choices..dosent matter about him as long as you get what you want ay..and the kids dont need a parent with a mortgage..they just want a parent or both

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:11 am

  102. 90. Ok you have had your say, now please ask your ex to post his side of the story.

    Comment by Scott B — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:28 am

  103. it that i and many other men have supported and cared for their children since day one and paid child support as well ..things would work alot better if women didnt bring their spiteful vindictive attitudes into the picture

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:34 am

  104. Scott and Ford
    Who is so bitter here?Read your own angry words.Ahem I pay my Mortgage myself obviously not my Ex.Your anger could be why things just dont work out for you.Look at yourselves for once instead of projecting anger at your Ex.I may ask their side of the story may be interesting too.As for my Ex giving his side of the story…he would not have the energy and maybe that is why he has not supported his children properly.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:40 am

  105. #96..i know it costs to raise children but nowhere near the over inflated figures you lot come up with

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:40 am

  106. There is a sob-story on Stuff today which cites $285 a week in rent for a two bedroom flat. Woman has daughter in foster care; (god knows why, if she can’t look after daughter, daughter doesn’t go live with dad; but that’s another story) So woman needs second bedroom for daughter when she comes to stay every second weekend. Fair enough you might say.

    So if I use Tracey’s logic, and merge it with the situation many men face, it would be fair to say that most non-custodial dads need a spare bedroom when their children come to stay.
    Tracey would appear to expect that dads cover the cost of accomodation for custodial mothers. In the above stuff story, say two bedrooms = $14,820 per year. I’m not sure if Tracey thinks her childrens’dad should pay for all of this, or just half. Let me assume half, $7410 per annum as part of child support.
    Her children’s father will then presumably need a similar two-bedroom flat for himself. Ergo Tracey pays $7410 for accomodation, and her children’s father pays $22,230.
    Let me assume Tracey’s children’s father earns the average national wage, about $44,000. He will pay $6720 in tax and (assuming two children) $7037.
    Tracey would presumably use this mainly to feed and clothe her children – assume 2 kids, this gives her $135 a week.
    So would Tracey have her ex pay an additional $7410 to cover accomodation (rent or mortgage) costs?
    Assume yes, so poor old Mr ex, earning perhaps $44,000 has paid $6720 tax and $7037 child tax, who has $30,243 left, can not pay another $7410, leaving $22,833.
    He can then expect to pay $14820 accomodation hilself, leaving him $8013 to live on. Or $154 per week)

    Sounds plausable.
    But hang on! when her children go to saty with her evil ex (who, remember, according to Tracey, is responsible for her poor choice,has an inablity to commit,may be alcoholic and may have other issues ), he still has to feed and clothe them too.

    Tracey, there is a difference between rent and mortgage. Two very big ones in fact.
    The first, is that dear Mr ex, who you appear to hold totally responsible for your marital breakdown, also has to provide accomodation, probably only rented, for himself and also for your children whenever they may see him.
    The second , as you actually alluded to, is that you get a huge asset to keep afterwards. Yours, and yours alone to do with as you please. To pay for your retirement, retirement travel, old age medical expenses etc.
    An asset worth maybe $300,000, maybe $600,000, maybe more.
    Yes, you may argue he is paying for your children’s accomodation afterwards. But if you own your home, he is in fact paying into YOUR retirement fund.

    Comment by Black Peter — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:44 am

  107. #104..angry words ..a term often used by manipulative women and if you with to hear mt x’s side of things all you will get is a pack on manipulative lies like she has told all her life but no doubt youd beleive her shit like everyone else does

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:46 am

  108. 104 where in my post was I angry? I politely asked you to get your ex to share his side of the story. If you think that is “anger” then I fear you don’t understand human emotions at all.

    Comment by Scott B — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:47 am

  109. ppl who accuse others of having bad traits such as bitterness and anger issues usually have the same problems themselves..its easier for them to portray their issues onto others so they dont have to confront their own problems..its called ‘denial’ and once thay have wrecked the x’s character and forced him from the home the children are actually left with the abusive parewnt…the manipulative mother

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 10:59 am

  110. Peter Black
    My ex has not paid my mortgage…I WISH !haWhere on earth did you get that from.
    I am responsible for my own poor choice.
    However i should not be responsible for all my child raising costs.Any fair minded person would agree with that I am sure.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:01 am

  111. you shouldnt be responisble for all your child raising costs as ghe shouldnt b either..also he shouldnt be responsible for your mortgage and your house costs through his CS payments..only costs directly used by the kids and nothing more and only half

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:05 am

  112. Tracey says

    I brought up children for many years on my own.I recieved Child Support spazmodically from the other unwilling to be responsible parent.We survived and I did my best on a low wage.However I ended up with no savings and a mortgage that will not be paid of at retirement.Is that fair?I dont think so.You would not in the same situation also I am sure.

    That statement is so loaded with blame, self justification and a displaced sense of entitlement (to be provided for by her ex).
    Blame: I recieved Child Support spazmodically from the other unwilling to be responsible parent
    Self justification: I brought up children for many years on my own AND I did my best on a low wage
    Entitlement: However I ended up with no savings and a mortgage that will not be paid of at retirement.Is that fair?I dont think so.

    Seems to me that Tracey expected to have her retirement home somehow funded.
    Seems to me that Tracey labels her ex a dead-beat father.
    Seems to me that Tracey is angry and bitter at her situation.

    Comment by Black Peter — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:06 am

  113. Firstly, Tracey, didn’t say your ex had paid your mortgage. I used a generous dose of assumptive adjectives.
    Sadly Tracey, there is not one person out there that would not believe you had not in some way used your child tax income to in some way cover your mortgage. If even only enabling you to go out and work, earn income , and then use solely that income to cover your mortgage.
    Unless, of course, you had the ability to keep entirely seperate accounts, whilst receiving child tax, presumably working, paying your morgage, and using only that child tax income to fund explicit costs of raising your children.

    Comment by Black Peter — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:13 am

  114. #112

    women want it all their own way

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:16 am

  115. Black Peter
    I recieved Child Support spazmodically as I said in the first comment.If you have ever had a mortgage you will know payments are not spazmodic.If I had relied on Child Support to survive with 3 children they would have ended up in care.

    Comment by Tracey — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:21 am

  116. when i was with my x she wanted me to give her the rent money so she could pay it..i thought ok as i didnt have to worry about it and she would put it in her acc. and started an AP for it… when the shit hit the fan and she had me removed from the house i couldnt use the fact i paid the rent..because it came out of her bank acc. from the money i had given her..i couldnt prove the money came from me and also when she spent the rent monet on other shit that was made my problem too

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:23 am

  117. #115..why would the children end up in care?…why wouldnt you give the children to the x to look after..afterall he is the father..or is your vindictive attitude sneaking in..rather them in care than with their father..typical

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:26 am

  118. Tracey,

    If I had relied on Child Support to survive with 3 children they would have ended up in care.

    Or with your ex? Or would you never have permitted that?

    Comment by Black Peter — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 11:51 am

  119. #118..thats why women make all character destroying accusations that they gives them all the excuses they need to avoid the x in any given situation..violent bitter and anger issues being the most commonly used and effective tool in the manipulative shed

    Comment by Ford — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 1:39 pm

  120. @Ms IRD officer 93

    Let’s get one thing clear shall we; the social argument has nothing to do with you so why don’t you fuck off and keep your opinion to yourself.

    Comment by Down Under — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 4:40 pm

  121. Ms IRD #93 …

    How do you propose children from ‘failed’ relationships, ‘inability’ relationships, one night stand relationships, incompatable relationships, dysfunctional relationships, poor parenting, mental health problems etc etc be cared for and provided for by our society?

    Why should they be cared for by society?
    I pay child tax for those children I have assisted procreate. I don’t particulalrly feel inclined to have my other taxes used to support children other people procreated.

    Comment by Black Peter — Sat 15th December 2012 @ 5:30 pm

  122. #120…well few more of them need to be told straight up where to go

    Comment by Ford — Sun 16th December 2012 @ 9:06 am

  123. Brevity is the soul of wit; I should have been more succinct: Zip it, Sweetie.

    Comment by Down Under — Sun 16th December 2012 @ 1:54 pm

  124. People’s private lives don’t need to be moderated or screened by the GOVT and not paid for by the collective!

    People (Usually women) get on these sites and ask where would I get GIVEN my money if you took away benefits? Get off your ass and work!!!!

    Comment by Too Tired — Tue 8th January 2013 @ 9:38 pm

  125. Hey Guys,

    So I have been able to get the ex to agree to a voluntary agreement that will hopefully start very soon. (Well as soon as I get all the paper work completed.)
    So I’ve got my fingers crossed that as advertised on the IRD webiste that I will avoid the dredded evaluation this coming April.

    Does anyone have any experience with vol/agreements? Seems like an impossible situation for most divorced parents to agree on anything let alone how much CS to pay.

    Anyone have any other stragegies to paying less CS?

    Comment by Too Tired — Tue 22nd January 2013 @ 3:43 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