Examples of Family Court rulings on Admin Reviews?
I’ve been assessed at a ‘potential’ income which is three times greater than my actual income as a result of a staggeringly unfair Admin Review. As a result I’m launching a counter review, as well as taking the existing review to the Family Court to challenge the review findings.
I’m needing to find examples of rulings that the Family Court have reached in previous cases where non-custodial parents have appealed under section 103b of the Act. Does anyone know where I can find these?
I have nothing to offer in this regard. However I do add my voice to your appeal, if anyone has information please do help.
Comment by Andreas — Thu 22nd January 2015 @ 1:14 pm
That sounds like some sort of deliberate attempt to punish you for something. Is it a vindictive ruling or do think there might be another reason for it?
Do you have any hope of paying required amount of money in the meantime or is it just accumulating Debt?
Who is the beneficiary of the ruling. Your ex or the state.
Comment by Downunder — Thu 22nd January 2015 @ 2:28 pm
Dear richardmills, this is a conversation best held privately.
Best regards,
MurrayBacon.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 22nd January 2015 @ 9:40 pm
DownUnder, I don’t think that the Admin Review officer was particularly personally vindictive, he just wasn’t in any was reasonable, impartial, or able to look past the lies put forward by my ex wife in her Admin Review application. This was the 9th time I’ve had to go through an Admin Review, so if there’s anyone vindictive, you can guess who it might be.
I’m completing the documentation for my court hearing, which in this case consist of Form G6 (appeal to the court to have the application heard outside of the miserable 60 day window for appeal), Form G7 (information sheet) and Form CS 12C (the actual appeal application). It’s a paper war.
My basic question still stands though. Where can I go (preferably online) to find previous rulings from hearings of a similar nature made by the Family Court? Anyone know?
Comment by richardmills — Fri 23rd January 2015 @ 5:21 am
I disagree with you Murray.
There are some aspects of anyone’s case best not disclosed in detail. These questions from Richard are procedure, which we often discuss.
I don’t know the answers to these questions and they may well be hard to find. My feeling is that many men, perhaps most would give the system a two finger salute and walk in the opposite direction probably in the direction of the airport, after being done over like this.
I happened to notice the most recent post of the slow death of the IRD before writing this.
I can’t recall a discussion along these lines previously on Menz, and I’ll be interested to see if anyone has some helpful advice, or previous experience.
It takes a particular set of personal resources to tackle these things, the child support systems relies getting its way by on being an infatigueable monster.
That said Richard could be leading a charge here, one that has an interesting outcome. So following this in a post could be a valuable resource.
Either way I’m keen to hear more about this.
Comment by Downunder — Fri 23rd January 2015 @ 6:14 am
*indefatigable*
Comment by Downunder — Fri 23rd January 2015 @ 6:16 am
Richard University Libraries and law schools can access past cases and decisions and these databases are fully searchable. The test cases in Child Support area are not many.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Fri 23rd January 2015 @ 4:59 pm
Be careful.This happened to me in 2006.I appealed the decision and in the second admin review the review officer would not make a decision and said it needed to go back to the family court.I lodged another application to court and the night before it was due for hearing Crown Law served papers on me. At the court hearing the next day I asked the judge for my case to be deferred so I could employ a Barrister That was granted but I was hit with my ex’s and Crown Laws costs including travel and motel. Some thousands.
Next Crown Law applied for the case to be heard in the high court and were granted such. They were applying to have me assessed for payment based on my assets and not my income,and have it assessed retrospective.Cost me a fortune.
After the case I sacked my barrister and moved to Aussie.Don’t know the result but my kids are now grown up and I’m still paying. IRD are deducting money from my pension.
I could look for the court papers etc as I’ve still got them somewhere as one day my kids may want to know the truth.Things are still a little strained.
Comment by mustang — Sat 24th January 2015 @ 8:45 am
Bingo.
Thanks Mustang.
Powerful comment.
That is going to be a real eye opener for some people, to actually realise, and start to understand what is going on.
Comment by Downunder — Sat 24th January 2015 @ 9:11 am
Admin Reviews need to be well prepared for BEFORE the review. If you want to apply then take advice BEFORE you make your application. If you are responding then Take advice as soon as you receive paperwork from IRD.
I have people ask me most weeks for help on Child Support matters after they have shoot their case in the foot by their own poor applications or hasty responses. IRD make it sound easy. It is not rocket science but it does need care and preparation and experience helps.
99% of lawyers including moist family layers have very limited knowledge of the Child Support Act. In most cases the cost of obtaining legal representation will be more than you have any likelihood of gaining (or loosing) in the next 12-24 months so getting legal advice often is just feeding the system and getting bleed by CS at the same time.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Sat 24th January 2015 @ 12:51 pm
What was the “potential” income based on – ie how did the Review Officer decide that? I’m just wondering if this is another case where fringe benefits and/or shareholder’s salaries are grossly unrepresented in an attempt to avoid tax and child support … hey, it happens and lots of accountants and lawyers support the view that it’s ok to avoid payments in this manner.
Comment by OMG — Mon 26th January 2015 @ 6:28 pm
When Michael Cullen was revenue minister he declared child support to be a tax.
If it is then what’s the problem with that?
Comment by Downunder — Tue 27th January 2015 @ 6:26 am
Well, tax avoidance is fraud.
Comment by OMG — Tue 27th January 2015 @ 9:12 am
OMG you need a basis lesson in fraud.
Tax minimisation is an accepted part of most businesses and people’s finances.
Peter Dunne (former Minister of Revenue) even based his entire parties tax policy around tax minimisation by proposing income splitting between partners in families.
Wikipaedia says
Tax avoidance is the legal usage of the tax regime to one’s own advantage, and generally the detriment of society, to reduce the amount of tax that is payable by means that are within the law. Tax sheltering is very similar, and tax havens are jurisdictions which facilitate reduced taxes.
What I think OMG meant to say is Tax evasion, the deliberate and illegal representation of income to the detriment of society, is Fraud.
That is something quite different than what is described here.
Comment by Allan Harvey — Wed 28th January 2015 @ 10:39 am
OMG is also looking at ‘potential’ the wrong way. It is not the ‘potential’ of money to be extracted by altering the accounting basis.
It is the ‘potential’ of the person to produce an income. I.E. if this is the person’s historic ability he therefore should on a continuing basis produce this amount of money.
This was the problem with Cullen’s statement. It was in fact contrary to the law.
So we have accountants proposing an outcome by tax law and admin review officers proposing an outcome by legislation.
The issue the surfaces above is that a persons real income and the fictional income determined under the law, my be a considerable distance apart.
Comment by Downunder — Wed 28th January 2015 @ 2:47 pm
Comment by Downunder — Wed 28th January 2015 @ 4:00 pm
not to mention .. does IRD refund overtaxing.. NOT!!
Comment by kirann Jiharr — Thu 29th January 2015 @ 3:40 pm
I am about to file for an admin review myself after the first one was a complete waste of time. no matter how much evidence you produce they just completely ignore it. They certainly seem to have a pre-determined result before even starting the review.
I would be interested to know if anyone has challenged the IRD on the fact they work your “child support” (and I use that term very loosely) based on your pre-tax income then proceed to tax you and then remove your “child care” from your after taxed income. How can this be legal or right? If they are taking the “child support” out of your after tax income surely this is what the “child care” should be worked off? Otherwise this is essentially a “double-tax” the way I look at it?
Comment by BrokenHeartedDad — Tue 3rd February 2015 @ 3:12 pm
Start from the base point of income-tax v discriminatory poll-tax.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 3rd February 2015 @ 3:50 pm
Hi mate, I feel for you.
I am paying a very high amount of CS at the moment, I never had issues with that and I never missed a payment
Now I maybe facing redundancy and maybe have to apply for an admin review myself
I dont know what to do if I experience the same as you do.
Comment by Ray — Sun 15th February 2015 @ 6:57 pm
Sadly Ray, you’re probably (**%^$&*%^(
Redundancy: Any lump-sum payment you get is income, and as such if it pushes you over the 15% (or whatever it is) variance on your estimated income this year, will push up your assessment for this year (with penalties); AND will form part of the basis of your assessment for next year!
Then, if you’re not earning to potential (out of work; take a lesser paying job etc), they can assess you for your potential income!
You might be right on one point – file for an Admin review yourself pre-emptively, and pray you get a sympathetic mediator. But don’t count on it – almost not at all! Whether you file, or your ex files (which she no doubt will when she gets a massive drop in your income), chances are the first principals above will apply.
Or, if you are on fairly amicable terms with your ex, talk to her [DON’T mention assessments or Admin Reviews] and hope against all odds she simply accepts your situation. The longer you can keep the IRD default settings, the better, although it’ll still ding you for CS next year essentially based on this years’ income + n%.
Be happy if she herself is working – the better the pay, the better!. IRD formulas are meant to change this coming year to take the working custodial parent’s income into account. If she is working, and on a comparatively good wicket, then your CS should drop this coming year.
Comment by OMG! You're (**%^$&*%^( — Mon 16th February 2015 @ 7:32 pm
Hi, thanks for that reply.
I’m currently paying CS at max level. So if the IRD assesses my potential income on the current one I’m screwed.
My ex got 90% of all assets after separation and I was slowly getting on my feed again.
There are no amicable terms with her…..
Comment by Ray — Mon 16th February 2015 @ 8:07 pm
@ Ray. I feel a post coming on … could have a Yorkshire flavour to it.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 17th February 2015 @ 8:57 am
Hello, (Child Support Payers)
Anyone heard or recieved a review for next year? (This April) new rules and all.
I was told in a couple of weeks, but it seems to be draging on too far. With such a huge fiancial shift surely all parties need advanced warning.
Comment by too tired — Wed 18th February 2015 @ 4:33 am
IRD have the new formulae in use for child support calculations from 1/4/2015, so it must be happening!
Comment by Sarah Haras — Thu 19th February 2015 @ 7:35 pm
Apparently they are in the mail. We have been assessed ( increase 25%). Our access is hard fought but not enough to count for the min threshold . in addition the carer works under the table so their income won’t help offset child support. Are.admin reviews really that much of a waste off time. Currently paying 60% more for access
Comment by Harry — Fri 20th February 2015 @ 12:35 pm
Thanks Harry,
Will be on here with my assesment details as soon as I recieve it.
I want to know the process this year, surly they are asking each parent to give details of current arrangements etc before stating the amount required to pay?
Comment by Too Tired — Fri 20th February 2015 @ 9:28 pm
They sent out a letter (presumably to both parents) about August last year, asking the current arrangements. I presume they did that for all current CS files on their books.
I dare say, on the whole IRD will assume the applying parent (usually the mother) is honest (in terms of ‘nights’) for new cases, and levy CS accordingly (after all, IRD have income details for both parents). ie UNLESS the father objects when he receives the first letter from IRD that he has been assessed for CS on child x, then IRD will simply proceed on the assessed basis.
Comment by Sarah Haras — Sat 21st February 2015 @ 5:42 am
Hi Folks. Got my letter in the post Thursday. My god if this is fair then I would hate to see it any other way. a woman from the I R D said that I would be better off when it is in place. she must have been talking about the womens side of it. And if one does not agree with the outcome then you can take it to the family court HAHA NOT TRUE been there done that. the court told me that they do not deal with child support issues when I was told to recover some money that was owed to me. I would love to hear from any others having the same problems.
Cheers,
Kenny.
Comment by Kenny — Sat 21st February 2015 @ 5:05 pm
What? got my letter the other day my CS has nearly double. Daughters Mother was done for welfare fraud, last year with home detention and works under the table,so i can guess how honesty she was….. and in my case try getting a 17 year old to come stay with us is not easy when the mother lets her party and drink.
Comment by lawrence — Sat 21st February 2015 @ 10:17 pm
Got my letter today. My CS has HALVED!. I am so happy! $10 grans a year back into my pocket. Yay to Peter Dunne!
Comment by Arthur — Sun 22nd February 2015 @ 6:24 am
Well I got my letter and my CS has nearly doubled!!!! Ex, now remarried, bought house together etc etc, has part-time job. Tells the kids that the new guy supports them all and dad pays nothing, I could go on for weeks…. Any way IRD clearly haven’t assessed her income as I wear 100% of raising my children, money of which my kids never see apparently as they always have stuffed or ill fitting clothes and are hungry. Do I bother with admin review or just quickly go broke. I live in Canterbury, where my work is which funnily supports her lifestyle, and she lives on the West Coast (over 300 km away) and see my kids every third weekend. I travel roughly 2/3 more distance to her despite a parenting order that states meeting halfway, at huge cost in money and time off work. Tried the lawyer thing, hopeless. Any Advice from anyone would be appreciated, Cheers
Comment by J Silcock — Sun 22nd February 2015 @ 1:24 pm
You can now work out what your ex’s ‘income’ is.
It tells you your income. Should be no news there; and your ‘adjusted taxable income’. It tells you the ‘combined child support income’. Take your adjusted income off that figure; and add the Living allowance to it, and that should = her income.
I did this, and then double checked by sticking what I deduced was ‘her gross income’ into the IRD calculator. It worked.
Then have a long stiff g’n’t as you realise the realities of life.
Comment by Arthur — Sun 22nd February 2015 @ 6:34 pm
Okay… so I got my notification in the mail the other day and it tells the typical story.
I’m paying at the maximum level of CS that they can take for you with 2 kids under 13. Fair enough I say, my income is reasonably good. But here’s the bit that annoys’s me… My ex wife earns less than the living allowance threshold, and so I pay 100% of the CS cost (an eye wateringly high $2,187 per month!)
I wonder if admin reviews now work both ways?? The only reason she is able to work < 20hrs is a week is because she receives a massive CS boost each month (which bought her a brand new ford focus last year BTW – nice!). Would be interesting for me to test the "capable of earning" argument up the chain to her since it has been applied down to me in the past.
But knowing the one sided views the admin reviewers come with I wonder whether it would really make a difference. Probably not I think. Might give it a go though 😉
Comment by Brayden — Mon 23rd February 2015 @ 2:50 pm
Is she on DPB? Your CS is deemed to cover the cost of DPB. And if she is, then WINZ should be ‘encouraging’ her to find part time work once the youngest is 6; and (if I am correct), full time work when they are 14.
And if aint claiming no benefit, then she can work as much or little as she wants.
What she (theoretically) can’t do now, is arbitrarily reduce her work hours / income (being the ‘lifestyle choice’ IRD live to ping fathers for, when they are suddenly unemployed.
Comment by Arthur — Mon 23rd February 2015 @ 4:54 pm
No, she’s not on the DBP, but has a part time job. But she’s only able to do that because she collects 26k a year from me. If you were to convert my 26k to an equivalent after tax salary and add that to her part time income, she’d be on the equivalent of a 60k salary per annum (not bad for 20hrs a week).
The point you make is valid though… If we (as men) get pinged for having greater earning capacity, now that the formulae takes into account both parties, should the door not swing both ways and ping her for not working full time and having greater capacity to do so??? The answer is clearly yes, but I sense a double standard coming my way if I take it to review.
Comment by Brayden — Mon 23rd February 2015 @ 5:43 pm
#36 Brayden. I’d be tempted to ask for an Admin Review on her. I suggest you talk to Allan Harvey. He’s posted a little further up the Thread.
I have met a woman who the IRD accused of taking a lower paying job on purpose to reduce her Child Support liability. She hadn’t. Her boss was going to retrench her but offered her a part time job so she could continue working while she was studying. The IRD refused to believe her or her boss … So you may have a chance. And as far as I know, asking for an Admin Review on your ex is free (which probably explains when so many women do it !)
Comment by golfa — Mon 23rd February 2015 @ 6:06 pm
Hi
I have the new assessment. Increase of $400 per month. Now up to $2200 per month for 3 kids. Ex has a family trust that owns house and Granny flat. There is income from Granny flat. Plus non cash allowances from work-car-internet-phone. Can i ask these to be taken into account in assessing her income?
Comment by Alistair — Mon 2nd March 2015 @ 2:51 pm
Hi All,
I too got my good news letter! – not sure of the % increase but I’m going from a bit over $1000 a month to over $1300 ish. No change in my earnings, no change in the ex’s, no change in nights spent with me so I took a good look at the assessment and saw that my circumstances had changed………
I am now re-married with 1 dependent daughter. She is not my biological daughter but her mum (my wife) has no contact or money from the bio dad (don’t even know what country he is in).
My living allowance used to take her into account but no longer! I am assessed as a single man with no dependents.
What a total con and why am I not surprised – shafted yet again by a corrupt system that seems to be permanently biased.
Comment by broke dad — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 11:38 am
I’ve actually just prepared and sent off my admin review application. I will be very interested to see how it goes. Now that the door swings both ways it will be interesting to see how its handled (still, I’m realistic about my chances knowing how this system works). Still… when you’re paying the max, it can only go down I say 😉
@broke dad – you should contact child support and check that. At the end of the day its hard to see how your step daughter wouldn’t be considered a dependent.
@Alistair – You could try an admin review… I know these things have been stacked against dads in the past (I know as much as anybody) but one thing I’d have to say about the recent changes is that they at least open the door a little. The interesting thing to see will be how long it takes for the admin reviewers to adjust given their historical tendency to bias the custodial parent.
Comment by Brayden — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 12:05 pm
My assessment also has me as a single but I have been remarried for years – are IRD doing this on purpose or are they just thick?
Comment by Doug — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 2:29 pm
It was mentioned above that IRD will not let you take a lower paying job and I have heard of cases where this has happened. Last time I checked indentured labour was illegal in NZ – has anyone taken this up with the human rights commission, it is totally wrong for the state to force someone to remain in a job under pain of a financial hammering.
Can I suggest that the first person reading this who wins lotto should go out and take a whole bunch of test cases against the IRD on behalf of the rest, surely their legal grounds are flimsy and they rely on outmuscling and outspending their victims in court.
Comment by Doug — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 3:49 pm
Interesting reading. I’m in the process of completing my Admin Review papers right now. My ex has finally bought a house and moved in with her partner, therefore, after six long years of bludging off the state (us all), is no longer able to collect the DPB. The problem is that the child support formula is based on her income from last year, DPB of about $25k, but she has a university degree and a teaching diploma and is capable of easily earning double that this year. That is the basis of my admin review. It will be very interesting to see what the result is. By the way, I fought hard to get 50% care of my kids, and won, so I’m not in as bad a predicament as some of you poor buggers, and I feel your pain. The IRD use the divide and conquer approach, making each of us act individually, so if we want to really make a difference to this unfair system, we need to unite and take action together. I.e. start with something simple like a petition. The system is so unfair that only an idiot or a man-hater would not support the right action. At the very least, we need to register ourselves as members of an organisation such as this, have regular email contact, and take some joint-force action for the good of all men who get shafted by women using us as sperm donors and ATM machines. One last comment: Until recently, my ex always said she did not expect any money to change hands once we were 50/50, but her vindictive nature and greed causes her to continue to put her hand out. Wrong – So wrong.
Comment by Rooster — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 6:00 pm
Well done Rooster. I’d be interested to hear how you get on there (sounds like a classic case). Please keep us posted. You raise some very good points on the IRD too, you are right as well. The problem obviously is they have a bottomless pit of money… And we don’t 😉
Comment by Brayden — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 8:13 pm
They over spent on implementation of this already broken new system to the tune of 100 million dollars. So they will be even more keen to fleece us!
Rooster the problem with your Admin review if I read it correctly is that she had potential but no job? I’m sure your review will work if she is employed now.
Also everyone my bill this year is inflated due to the change of the year to date being Jan to Dec 2014, I had a private arrangement until April of 2014 so I worked my ass off in overtime, now they wont reduce it to last years April to April earnings, even though I have pointed out I don’t earn the amount they are stating I earnt.
It’s not 15% more so they wont reduce it.
Comment by too tired — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 9:19 pm
#39 Broke Dad,
Your situation was clearly stated before the changes happened, just like my ex’s new kid dosent change how much I pay, neither does any children that live with me. New Kids aren’t considered dependants because the system is supposed to be circular.
Comment by too tired — Tue 3rd March 2015 @ 9:23 pm
So far this year, IRD have stuffed up on me twice.
(1) In Feb they declared I had missed a payment and they had added 10% penalty; and please pay immediately.. [I had not missed; I jumped onto IRD.Govt.NZ immediately, and they had my payment, not charged any penalty etc; all was in order, so where the fck does this overdue notice arise?]
(2) Last week I had a new notice of assessment for the current year, reducing from what I was previously assessed and have been paying, back to my 2013 assessment + 1.6% inflation. Great ! I can save money!. Problem is, the new assessment is below 80% threshold of what I will earn, and on end-of-year square-up, I’ll be dinged 10% penalty for under estimating.
IRD are fckd! Neither of these issues should have occurred. how the fck, or who the fck is playing around with their data?
Comment by Arthur — Thu 5th March 2015 @ 7:31 pm
Arthur (#47): The pitiful $133 million that IRD has spent on implementing these minor changes was clearly nowhere near enough to ensure they don’t exploit fathers.
Oh wait, no, the aim of so-called ‘child support’ IS to exploit fathers, so perhaps the $133 million wasn’t enough to enable IRD do so in a way that the fathers wouldn’t detect. You are just being a nuisance to them by objecting. Why not just pay everything they throw at you? Be a good little male and cooperate with the feminist gulag.
I guess the $133 million (which will undoubtedly be whipped from men’s hides in due course) is facilitating plenty of emotional abuse causing mental illness and other stress-related illnesses in males, so that at least was a good investment for the war against men.
Comment by Man X Norton — Fri 6th March 2015 @ 8:26 am
I recently had to submit an appeal against an admin review decision to the family court. The financial strife my family are now in means paying for a lawyer was out of the question. The bureaucratic nightmare of the paper war I had to submit just caused stress and anxiety.
My 16 yr old daughters mother moved her and the family to Abu Dhabi two years ago. My daughter was supposed to come back after a year but didn’t want to give up the high life and slum it back in NZ. It was mutually agreed that she could go if they could fully financially support her over there. My daughters mother changed her mind while over there (although there was clearly always a strategic intent) and claimed child support to which I can’t seem to do anything about, even with the parenting order from the family court. The admin review just made it worse, and the CS changes occurring 1 Apr make it as bad as it could possibly be. I have gone from not paying child support to having a huge debt as well as having to pay over $1k a month, therefore can’t continue to pay the mortgage on a house I worked a 24 year career in the military to buy. My family (wife and two kids) will be starting from scratch due to the greed of a bitter (evil) X who is currently winning at playing the BS NZ child support system.
My wife has had to give up the small business we were trying to get off the ground to take on full time work just to survive. Struggling to see the light at the end of the tunnel and you can imagine the stress this brings to the family. I feel my family is being punished for me being on a reasonable salary, yet we end up living worse than a beneficiary. I can’t even treat myself to a nice coffee? How can this system claim to be ‘fair’?
The 1 Apr CS changes uses a formula with a principle element of counting both parents taxable salary. I can’t see how the formula can still work if one of the principle elements is removed, namely my daughters mother being in a non-taxable country, not earning a wage because her husband is killing it. They aren’t even considered NZ tax residence.
Any advice or support would be kindly welcomed.
Comment by Steve — Sat 7th March 2015 @ 10:09 am
Steve,
If this “mutual agreement” is documented within and forms part of the parenting order that has been ratified by the Court,IRD would appear to be breaching the order and therefore in contempt of court.
Apply immediately, for a without notice “Suspension Order”.
Suspension orders are for a specified period under statute,so Judges are not overly adverse to their issue, especially since the grounds of the application would be self evident from the ratified Order.
For the Court to allow the continuance of IRD to garnish from you, it must itself vary the Parenting Order, which it can’t do without an application by either party, then with submissions, hearings etc…
Suspension easy fix.
Best of luck.
Comment by Been there — Sat 7th March 2015 @ 1:37 pm
Thanks for the advice. I’m still recovering from the last bureaucratic nightmare submission to the family court but know the Suspension Order is an option. You have given me some motivation though and I’ll work on mentally preparing myself for this next challenge. Cheers
Comment by Steve — Sun 8th March 2015 @ 7:42 pm
i was earning good money – paying 300 a week in child support, then i got made redundant and started my own company,
my ex done a admin review on me and last year the company made a loss of 14k – i made 8500… and paid 7000 in child support…
the system is flawed – where do i go to find rulings on previous cases????
Comment by kevin — Mon 11th January 2016 @ 8:53 am
I’m not saying this is right – but you need to see the difference in these laws to understand the difficulty in finding previous cases.
In the first instance YOU were earning money and paying an amount of child support.
In the second instance you directed a company which made a loss.
In the third instance a ‘civil claim’ was made against you personally as to your ability to pay an amount of child support.
Rather than saying the system is flawed – I would say you are being subjected to two different legal regimes.
Comment by Downunder — Mon 11th January 2016 @ 9:06 am
Hi Kevin,
Flick me an e-mail and I can do a quick review of your situation.
One of the questions an IRD review officer will need to be satisfied is your decision to set up a new company after redundancy likely to result in you earning the same or better income than in your previously employed position. There is court precedent that you cannot leave a job and earn less with the intention, or sometimes even secondary consequence, of reducing your child support. In your case you were made redundant which is a formal process and this should not apply.
From your story above you were paying $500 a week and that after the admin review it was reduced to $134 per week. The Child Support Act says that there is a minimum of about $800 a year or $15 per week. That applies to everyone. Your company made a loss but you had drawings for your self of $8,500 which the IRD assessment starts with.
The assessment then looks at the specifics of your situation, your kids and your ex.
Flick me an e-mail on [email protected]
Allan
Comment by Allan Harvey — Tue 12th January 2016 @ 7:39 am
Hi,
Does anyone out there know the processes that IRD are able to follow with administrative reviews? Out of the blue I recieved a letter from them wanting a meeting with me to and I quote from the letter ‘Check that our child support customers are paying the correct amount of child support for their children’ and ‘confirm that correct income has been used for your child support’.
Knowing its in my best interest to be compliant I rang the community compliance offer to confirm I would attend the appointment. I asked whether this was an assessment or the start of a review but she said it was nothing more than a friendly catch up and currently ird were interviewing all low income earning child support customers. I pay the minimum amount of child support working part time for heath reasons and also to accomodate the rediculous contact regime I ended up with at mediation.
Any body have any ideas as to whats happening here? Is this common practice and do I answer questions at the meeting and allow it to be recorded since I have been told its no more than a ‘casual catch up’?
Comment by Jono — Sun 10th April 2016 @ 5:14 pm
#55 Jono. I’d be EXTREMELY wary. If I was you, I’d contact [email protected] above and have a word to him. Through the mechanism of an Admin Review, the IRD can assess what you pay on your “potential” earning capacity. So, say for example you’re a qualified motor mechanic, they have the tax records of hundreds of motor mechanics, they can easily (using their power) assess your income “potential” to being what an average motor mechanic earns. You may tell them that you have a health issue that prevents you from working as a motor mechanic. Unless you’re in a wheelchair or walking with the aid of crutches, they will probably conclude that you are deliberately taking on a menial job as a means to reduce your Child Support liability. But as a gesture of good faith, they may tell you that if you don’t like your new assessment, they will be happy to go to Court (which you will have to initiate) and defend their position.
Comment by golfa — Sun 10th April 2016 @ 8:56 pm
Add to that, backdating the assessment, creating a large debt, and attacking your assets or your current partners.
You’d be naive to believe that the context of the sentence should be read in your interest and not theirs.
I’d have a good long think, before you jump into the Lions den!
Comment by downunder — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 9:04 am
Thanks for the advice guys. Was working nightshift and changed jobs on th advice of lawyer for child n child phycologist as they considered my job unsuitable to having care of children. In addition to fact it was killing me. Tying to organise to see communitylaw centre lawyer before this appointment. Contact has been since pulled with the children and now have the daunting task of filing in court for breach of a parenting order myself and now this comes up!
Comment by Jono — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 10:41 am
I’ve seen this type of scenario play out before.
There are some people who consider it their political right to upset successful court decisions, by advising the mother politically and legally in the best interests of their ideology.
They have useful contacts in the IRD also.
If the Family Court has found a more ethical footing, this may be something that is being pushed out into the open, and playing out in a slightly different way, but still looking for the same outcome.
Comment by downunder — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 10:59 am
This sort of back ground corruption has serious implications for the well being of the children, implications of parental alienation, and health issues for you.
I think you are going to need some genuine help.
What city are you in Jono?
Comment by downunder — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 11:16 am
I recall having these hassles back in 1979-1989 before IRD got involved and in those days lip service only was paid to the “welfare of the child” and I doubt today is any different. Lawyers are the sole beneficiaries of the Family Court System.
Comment by JONO — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 5:32 pm
Thanks for the advice guys. Downunder Im in hawkes bay. Iv run th full guantlet. 2 protection orders withdrawn after the first hearing. Waited 2 and half years for a hearing for shared care then got charged under the anti smacking law- found not guilty. Alienation oldest two of four dont want to see me. Havnt givin up yet tho. Im convinced now though that any further court work Ilhave to do myself. Both lawyers I used seemed not only incompetent but im convinced were doing alot of behind the scenes work to stall out my case.
Only way my ex will let me see them is through her which is way too dangerous. So does anyone have experience filing to enforce an order?
Comment by Jono — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 6:06 pm
Is there anyone from the old Napier group on line? Is Viv Roberts still down that way?
Comment by downunder — Mon 11th April 2016 @ 6:30 pm