Child Support

[dave289]

CSA have one law for men and another for women. a good mate of mine has a ten year old daughter ,he has always paid child maintenence at the set rate advised by them since the beggining. he has wanted overnight access for years but has been denied ,he is a top bloke and works hard and just wants to be able to take her on holidays after all he has provided for her all his life.he has spent thousands in court to try and fight this and still gets nowhere.fair ,what is fair?

another good mate of mine has 2 daughters to some lowlife mole.they seperted when the girls were young ,at one stage the mother left and he was forced to leave work and look after these girls for at least 2 years on his own. In this time they did not even see there mother at all in this time.then all of a sudden she shows up and wants to see the kids after 2 years .he being the softarse he is about it agrredd to let her take the kids out as he thought it would be a good idea for them to see their mother.I told him he should not.so what happens ,she takes the kids away and dissapeers, then she makes a claim that he has molested the children.(this is a good mate that I have known since i was 13 and im 38 now,he is the sort of bloke you would trust your life with and does no wrong by anybody ).now all of a sudden he is not allowed to see his children unless it is by supervised access.he tried to fight it and got nowhere,this is after he had taken care of them for over 2 years and in this time they did not even see there mother once.he is a shattered man over this and has now not seen his kids in over 3 years. now if this was the other way around do you think it would have happened to her? no, what a joke these mob are,lowlife scum dogs have screwed my mate in a big way.all because of some lies from some lowlife mole.
now to me ,If it makes some of you feel better a have looked after my 16 year old son since he was 13 months old on my own, in that time I have not recieved 1 single cent in child support from the mother, like I said earlier one law for women and another for men.the law is supposed to be fair but as you can see its not to fair if your a man.

[CPOCSM]

Hey there guys and girls - I can tell you right off the bat as I dated a member of the CSA and until you actually go into the whole thing they deal with, you really have nothing to go on.

Firstly, they aren't out to get you. What some parties do is not fully disclose their situations like what they actually earn and where they have their money hidden. It is human nature to hide crap to protect individual interests however it will turn around and bite you on the ****. The CSA has direct links to Centrestink and the ATO as well as Medicare and anything that your pay goes into - you cannot hide for long. Also leave the emotional bulldust out of it too - stick to the facts and you will be a whole lot better off.

Second, if you think you are being smart and not paying, think again. You accrue a debt from the moment you stop paying and that is FOREVER!!!! They will ping you 30 years down the track when you are trying to survive on your meagre pension - some people have accrued $50-60000 in debt - imagine all the heartache spared if you just coughed up for what - 18 years...think about it.

I pay $15000 per year into child support and my very stupid ex-wife then tied it into the mortgage she took out - now when the child support rates dropped 18 months ago, I was paying $150 less than before which put her in the bad books with the bank. I call it Karma but there you go. She tried to put a change of assessment in on me citing she couldnt afford the kids. I went to court and it cost her $14000 in costs due to the fact she didnt disclose the full story - a very extreme case but there you go. I now put a couple of hundred dollars into my boys savings accounts to tide them over for when they leave school.

It is a very emotive subject and there is a lot of dislike between some parties when the CSA is mentioned - me included before I actually knew what these people do. Just a thought for you all - put yourself in the shoes of the people that work there and having to put up with emotional bullshite that comes down the telephone line. Trust me I saw the end result of it for 18 months and it isnt pretty. People think that because they have to pay, for whatever reason, they can take it out on the person on the phone. Remember these people have to put up with it but they also provide you with the information, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AND REGS OF THE COMMONWEALTH, to get you through it. They dont make it up and they dont hide from you. If you have selective hearing, like a lot of callers seem to do, then you arent going to get the right info. If you think you are hard done by - only you can change it so put a change of assessment in and get it sorted - these people will not do it for you! If you have a problem with what they are telling you - take it to your local member of parliament or go see a chaplain - it is all about choices :

Rant over - talk to your CSA case officers civilly and like a human being and you will be better off. I am not saying any of this as a smart **** but as a person who knows and also as a person has obligations to support my children from a previous relationship. I was put thru the wringer when I divorced but I now have the wisdom and the strength in the knowledge that I now know how the system works. I hate the fact I am paying $15000 a year - but I have to do it. Just be thankful you dont live in the US - they (the courts) can make you take a loan out to pay the primary caregiver out on half of your superannuation...food for thought if you had to take out a $500000 loan like I would have had to do... :evil3:

Hooroo

[Hally]

Like many others in this forum, I too pay child support for a child I get very limited access to because of the games of her mother.

I don't disagree with the concept of paying CS as such, but some of my major gripes are:

- Calculations are made pre-tax, deductions are post tax and the mother does not have to declare it as income (because I have paid tax on it)
- Child Support is not linked to access as such, even when mothers play the games and flirt family court orders.
- because I have chosen to better myself, I get further penalised the more I earn. Her on the other hand only works to she earns just under the $18k amount that is your allowance (cant remember the correct term) so she effectively does not figure in the calculation.
- Her Centrelink benefits are only paid if she is claiming the maximum amount possibly from me. There is no hope of doing a fair deal

Then there is CSA themselves:

- I am sure they only have angry lesbians working for them
- They pick on the good guys because we do the right thing and we are easy targets.
- they are incompetent and rude
- i recently had my tax return refund confiscated because they made an error on my income!! And then had the hide to blame me because I should have picked up that error.

I could go on but it just gets me more peeved.

[CPOCSM]

Originally Posted by Burnedout

Yes, she can lay claim to up to 80% of your Super.

I would love to see the documents you saw that led you to think she can claim 80 percent...I went through the family law court to dispute a claim by my Ex on 100(!!) percent of my super and the magistrate basically told her to go forth and procreate. They cannot do it unless the other party is not toeing the line or has incurred a debt.

I am with you - it isnt fair - but we have to suck on it - if you think you are hard dome by, YOU need to call them and sort it - they wont follow you up unless you stop paying then they jump all over you.

[CPOCSM]

Originally Posted by Hally

Like many others in this forum, I too pay child support for a child I get very limited access to because of the games of her mother.

I don't disagree with the concept of paying CS as such, but some of my major gripes are:

- Calculations are made pre-tax, deductions are post tax and the mother does not have to declare it as income (because I have paid tax on it)
- Child Support is not linked to access as such, even when mothers play the games and flirt family court orders.
- because I have chosen to better myself, I get further penalised the more I earn. Her on the other hand only works to she earns just under the $18k amount that is your allowance (cant remember the correct term) so she effectively does not figure in the calculation.
- Her Centrelink benefits are only paid if she is claiming the maximum amount possibly from me. There is no hope of doing a fair deal

Then there is CSA themselves:

- I am sure they only have angry lesbians working for them
- They pick on the good guys because we do the right thing and we are easy targets.
- they are incompetent and rude
- i recently had my tax return refund confiscated because they made an error on my income!! And then had the hide to blame me because I should have picked up that error.

I could go on but it just gets me more peeved.

I know it isnt fair - but it is the way they work it out. Look at my situation - the Navy is paying me $24000 to stay in another 18 months - my ex gets the child support at the pre tax amount, I receive the allowance at the post tax amount and my child support is paid to her at the pre-tax amount.

I can also say they do "putt from the rough" - long story I would prefer to PM you on!!

[GT0132]

Originally Posted by Burnedout

I have advised my two kids now 20 & 18 never to get married without a pre-nuptial agreement.

I never mention their mother to either of them, as I was busy keeping up my relationship with the kids. I had 8 hours access to my kids and made the most of these moments; there was a time when the Family Court was negative to men in a rather severe way at times.

I have not spoken to their mother in ten or eleven years.

Men do need to be careful - women get together over these things quite often at the school yard gate, you know. There is a huge amount of free legal advice concerning family law available at the school yard gate.

Regrettably, I was ambushed in this manner and never stood a chance; (a mutual female friend told me later).

When the courts look at division of assets they initially assume a 50/50 split. This is then adjusted by looking at other factors including (1) the contributions that both parties made to the marriage, not just a financial contribution. (2) what each party went into the marriage with, although this becomes less relevant the longer the marriage lasts , and (3) who will have main custody of any children from the relationship.

Typically the end result will be a 35/65 split in favour of the mother. (Typical being a situation where it's the mother who has custody of the kids and has worked part time most of her married life)

"contributions" isn't confined to "financial contributions" it extends beyond that. For example a mother not working is deemed to have contributed as a "home maker'....so just because she did not contribute to the purchase price of the house is irrelevant

Assets for the purpose of determining the financial split means anything of value (including - from 2002 - balances in superannuation accounts) irrespective of when it was purchased and is based on current value , not purchase price. The GTHO Phase 3 you've had in your shed since you were aged 21 in1980 - ten years before you met this girl still gets included.

A judge may look at a pre nup agreement to disseminate what was owned before the marriage and set that aside to the original owner, but I doubt it would have any imopact on assets accumulated DURING the marriage.

[El Venom]

i get treated like a dead beat dad when i call csa even though I have my kids full time. there mum works but only pays $26 a month. Tell me what $26 is gonna get 3 yr old twins these days, nothing the system is all up

[El Venom]

CSA are pricks. When I call them they treat me like a dead beat dad even though I have sole custody. The kids mum works but I still only get $26 a month and I dont always get that. The system is screwed, people have a responsability to there kids even if they dont have them, so why are these idiots letting people get away with paying so little. Whats $26 gonna get 3yr old twins? Bugger all but they see this as ok and if you question it your treated like crap

[gtfpv]

i'm not going to disclose info online . but lets just say i went to see a lawyer who, happenede to be female , before proceeding with a possible divorce some years ago.
i walked out in tears when i heard the facts on my rights and hers. basicaly a womencan lock a male out of a house, take it + super . plus GT . PLUS 40% OF ONES NET PAY. PLUS MOVE next hubby in and have an income from him. in fact be much better off . leaving myself with enough money to share a rented flat.
the lawyer thenproceeded to tell me that the law is very very unfair to males . and for that reason she does not represent women. she also told me that she is glad she has no sons .
she also said that a males life expectancy falls after divorce , and sudden death possibility goes up 300%.
on the upside . a males only prospects are that so many women have screwed the x out there that there are plenty of chances to get a life back with someone elses family. ( wierd but true) . or the alternative is to just quite work . dissown your previous family and become a hippy and travel around the world as a loner . many take this option .
i was literally in tears after walking out of there .
she even told me that when a man walks into a soliciters office ,he normaly get lied to by a soliciter, thinking that he will feel like he has a 1/2 a fighting chance . the reality is differant .
a woman also gets lied to saying you can take him for almost the lot . not quite true . but close to 70%. either way the male pays , even most of the court fees. lawyers play on victikms emotions to screw both parties to get max $$$ as well.
that was my stry , from the office . bekiev me we went through all the scenarios and i was in tears every way .
this is on a mutual non fault agreed divorce to.
the only way the pendulum swings is if one partner has problems .

[El Venom]

I know what you mean with the courts. i went threw 2 /12 years and that was even with police reports and reports fom shrinks stating that the mother was a risk to the kids

[Hally]

Keeping a keen eye on this thread....

One thing I didn't mention earlier was this;

Generally the mother of my child is a game player, but I disengage and don't get sucked in. Anyway, earlier in the year she requested to go 'private collect', which I had no choice but to agree to, and as expected the games started.

Things like, ' i need your payment early' ' can you pay two months' and this type of stuff. I rang CSA to plead to go back to them collecting, and guess what, they can only do it on her request!

CPOCSM, I hear your point about CSA staff only doing there job and going by the laws of the land, BUT in reality they are poor performing public servants who in my experience are always rude and inflamatory straight off the bat. I treat them with respect but generally I find them hopeless, and that is where the frustration sets in.

[noosacuda]

CSA are a bunch of moronic,one sided a-hole,nazi gov't department! I pay child support for a son that i don't know where he is,(taken by his mother because she got "a better offer" on the internet)but also i do have a child support debt in NZ for 3 years worth because the moved there for a few months and took my son with out my knowledge OR consent : :

[AGRO]

Don't get me started on this topic!
Never been through it, but have many close mates over the years who have.
The main grip they have is, they don't mind paying the child support (even if it is usually way too rich), but they want to see thier children.
It's not CSA fault, it's the laws fault. The system needs a MAJOR overhall, to keep the best interest in that of the child. At the moment, it does not do this.
A child's best interest isn't giving nearly everything to one partner, nearly always the woman. How does this help the child? It helps the mother more so than the child!
What the child needs is thier parents, both of them, not one with lots of money and assests, and not seeing the other! A balance must be obtained, UNLESS PROVEN claims of abuse or neglect are made.
If either parent accusses the above of the other, this should be proven in a court of law ASAP, and the outcome of visitation rights/custody then decided on the outcome. If a parent falsely accusses the other just for financial gain/custody (which believe me happens very often) and those claims are found to be fabricated/false, then the shoe as to speak, 'should go on the other foot' to the other parent, and the supervised visits reversed for punishment, or goal! If a parent was informed of the consequences of a false accussation up front, a lot of these situations wouldn't turn to .
On final, whoever custody goes to, then the remaining parent should pay CS, despite what gender they are! It should be calculated exactly the same for both male and female. At present, it is NOT. If the woman can dodge paying decent CS because of some crap rule or gender, then this should be the same for a male. From the examples already in this post, and from a few close mates who have custody of thier children, it proves the sexs are NOT TREATED EQUAL.

AGRO out.

[GT0132]

One other thing that I should mention that I think is wrong with the curent situation with asset division is this.

It is accepted that whoever gets the kids has a bigger slice of the assets , including the family home. However once the kids have grown up and left home, shouldn't the person who had custody then pay the balance back to the other parent?, because honestly they don't have child care responsibilities anymore so don't need a 3/4 bedroom home

The way the system now works is that when the kids leave home and the Mother (assuming she's the custodial parent) now has a house all to themselves. Admittedly the father no longer has to pay child support which frees up a lot of his income , but because he only has 10-15 years of working life left, and no cash in the bank, no bank will lend him the money to buy a place of his own so he's stuck living in a rented bed sit for the rest of his life.

It's even worse (or better depending from whos point of view you look at it) if ex wifey has met a new guy on a huge salary with no kids so he's not on the child support merry go round himself.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by GT0132

It is accepted that whoever gets the kids has a bigger slice of the assets , including the family home.

I've wondered this too. If a home is owned by the couple and she retains possession, or alternately if the home is under mortgage and the male is contributing, is he entitled to his share of the asset when the kids mature?

What happens to the title on the house in a divorce? Do both couples retain ownership or have I missed the boat on this??

[GT0132]

Originally Posted by GTP006

I've wondered this too. If a home is owned by the couple and she retains possession, or alternately if the home is under mortgage and the male is contributing, is he entitled to his share of the asset when the kids mature?

What happens to the title on the house in a divorce? Do both couples retain ownership or have I missed the boat on this??

In theory all assets are sold, debts are paid off and whatever cash is left is split according to what the court decides - i.e 35/65 using my example. However it's often more practical for the parties to take assets of similar value rather than sell them.

For example, rather than sell the family home the person who takes it will often payout the other party their share and take over any remaining debt on the property.

In a real life scenario, consider the follwoing

Assets consist of (at market values):

Family Home : $800,000
Husbands car: $30,000
Wifes car : $15,000
Husbands Superannuation : $150,000
Wifes Superannuation : $25,000
Share Portfolio : $60,000
Bank Balance : $5,000

TOTAL ASSETS $1,085,000

Debts

Mortgage on Family Home: $200,000
Loan on Wifes Car : $5,000
Credit Card Debts: $10,000

TOTAL DEBT $215,000

NET ASSETS $870,000

The court awards me 35% of the net assets , so I get 35% of $870,000 being $304,500 - she gets $565,500

The house is worth $800k but there is a mortgage of $200k on it, so the net equity my wife and I have in the house is $600k.

I can take the house but since I'm only allowed assets valued at $304,500 I'll have to take out a loan to pay her $295,500 being the difference between the $600k equity in the house and my divorce settlement amount. I'd also be required to take over the mortgage of $200k or otherwise refinance it. The amount of debt required makes it more practical to just let the wife have it and for her to pay the husband a nominal amount of money in settlement -. he gets to keep his super and also gets to keep his car but gets a smaller share of the house.

The other debts would be paid off by raising cash through selling some of the other assets (except the superannuation) and using the $5k bank balance. I'd be required to assign my super over to her and also the shares if they were in my name

If I wanted to keep my car I'd have to take out a loan for $30k and pay that amount to my ex wife

The huge amount of debt required for the husband to take the house makes it more practical to just let the wife have it and for her to pay the husband a nominal amount of money in settlement -. he gets to keep his super and also gets to keep his car but gets a smaller share of the house.

[IDT]

Originally Posted by CPOCSM

Talk to your CSA case officers civilly and like a human being and you will be better off. I am not saying any of this as a smart **** but as a person who knows and also as a person has obligations to support my children from a previous relationship. I was put thru the wringer when I divorced but I now have the wisdom and the strength in the knowledge that I now know how the system works. I hate the fact I am paying $15000 a year - but I have to do it. Just be thankful you dont live in the US - they (the courts) can make you take a loan out to pay the primary caregiver out on half of your superannuation...food for thought if you had to take out a $500000 loan like I would have had to do... :evil3:

I peeves me off when people say "consider yourself lucky you don't live in place (A). Who gives a rats what they do in place (A). In some places the guy can just say you are divorced three times and its over and done with. In other they just beat the woman into submission. We don't live in any of those places we live here! As for talk to your case officer civilly Pffft what a joke. Don't speak to them at all do everything in writing or through a sloicitor if you can help it.

[cool65]

Seen alot of running away over last 6 years in transport. Drivers come and start and 4-6 months later when CSA catches up to where they are working and deductions are about to start coming out - poof -off they go to another company to get out of payment to the ex
very common in interstate transport game (because they chose this career they are away long periods and the misses does the dirty - they feel this is payback but it's the kids who miss out)

[GT0132]

Originally Posted by cool65

- they feel this is payback but it's the kids who miss out)

Totally agree there and that's why it's good to keep things civil with your ex if you can. The kids cant' be made to suffer just because us grown ups can't get it right

[Interceptor]

just my side of this..... parents got divorced in 1991 when i was 10, very messy times in court untill at my request, i ended up living with my dad

mum refused to pay child support and went to the extent of doing purely voluntary work and even telling me that she'd go to jail before paying a cent

funny how she managed to get a job not too long after i turned 18......

[CPOCSM]

Originally Posted by Interceptor

just my side of this..... parents got divorced in 1991 when i was 10, very messy times in court untill at my request, i ended up living with my dad

mum refused to pay child support and went to the extent of doing purely voluntary work and even telling me that she'd go to jail before paying a cent

funny how she managed to get a job not too long after i turned 18......

If this is the case - wait until she gets a job and the debt will be waiting for her at the other end - I have a good friend who was stupid and too cash for his job. He divorced his missus 25 years ago - got a nice government job and was slugged with a $45000 debt from CSA - you cannot escape

Yes WA - I am glad I live here!

To all - I am out of this debate - do as you see fit but remember you are the ones that have to decide what to do - this info is from the horses mouth and take it with a pinch of salt...nuff said!

****ed an amazed!

[Jesk]

I'm sooo glad there wasnt any kids when the missus and I split, not the financial thing, though that would be pretty hard too, but no kid deserves to go through the crap-storm

[OLDFORDNUT]

The lowest form of Human is the one who uses their child as a pawn in their power game, sure you might hate each others guts but you should never put the weight on any childs shoulders ,like wise you should always take the screaming arguments away from the kids.
I've seen the results first hand ,my girls are 26 and 28 years old now and i can see how my ex's screaming rants and violence in front of them when they were in their early teens has affected them in later life,It comes out in too many ways to explain but believe me i look and listen to them sometimes and want to go away and cry,
even though i always tried to shield them from my ex wife's fits of rage i know now it did not help much,My oldest daughter is a good mum(better than her own was)but she has been left with some strange ideas when she gets angry with her children(my Grandkids.)

[snap]

How can we organise a open letter to the government and put it on the internet and get people to sign if they wish. Then send it on to the officials and see what happens.
I have just found out the boy is mine from the DNA mob and I do not know what he looks like, he does not know his grandparents or me. There has never been any violence of any kind between me and the mother yet I am not able to know where he lives (interstate) and I am expected to support him??? It is unbelievable how I have no rights. It is totally unacceptable the boy has no contact with his biological father.
I cannot afford to go to a solicitor anymore as I have drained my savings just to find out he is my boy. Totally confused and upset. No one will help you unless you are willing to part with thousands of dollars which I no longer have.

[Scott]

http://www.legalaid.qld.gov.au/

[J_Tank]

Contractor told me a joke the other day,Q: How do you save 10 years? A: Buy a house and give it to someone you hate. In all seriousness best of luck to all those in the situations mentioned above. So many of my friends are in a simlar position to those posted above, here's to the children involved getting the best deal they can get.

[Hardtop]

Sorry to sound harsh, but there's a lesson to be learnt here kiddies,

Dont wanna be shafted by the CSA? keep it in your pants.

OR

Never leave your partner once you've had kids,

then you'll have more money for petrol

but seriously, if you decide to have kids, you should pay for em when it goes titts up

[Bucknaked]

Originally Posted by J_Tank

here's to the children involved getting the best deal they can get.

That's a little harsh.

I don't think children get to choose anything. They are the ones stuck in the middle of relationship breakups.

[BIGJB]

DIDS

This statement is directly from the above site.

While you read this and view this image, a man somewhere is about to throw a rope around the beam in his shed, another is attaching a hosepipe from his exhaust to the window of his car and yet another is about to turn his wheel into the path of an oncoming semi-trailer.

5 males suicide in this country every day.

Whatever the reason, it's too many. If 5 whales beached themselves on Bondi Beach it would be front page news, broadcast all over the world, enormous money, effort and resources would be utilized in trying to save them.

Yet we lose 5 males a day in this country and we seem to accept that.

I cannot, and that's why I started Dads in Distress.....

Tony Miller Founder Dids


I urge any father out there that is a his wits end with it all
to contact these people. They have a lot of knowledge when it
comes to family law and just may be able to help you.

[BIGJB]

I should also add that these guys were fantastic to me in my time of need.
If it weren't for them and their advice I would've never seen my kids and
that goes for a few of my mates too who have been helped along the way by these guys.