Child Support Question, need some knowledge or imput!

[subaruforestermum]

This person I know has 2 kids one is 8 and one is 17, 2 different mothers, living with neither of them.

The 17 year old is working full time earning an adult wage, NOT studying but still living at home. Living in Victoria with the mother!

The 8 year old, this person has every weekend, or every second weekend. Shared care. As he lives close by!

No even though they have shared care, the mother still claims FULL Tax Benefit A, and is the only one to get the FULL AMOUNT of the government bonus, yet still gets FULL child support payments.

So my question is, why does he still have to pay child support for a child earning MORE than him and not studying??

And why is he not entitled to part of the FTB-A even though they have shared care???

When I was younger, my mum got some CS then when I started working it stopped, then when I went back to study it started again....

But many phone calls have been made, and CS say that until the child leaves home child support still has to be paid for that child! ? ! ? ! why?????

[BreakfastatTiffanys]

Not sure but it is crazy isn't it.

When my dss was 16 he was bringing home $1200 a week.
His mum was charging him $200 board and was still claiming full family tax and child support, all legally I might add.

Not much help, just letting you know that I know how frustrating this can be.

[PunkyDiva]

This site may help with all the changes to child support.

http://www.csa.gov.au/schemereforms/questions.aspx

Child support is paid until the child turns 18, then if still at school they must apply to court for continuation.

[WorkingClassMum]

The mother could pay it back - my step-father was caught in a similar boat when his 16yo son got an apprenticship and his 17yo daughter was working, but still had to pay CS.

His ex-wife started giving it back after 6 months 'cos she and both kids were working

I think Centrelink has it's head up its %$%^ sometimes

[subaruforestermum]

I dont understand that this older child is working, earning MORE than his father, and yet the father still has to pay the mother (who also works) CS! And also pays for flights for holidays and stuff...

It just doesnt seem right to me.... And it's not even me in the situation!

[sam's mum]

I think Centrelink has it's head up its %$%^ sometimes

sorry, I am just not sure what this has to do with Centrelink?

It isn't even anything to do with the Child Support Agency who actually administer the law.

The government actually makes the law, not the department. the person that you are talking to on the phone might even agree with you, but they can't tell you that. They are paid to deliver the law, they don't get to have an opinion during work hours.

[flick82]

The 8 year old, this person has every weekend, or every second weekend. Shared care. As he lives close by!

No even though they have shared care, the mother still claims FULL Tax Benefit A, and is the only one to get the FULL AMOUNT of the government bonus, yet still gets FULL child support payments.

And why is he not entitled to part of the FTB-A even though they have shared care???

Here is the factsheet for ftb, and the number of nights that need to be in the other parents care before ftb gets split. This needs to be taken up with centrelink, best to give them a call to update details.

As for childsupport, DF had 50/50 care and we were told as its shared care and he earns more than her he has to pay childsupport (the only way to change this is for us to get sole care) as it cost the same for each of them to bring up the child, even tho he only has to pay her $40 a month.

[missie_mack]

When I was younger, my mum got some CS then when I started working it stopped, then when I went back to study it started again....

Only because your mother agreed for this to happen the law has always been that you were responsible to make payments until the child is 18, the death of the payer or the child or until the child no longer resides with parent receiving benefit, which ever comes first. Remembering that any child support agreements made pre 1988 were all court orders and the only way the financial amount could be reduced without mutual agreement was in court.

I dont understand that this older child is working, earning MORE than his father, and yet the father still has to pay the mother (who also works) CS! And also pays for flights for holidays and stuff...

It just doesnt seem right to me.... And it's not even me in the situation!

If the child is living at home with its mother she would still wear some financial burden for the cost of raising the child. Why should the paying parent (whether it be mother or father) get out of the financial responsibility because they were fortunate enough to have a child that got a job before they were 18 If the child was completely independent financially of its parents he wouldn't be required to pay anything, but as it is this isn't the case.

Either way if the child is 17 he won't have to pay child support for much longer and in the meantime he is giving his child a wonderful headstart which he cannot/won't give him physically for whatever reason (I think you said distance?)

[subaruforestermum]

Only because your mother agreed for this to happen the law has always been that you were responsible to make payments until the child is 18, the death of the payer or the child or until the child no longer resides with parent receiving benefit, which ever comes first. Remembering that any child support agreements made pre 1988 were all court orders and the only way the financial amount could be reduced without mutual agreement was in court.

Umm NO she didnt agree to it....

If the child is living at home with its mother she would still wear some financial burden for the cost of raising the child. Why should the paying parent (whether it be mother or father) get out of the financial responsibility because they were fortunate enough to have a child that got a job before they were 18 If the child was completely independent financially of its parents he wouldn't be required to pay anything, but as it is this isn't the case.

Either way if the child is 17 he won't have to pay child support for much longer and in the meantime he is giving his child a wonderful headstart which he cannot/won't give him physically for whatever reason (I think you said distance?)

The child pays for everything himself, the mother refuses to pay for things for him, so she is not carrying the costs of raising this child, as she refuses to due to the fact he works and earns his own money!!! The kid earns more than the father... I dont get how it's fair to be honest!

[missie_mack]

Umm NO she didnt agree to it....

The child pays for everything himself, the mother refuses to pay for things for him, so she is not carrying the costs of raising this child, as she refuses to due to the fact he works and earns his own money!!! The kid earns more than the father... I dont get how it's fair to be honest!

Well all I can say is either your father just refused to pay it or it was taken to court. The expectation for a non custodial parent to pay child support until the child was 18 have been around long before the Child Support Agency got off its feet and those on the older style weren't required to go over to CSA it was voluntary.

How much child support are we talking anyhow if a 17 year old has a higher income than he does I think most people would be suprised at the cost of having a child in the home EVEN if your not feeding them! I had my younger brother live with me for a few years and was stunned at how much my bills reduced when he left and thats just electricity, water and toilet paper (lol ) Just the cost of water, electricity, rates/rent, home insurance (which also covered his items), wear and tear on your appliances, was easily in excess of $200 a week and thats not considering food or telephone line rental (just for incoming calls) possible internet and that was the 90's. Teenage boys cost a fortune!