Closed Thread
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 103
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    245
    Reviews
    0
    When a NCP has a certain level of visitation with a child, then the CP chooses to move away, thus lessening the contact the NCP has with the child, the NCP should NOT have to pay more because they are now having less contact with the child.

    Talk about adding insult to injury - sorry sir, you don't get to we your kid anymore, and by the way, that'll cost you a bit more because you're not seeing your kid anymore.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Fox in Sox For This Useful Post:

    Lovemyfam  (31-01-2012)

  3. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    245
    Reviews
    0
    AND, if a payer underpays, they have to catch up at the end of the year, or whenever CSA reconcile it. Totally agree with that.

    BUT, if the payer overpays, too bad, so sad.

    Ridiculous double-standard.

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    8,794
    Thanks
    3,395
    Thanked
    3,081
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fox in Sox View Post
    When a NCP has a certain level of visitation with a child, then the CP chooses to move away, thus lessening the contact the NCP has with the child, the NCP should NOT have to pay more because they are now having less contact with the child.

    Talk about adding insult to injury - sorry sir, you don't get to we your kid anymore, and by the way, that'll cost you a bit more because you're not seeing your kid anymore.
    Sorry, but this is what I meant. Money should not be taken from YOUR child (or HIS child) on the basis of visitation. Not at all. When that mentality changes, things will improve.

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to share a book For This Useful Post:

    naebie  (31-01-2012),SassyMummy  (31-01-2012)

  6. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    8,794
    Thanks
    3,395
    Thanked
    3,081
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fox in Sox View Post
    AND, if a payer underpays, they have to catch up at the end of the year, or whenever CSA reconcile it. Totally agree with that.

    BUT, if the payer overpays, too bad, so sad.

    Ridiculous double-standard.
    I was overpaid 86c one financial year, it was taken from my tax. I received less than $10/month.

  7. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    65
    Thanks
    209
    Thanked
    67
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Fox in Sox View Post
    When a NCP has a certain level of visitation with a child, then the CP chooses to move away, thus lessening the contact the NCP has with the child, the NCP should NOT have to pay more because they are now having less contact with the child.

    Talk about adding insult to injury - sorry sir, you don't get to we your kid anymore, and by the way, that'll cost you a bit more because you're not seeing your kid anymore.

    But this is a contact issue and needs mediated or whatever. Has nothing to do with what the child should recieve in support.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to T 800 For This Useful Post:

    SassyMummy  (31-01-2012)

  9. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    245
    Reviews
    0
    AND mandatory DNA testing before CS can be claimed, to prove paternity. Not only if it's a requested, I mean every single case.

    While this is not our case, as my DH is confident he Is the biological father of his children, I believe there are probably many payers pay g for children who are not biologically theirs. I know that this would cause a lot of unrest in families, and children would most likely be the losers in this, so perhaps it's actually a crap idea. But something has to change to ensure this doesn't continue.


    Ok, I'll stop now

  10. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,115
    Thanks
    748
    Thanked
    458
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I would have liked it if my father paid...
    My mum could have done with that little bit of money...
    We went private to make it easier for him - one lousy payment... So back to CSA...
    He paid my mum $5k and asked for the $11k debt to be wiped. I said to her to tell the CSA "no effing way". Sorry, but no...
    I refused to see him after the age of 12, but he is still expected to pay and so he should. (there are reasons to why the visits stop, if you really must know - ask, but I won't share on an open forum.)

    I feel so hurt for my aunt. She gets $6 a week for her 4 kids from their "father" yet he buys new car, goes on frequent holidays... that's not fair!

  11. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,848
    Thanks
    6,202
    Thanked
    16,895
    Reviews
    10
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by sunnyflower View Post
    Harsher penalties for men that refuse to pay or do dodgy things to get out of paying child support.

    These men and women do it because they get away with it. Personally I am owed about 16000 currently. Am not holding my breath.
    Agreed. I would like to see the seizing of non essential assets by CSA (like cars, boats motorbikes, but not a house or furniture) for deliquent payers. I'm not talking about a man that dutifully pays his CS has an accident and is living off nothing with his parents while recovering. I'm talking about those that have a steady income and who owe thousands. Garnishing is limited, most just chuck the job in and find another and CSA has to chase them to find the new employer.

    and deliberately increasing debts by borrowing money for assets to reduce payments should not be on. I know a few women that have literally starved so their child ate bc the ex didn't pay CS. All the while he had gone out and got a loan for a 50k car then had the audacity to deman a re assessment (and reduction of CS) bc he has more outgoing expenses. Too bad, if you can't afford a SS commodore and pay for your child don't buy it! Just as the mothers have to live within their means so should the fathers.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    Gandalf  (31-01-2012),MissMuppet  (31-01-2012)

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    245
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by share a book View Post
    Sorry, but this is what I meant. Money should not be taken from YOUR child (or HIS child) on the basis of visitation. Not at all. When that mentality changes, things will improve.
    I absolutely get your point, I do.

    But surely if visitation changes because the payer moves so far away that they payee can't see the child any more, he should not be penalized?

    The payee has chosen to move interstate and take the child so why should she also gain financially from that?
    Last edited by Fox in Sox; 31-01-2012 at 20:16.

  14. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    131
    Thanked
    245
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by share a book View Post
    I was overpaid 86c one financial year, it was taken from my tax. I received less than $10/month.
    Ok, sounds like that's something which has changed then.

    CSA told me in a conversation about 2 years ago that if we (as the payer) overpaid, it would not be returned to us.

    And $10 a month is an absolute insult to see mine trying to raise a child.

    I also agree that the minimum should be increased.


 
Closed Thread
Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. **spin off** Things your partner has said or done that you've loved.
    By Gonnabemum in forum Issues with Family Members
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 03-06-2012, 19:57
  2. Spin off: Things you have said that haunt you
    By Guest1234 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-06-2012, 03:39
  3. *Spin off* Would you change your child's name spelling?
    By Happy2be3 in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 22-04-2012, 12:00

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Riverton Leisureplex
An Extreme Family Pass at Riverton Leisureplex is the ultimate way to cool off during the summer school holidays. The $30 Pass allows pool and waterslide access for 2 adults and 2 children, as well as a drink, popcorn and an icy pole for each person.
sales & new stuffsee all
Wendys Music School Melbourne
Wondering about Music Lessons? FREE 30 minute ASSESSMENT. Find out if your child is ready! Piano from age 3 years & Guitar, Singing, Drums, Violin from age 5. Lessons available for all ages. 35+ years experience. Structured program.
Use referral 'bubhub' when booking
featured supporter
Tribalance
TriBalance is a physio, yoga & pilates studio in Brisbane's inner north, offering specialised women's health physiotherapy services. Weekly pregnancy yoga classes are scheduled at the studio on Thursdays 1- 2pm and Saturdays 1-2:15pm.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!