This was posted in the comments but needs to be on the front page!

Anonymous said...
A message for MikeT and overcsaWe sense a pattern in the thread about payment of child support beyondthe age of 18.First Mike makes the usual assumptions 1. The mother is the payee. Wrong! She is the payer!2. The injustice was done to the payer. Wrong again! The injustice wasdone to the payee as it most often is!The thing is, this case just shows yet again that CSA is in fact veryreluctant to create a debt for the payer, even where they have lied about their income, and the injustice overcsa complains of is a very commonoccurrence for payees.Second, nobody notices and corrects him because it is not the party lineto admit payees get a hard time too and that CSA bends over backwards for the payer.Mike even said that CSA is likely to ask the payee to agree to dismissthe arrears. That is what often happens, but nobody bothered to pointout they do that in the interests of the payer, not the payee or the children. Oops, can’t let on that a payee has not had justice. That is just not the image FLWG wants to project at all!!Lucky debraesq eventually weighed in with yet another example of thepayer getting preferential treatment over the payee. Still no commentfrom the ususal ‘dads/payers as the only victims’ players, but at leastthe story was not deleted.The real tragedy comes in Mike’s advice to overcsa – he keeps on and onabout the application not being signed by both parties.Again, nobody notices his error or corrects him. Shame really! Mike iswell meaning, speaks very respectfully of his ex despite the FLWGculture but he often gets the details wrong and always assumes the payergets the raw end of the deal.For the record, so others will not be inconvenienced by this very pooradvice, here is what the CSA actually said An application to extend the child support assessment (made orally or inwriting) should include:• the name of the child; • the name of the school or college; • whether the child receives full-time secondary education; • the last day of secondary school for that year; and • if the application relates to a child support agreement, theapplication must be in writing and signed by both parents. The application only needs to signed by both parents if there is acurrent child support agreement in place.Come on!Look again!Overcsa did not say there is a current child support agreement in place.Even the usually pedantic bigred missed that one.Overcsa, it is a pity you characterised payees as ‘riding the wave ofwealth in the guise of parenting’. Sure you only meant the one inquestion, but you should know by now what dad’s army does with thosekinds of comments. You want justice for when your partner was a payee and for now when he is payer?Well then, play nicely!We might have steered you in the right direction if you had played nicely.Instead, just a few hints.Forget the blah blah blah about the signature unless there was a childsupport agreement – it is irrelevant.Think about private schools versus state schools, final assemblies etc.Think about why you did not object when you got the notification in August.Forget compensation. It is another red herring if you did not object on time.Could be you can do something with those.Could be you blew it.As for Mike, will someone please back him up! How about checking what he says very carefully instead of just running with it.
November 2, 2008 1:56 AM