Ledwith and Child Support Registrar (Child support)

[2020] AATA 1483

Ledwith and Child Support Registrar (Child support) [2020] AATA 1483 (10 March 2020)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2020/MC018344

APPLICANT:  Mr Ledwith

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar

TRIBUNAL:Member S Letch

DECISION DATE:  10 March 2020

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – dismissal of application for review - particulars of the administrative assessment – care percentage decision – application for review is frivolous and lacks substance - application for review dismissed

Names used in all published decisions are pseudonyms. Any references appearing in square brackets indicate that information has been removed from this decision and replaced with generic information so as not to identify involved individuals as required by subsections 16(2AB)-16(2AC) of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988.

DISMISSAL OF APPLICATION:

1. On 5 February 2020, Mr Ledwith applied to the Tribunal for review of an objection decision dated 25 January 2020 which disallowed his objection to a care percentage decision. In part, that decision recorded the following:

   Mr Ledwith objected to the decision on the grounds that the assessment should reflect 50% care to him and 50% care to [Ms A] for [Child 1] and [Child 2] as there are court orders stating both parents have 50% care.

   Mr Ledwith was advised the system would default to 51% care and 49% care to the parents when the care was shared equally for the children. He was also advised this would not affect the cost percentages for the assessment and the system would not reflect 50% care each to both parents.

   Therefore, we affirm the decision made on 23 July 2019 to reflect 51% care to [Ms A] and 49% care to Mr Ledwith for [Child 1] and [Child 2].

2. In an email from the Child Support Agency (CSA) to the Tribunal dated 3 March 2020, an officer of that agency advised the following:

   As discussed, I checked the care records for this case, and for both children, we have already checked the ‘care reported as 50 percent’ box, to show that we are aware that the effective care level is 50% for each parent. 

   Unfortunately, this can only partly override Cuba’s default result of 51% / 49%, as splitting 365 nights between two parents will always result in one parent having 183 nights (51% care),  and the other having 182 nights (49% care). 

   Even though we have recorded the care as ultimately being reported as 50% each, parts of the assessment notices and letters generated by the system may still refer to 51% / 49% care, and this is unavoidable.

   As you…are already aware, this makes no difference to the assessment calculations results, as regardless of which parent is shown as having 51% care, BOTH of them will receive the same cost percentage of 50%.

   For example, the payer and payee cost percentages at the bottom of the Assessment details screen shots on pages 54; 55 and 58 show both parents

   as having the same cost percentage of 50% for each child.

   Also, the care screen shots on page 52 should have shown the ‘care reported as 50%’ button as ticked for both children, and that the care percentage of 50% is applicable to both parents, despite the default 51% / 49%. 

   However, the individual care period for each child was not highlighted before the screen shot picture was taken,  so those full care details are not visible in the current version of page 52 that has been sent to the parties and to the AAT.

   I have attached for your information an informal corrected version of that page 52 (with circles showing the location of this crucial information), and I have asked an SSO to arrange for a formal corrected version of this page to be sent to the parties and to the AAT.

3. This is a widely known problem. The Tribunal can only speculate why the CSA has not remedied what amounts to a “display problem” in its computer systems. Presumably, there are higher priorities. However, the Tribunal is satisfied that care has been recorded by the CSA as 50% to the applicant and 50% the other party, and that the child support assessment has been properly calculated.

4. The Tribunal understands why the applicant finds this situation unsatisfactory. However, there is nothing to be gained by this matter proceeding. The application has no prospects for success in any practical sense; the applicant cannot secure a better result in terms of the child support assessment. In a strictly legal sense, it is frivolous and lacks substance.

5. The Tribunal is satisfied that the application should be dismissed pursuant to subsection 42B(1) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.