Nieder and Nieder (Child support)

[2018] AATA 5058

Nieder and Nieder (Child support) [2018] AATA 5058 (28 November 2018)

DIVISION:Social Services & Child Support Division

REVIEW NUMBER:  2018/BC014905

APPLICANT:  Miss Nieder

OTHER PARTIES:  Child Support Registrar

Mr Nieder

TRIBUNAL:Member S Letch

DECISION DATE:  28 November 2018

DECISION:

The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution, decides that [Child 1] is to be recorded in Miss Nieder’s 100% care from 28 March 2018.

CATCHWORDS

CHILD SUPPORT – percentage of care – child resumed living with parent - decision under review set aside and substituted

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

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Miss Nieder and Mr Nieder are the parents of [Child 1], born 2001. This case is about how her care should be recorded from 28 March 2018, when Miss Nieder made an application for a child support assessment (the previous assessment had been terminated in October 2017 following [Child 1] commencing to live with her boyfriend).

2. Miss Nieder advised the Child Support Agency (CSA) that [Child 1] was no longer living with her boyfriend and had returned to her 100% care, and was attending school. The CSA decided on 18 April 2018 to record [Child 1] as being in Miss Nieder’s 100% care; on Mr Nieder’s objection, it was decided on 9 August 2018 to record care as 0% to each parent at the time of the fresh application for child support.

3. Miss Nieder applied to the Tribunal for review on 28 August 2018. The Tribunal conducted a hearing on 28 November 2018; Miss Nieder and Mr Nieder participated by conference telephone and gave sworn evidence.

4. Following the hearing, Miss Nieder supplied to the Tribunal a letter from [School 1]dated 24 August 2018 in which the Senior Deputy Principal confirms [Child 1]’s enrolment and that [Child 1] resides with Miss Nieder.

5. Mr Nieder indicated to the Tribunal that if Miss Nieder did have care of [Child 1], he did not object to [Child 1] being recorded in Miss Nieder’s 100% care.  He told the Tribunal that his issue is that he has been unable to verify [Child 1]’s situation; he does not have contact with [Child 1].

6. The Tribunal found Miss Nieder a credible and straightforward witness. Her care of [Child 1] is corroborated by the letter from the school.

7. The Tribunal is satisfied on the evidence that [Child 1] should be recorded as being in Miss Nieder’s 100% care from 28 March 2018. The objection decision will be set aside.

DECISION

The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and, in substitution, decides that [Child 1] is to be recorded in Miss Nieder’s 100% care from 28 March 2018.