You are here:   Forums
Register   |  Login

Welcome to the Crimes Against Fathers Forums

ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...Another fixable disaster upon families Tue 15/02/2011 23:46Another fixable disaster upon families Tue 15/02/2011 23:46
Previous Previous
Next Next
New Post
 2/27/2011 12:18 AM

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Kennedy []
Sent: 15 February 2011 23:46
To:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; senator.O’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; Yvette.D’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; Brendan.O’; ken.o’;; deborah.o’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Cc: snipped
Subject: Another fixable disaster upon families

Dear Senators and MHR’s one and all     


This is a new complaint about another government agency requiring your most serious attention because it is the appellate body to child support agency not performing its duties as was set out by The Legislature.  Instead it seems ignorant of its formal duties of reviewing ‘all’ that CSA is required to do and is simply in most cases only ‘rubber stamping’ what CSA has done.  Obsessively ‘overcharging’ male child support payers and also ignoring female child support payers.  Please read and comprehend the seriousness of the attached complaint.  Both by simultaneously failing create a complete destruction of the best legislation and strongest case facts.

Regarding CSA I seem to have achieved the impossible and far more than politicians to have ever achieved an internal investigation of CSA on the matters listed below for your information is only half of others yet to be detailed and investigated. Of which I am an active component of establishing the format of the investigation.  As you have been previously advised by me the problem is not in the legislation but n the minds of the staff conducting the case administration.  Their minds drifting from lawful duties instead onto ensuring ‘women’ and ‘CSA’ and ‘SSAT’ always win over fathers – IRESPECTIVE OF BOTH THE LEGISLATION AND THE FAMILY CASE FACTS. – Is hidden upon case files behind ‘confidentiality’ and ‘suppression orders’ over each individual case.  A fraud and sham within Government service deliveries.

Similarly the void too is in the appellate body of SSAT that effectively negates the legislation as The Legislature intended to apply to citizens parents.  You are urged to inspire an inquiry into both of these agencies to return them to the good legislation provided by The legislature to be properly related to the parents case facts of which some of these details are exposed below and within the attached complaint to the ‘watchdog’ agencies.

You are strongly urged to instigate a most searching ‘government’ inquiry that must lift suppression orders so that the evidences against wayward Government officers can be found to properly prove identify identities and rectify the causes of ‘overcharging’. Please fix and reduce the consequential suicides of “overcharged’ child support payers


Robert E Kennedy          Coordinator        NT Office Status of Family, PO Box 988 Palmerston, NT 0831       Phone 08 893 3339


Some of the step by step ADMINISRATIVE failings of ‘due process’ by CSA and SSAT case officers and panelists that negates the intentions of The Legislature.  An extract form my discussions with CSA follows and its same points are for each Honourable Member and Senator to note as a duty to have The Public Service be ‘fact’ and ‘law compliant on all matters at all times so as to deliver what The Legislature intended.  Please inform yourself and fix for the citizens you represent.

As I have indicated we will continually revisit previous matters to add more detail and develop a better comprehension of both ‘lawful’ and ‘unlawful’ due process before adding in their specific evidences and case and officer identities.  Here on the proforma 6A application

  • The 6A proforma document is essential as the ‘initiating’ or ‘source’ document that that ‘legally’ commences a ‘due process’.
  • Some completed forms have  never been supplied to the payer and seem to have never existed
  • When they do not exist no lawful due process can commence.
  • In instances where they do not exist and due process has begun the process is for the said reasons wholly unlawful.
  • Some supplied are so inadequate as to fail the ‘qualification’ criteria of a lawful application.
  • Some supplied are intentionally false and misleading are not being rejected but are being used as the case officers ‘alleged’ investigation.  Where the false claims of the mother are simply quoted back ‘falsely’ to the father as ‘the case facts’ of an alleged CSA impartial investigation
  • In instances where an unlawful due process has been commenced it is as an unlawful  thereafter remaining only as a ‘favour’ to the applicant mother
  • Many appeals to SSAT commence without the 6A source document thus SSAT is condoning the wrongs of CSA and not upholding their duties to review the case {viz ‘audit} that CSA has complied to all legal points.
  • The villinary of SSAT is to proceed with proceedings although they have no legal beginning being completely uninterested in the legality of due process but obsessed with reaching the point of the fathers business and income.  Irrespective of it being under family law also a family asset and income also of the applicant mother.
  • Of special note here is why CSA and SSAT are not it make determinations whiles parents are in family law litigation but misandry ‘staff’ overzealousness prevails over officers ‘ government’ adjudication responsibilities driving ‘unlawful processing’..
  • In some cases where this source document has not been supplied to the respondent payer CSA has admitted it existence but refused to supply a copy save through Freedom of Information where most of the information would be removed.
  • The other parent is lawfully to receive a copy to be able to answer the claims of the other applicant parent and it is unlawful if they don’t and are treated as an ‘outsider’
  • Such 6A applications submitted and withheld by CSA to the other parent is an unlawful conduct intended to cause the respondent disadvantage by not ever seeing the initiating claim.
  • Thus being forced to ‘trust’ whatever CSA ‘alleges’ known often to be intentionally untruthful and misleading places the respondent in a disadvantaged situation  as set out herein..

Both CSA and SSAT indulge in these malpractices

  • Allegedly to ‘protect’ private information of the applicant mother such as her abode
  • Seldom is this a fact because both parent know where each lives and is often an address where children are exchanged’
  • If privacy is the issue these information’s could be blanked out but this is not what the CSA officers want.  They do not want their own and their colleagues misconducts revealed and so they unlawfully withhold the document revealing these evidences.
  • This malpractice turns both CSA and SSAT into ‘star’ secret chambers not a feature intended by The Legislature.
  • By this malpractice it is the ‘wrongful’ staff of these agencies who are ‘protected’ by such secrecy and withholding of ‘evidential’ material.

This again is only an insight to the greater ‘wormhole’ administration devised within and between  CSA and SSAT until ‘due process’ as intended by The Legislature no longer exist as the effective due process.  Reiterating again that due process cannot be understood simply off the face of the child support assessment legislation without incorporating Officers compliances and all other ‘interlocutory’ legislation and unique ‘interlocking’ due processes of earning income that then forms the CSA due process.

Child support legislation does not and cannot deny payer citizens their universal right of how they earn income comes before all and set parameters of CSA due process being ignored by CSA case officers including Registrars of the past and Senior Offices of the present administration.  Again this still and only refers to part of the whole basis of discussion and remedy.        

CSA should of its own accord make complaint against the failure of SSAT to perform its duties properly that would by returning ‘wrong’ dictions alert CSA to these now CSA Office ‘serial’ and ‘copycat’ failures.

Regards Robert Kennedy

 CSA and SSAT complaint multiple 2 150211.doc
Previous Previous
Next Next
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...Another fixable disaster upon families Tue 15/02/2011 23:46Another fixable disaster upon families Tue 15/02/2011 23:46