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...CSA dishonesty about its unlawfulness and unwillingnest to deal with complaintsCSA dishonesty about its unlawfulness and unwillingnest to deal with complaints
Previous Previous
Next Next
New Post
 3/18/2013 11:59 PM

-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: 05 December 2012 20:30
To:;;;;;;;;;;; senator.O’;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Cc: NT News Conor Byrne; Ombudsama CW; Parkinson
Subject: CSA dishonesty about its unlawfulness and unwillingnest to deal with complaints

Kevin –[] now that you have told us by media release what CSA Commonwealth Officers ARE SUPPOSED TO DO  why do you not now ensure that is what they actually do during the ‘confidentiality’ of case administration?  And that the Stakeholder Director allows such reports about Officer failures to be submitted vial the Stakeholders purpose for its two way existence?  Such is the way CSA from highest levels torpedo complaints against CSA.


Be advised Kevin [] I uphold that Australia has worlds best child support legislation and service delivery system.  But from a long and wide spectrum of my direct experience over years and many cases it is rarely used – and as rarely seen by Payers and Citizens - by its Commonwealth Officers whose their first duties to The Commonwealth and its Citizens is too prevent fraud.  Whereby instead CSA ‘payers’ are duped leastwise at case and senior and objection officer levels who ‘administer’ and make official case by case ‘determinations’ by instead by officer forcefulness and ambush and combatancy to ‘mislead’ and substitute ‘the feminist template’ for the legislated ‘template’ of The Legislature.  I uphold the law when dealing with my clients to a degree if CSA did likewise the system would be working to law and impartially for all family members and cause a most dramatic drop in complaints to and about CSA and SSAT and better corporate images..


Kevin [] it seems CSA and SSAT have for so long been working to the feminist’s template that changing replacement staff is neither are any longer a resource of any knowledge of  template of The Legislature and CSA and SSAT Officers no longer remain loyal Commonwealth Officers to The Commonwealth except to the ideology of feminism so that ‘women win’.  Kevin [] go to the ‘in confidence’ pages of files and check back on the ‘actual’ and not ‘alleged’ family facts and see the clear ‘evidences’ of how case officers tamper with evidences so as to achieve ‘women win’.  That has been the basis of many complaints that CSA will not respond to except to only alleged they have complied even in the face of evidence to the contrary has been provided to CSA they still holdfast to the feminists template only.  CSA and SSAT are regularly and serially misleading Parliament to be instead delivering feminist ideology determinations of ‘women win’ thus are stereotyping father as liars and false reporters when the false claimant is the mother being concealed by CSA and SSAT Commonwealth Officers assisting her in her fraudulent claim and each unlawfully blaming the fathers as a decoy to their fraud.


By CSA using false claims mostly upon change of assessment 6A reason 8 applications that are not investigated by CSA on facts already to hand to CSA and SSAT but instead simply substitute their misandary solely male blame’ feminist template allegedly as their own ‘CSA investigation’ of the family facts.  So it becomes irrefutable that ‘women win’ irrespective of what the father and overall family facts really are. In most cases there are no factual or legal grounds in 6A applications for CSA to lawfully change father payers off Taxable Income Assessment on to Administrative Assessment.  CSA Officers make the change for the reasons set out in part herein but mainly  because they believe the have unfettered freedom to ‘make it up’ but legislation does not permit then such a freedom they take as in s117 ‘capacity to earn’.  A subject on its own of the principle for of overcharging/


 Is Commonwealth Officers behaving contrary to their employment by ILLEGALLY ASSISTING a particular class of female citizen COMMITTING A FRAUD against The Commonwealth (a) against their employer The Commonwealth Government (b) and against  the father payer {by being overcharged} (c) and The Commonwealth again by using Commonwealth property {its systems} to make a fraudulent transfer {of the overcharge} (c) and transferring it to a citizen not lawfully entitled to the ‘overcharged’ amount. 


 These Commonwealth Offices misdeeds as herein are prosecutable under Public Service Code of Conduct and Crimes Act Commonwealth 1913.  PLEASE FIX as you lawful daily duty before a citizens prosecution is forced to be initiated against The Commonwealth Government and Department head as second respondent and Kevin [] as third respondent.  There is also an action of Mandamus application to the High Court to make Commonwealth Officers carry out their duties they refuse to do.  PLEASE FIX.  Of course it is every Politicians daily duty individually and collectively to report any unlawful activities occurring in Government and The Public Service as is also occurring unlawfully on the feminist’s template as in CSA.  Also it occurs in the administration of family law and child protection and family violence.  Feminism has become an unlawful and ruling insurgent in these heterosexual Government Departments and Administrations. Female staffing ‘piggy backed’ it into administrative positions and delivering it.  This unlawful insurgent must be removed to allow The Legislature to ‘govern’ families’ gender impartially as the Constitution decrees and families to be left as cohesive and participating parents as far as possible.  Governance by gender is unlawful and effect in Government Service Deliveries must cease immediately. PLEASE FIX.


False claims by mothers alleging pensioner pauper status are common when they commonly received 70% of family property and then many commonly commit themselves to a house and car of costs beyond their financial means (as in s117 capacity to pay) are ignored by CSA and SSAT, as ‘over committing’ to ‘over spending and turn to fraud via CSA well know reputation of assisting mothers as outlined above to afford her s117 extravagant lifestyle.  Are instances CSA would hold out  if a father ‘over committed financially’ would still – according to legislation s117 – still be held liable to contribute more to child support payment.


But on the basis of gender CSA and SSAT ignore it in the same circumstances of a mother offender of the legislation because CSA will not do a full and proper investigation and SSAT will not run an appeal of CSA on the basis of ‘denovo’ (an entirely new) hearing on the same facts and law that CSA should have done.  This SSAT too are duping The Parliament who intended SSAT to be completely independent to CSA ‘denovo’ so as to rectify mistakes of CSA.  Instead both agencies are working together to facilitated fraudulent CSA and mother to commit crimes against The Commonwealth and it Citizens in a ‘gender war against men’ and father and fatherhood in particular.


When in fact the facts in such cases before CSA family court property settlement of 30% and legal costs it leaves father in a pauper status relative to the mother but the mothers s117 factors of 70% property and financial over commitment are ignored by CSA in 6A reason 8 claims and lay false claims and overcharge the already over burdened father payer.  And also the same CSA victimization of fathers on Commonwealth Pensions where child support is limited to $380 per year I have two clients being ‘ambushed’ and ‘bullied’ to pay $5,000 per year.


Is it no wonder that so many CSA payers suicide?  After being asset stripped and income reduced by family property settlement then by ambush and combatancy  unlawfully by CSA and SSAT overcharged what they cannot possibly afford and are ignored completely in their complaints.  Even when some have me as their representative CSA bypass me to deal directly in ‘ambush’ and ‘combatancy’ to enforce the unlawful OVERCHARGE.  Working for feminism instead of The Legislature and Federal Government.


Kevin [] alleges complaints are promptly dealt with.  I have some years old just ignored even by the Ombudsman too on the same issues raised herein is the false way CSA alleges complaints have been dealt with.  On a very few occasions when CSA have responded it was not to address the complaint but to allege it had been dealt with.  Clearly not in the way The Legislature intended but through the same tainted ‘correctness’ to the feminist template and at time misquoting legislation to cover up the unlawful alteration of family facts.


Based on your 1.4 million statistics about four million aggrieved fathers and paternal families because CSA Officers are an accumulated resource to oppose the continuation of CSA Commonwealth Officers assisting fraudulent mother to commit financial fraud against fathers by unlawfully using Commonwealth property to achieve it.       PLEASE FIX


Kevin [] please note we too in addition to 248 Federal Politicians have a media including unknown to you an enormous audience mainly of aggrieved fathers and their proactive organizations behind Bcc.  Respectfully we suggest it is the easiest for you to return CSA Commonwealth Offices back  to their legal compliance in their workplaces than try to argue in court a class action that your legal ‘wrongs’ of enforced fraudulent overcharges vial Commonwealth property is ‘right’. Your days of combatancy and by stealth divide and conquer are over.  Now what we want is just as The Legislature decreed no more and no less and no longer what feminism decrees.  Do you comprehend just how simple that is?  With none of the employment and superannuation risks of working undercover for feminism.


Misogamy cried the feminist EMILY’s List Prime Minister also knowing what goes on in CSA to hide the misandary control feminists and sympathizer staffs have across the heterosexual spectrum of Government Service Deliveries.  Males and fathers especially are no longer going to accept this relegation to second class citizen status in their heterosexual joint family responsibilities as has been thrust unlawfully upon them by the feminist insurgent piggy backing in a gender war against men out of Government and its Service Deliveries.


I am available to discuss any of these issues and more.  But as usual I expect CSA or The Minister will not respond to me and continue ignoring complaints in the routine and serial way they do so that they get paid by The Commonwealth Taxpayer and instead work for feminist ideologues the likes of EMILY’s List.  That soon threatens to soon overburden the Federal Police investigating CSA Department Head and Case and Senior Case Officer and Objections Commonwealth Officer for assisting fraud.  In which SSAT too will come under scrutiny and can no longer be counted on as cover up for CSA.



Robert E Kennedy          Coordinator        NT Office of Family, PO Box 988, Palmerston, NT 0831.  Phone 08 8932 3339




Previous Previous
Next Next
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...CSA dishonesty about its unlawfulness and unwillingnest to deal with complaintsCSA dishonesty about its unlawfulness and unwillingnest to deal with complaints