You are here:   Forums
Register   |  Login
etter_Future_Ahead_01

Welcome to the Crimes Against Fathers Forums

Minimize
 
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...22 July 2011 07:49 FW: Public Servant unlawfulness is intolerable22 July 2011 07:49 FW: Public Servant unlawfulness is intolerable
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post
 7/26/2011 3:06 AM
 

Hi ALL

This went to all federal politicians.           Attached is their mailing list for you to send on a lobbing of your own for the return of this system to democratic law compliance.  Most politicians except EMILY’s List know it is corrupt but it has them baffled how.  It is this so you tell them too.  They should heed only one law break but this mob want to politicize our rights by wanting numbers.  So give them the numbers of bloke so victimised by CSA and SSAT unlawful officers..     Regards Robert

xxxxxxxxxxx


Dear Members

Note the Ombudsman finding of stereotyping by CSA - I report too by CSA appellate body SSAT.  The Ombudsman had no access to individual files as I have in my role to explain once more how such stereotyping occurs.  Primarily fathers allegedly under stating incomes whereas but not investing the allegation having any substance or that the ‘application’ carrying such claims is mostly wholly false.  But is still given false credibility by CSA case officers and SSAT panel members.  An ‘administrative 6A application Reason 8 REQIRES BY LEGISLATION AND DUE PROCESS THAT THE MOTHER TOO IS EQUALLY INVESTIGATED but as set out below neither of these two requirements are being met.  Thus mainly self employed fathers are inevitably unlawfully deemed defaulters. 

The Ombudsman has declared CSA as being unlawful during due process by finding them ‘stereotyping’ fathers {as avoiders} must also by implication finds CSA ‘stereotyping’ mothers of the inverses as infallibly honest.  Legal due process naturally does not allow any ‘stereotyping’ thus the case I make against CSA and SSAT has been found and proven by The Commonwealth Ombudsman.

Please fix with a Government Inquiry that must have access to case files.

Far more important than new legislation or carbon tax or media privacy is to ensure current legislation is upheld.  I bring to your attentions once more that behind case confidentiality well intentioned to protect citizens case officers of CSA and Panel Members of SSAT under suppression orders have developed an unlawful modus opeandi template substituting for ‘impartial’ lawful due process achieving stereotyping why fathers ‘never win’.  Case confidentiality and suppression orders only  ends up protecting criminal public servants defrauding by overcharging fathers to pay to non entitled mothers these often vast amounts to mothers in the order of $30,000 annually and $75,000 accumulatively on incomes of under $30,000 pa.  Note the ‘correct amount’ is not under any challenge.  The overcharge and its unlawful ‘due process’ are under the utmost protest.  Note these falsely inflated amounts only drive mothers into greed and fury when the false overcharge cannot be paid.  These selfish Public Servants are not only harming the mothers too but destroying what The Legislature provided as fair and just to the whole family.

I speak from a most privileged position as a child support representative with access to file material politicians and others never see to never know what I am reveling only briefly here.

Thus a full GOVERNMENT inquiry into CSA and SSAT with powers to go behind case confidentiality and suppression orders is essential and more than a decade overdue.  As it currently is the unlawful Public Servant is being protected while they ruin the lives of many ‘overcharged’ fathers and cause a high rate of their suicides.  Whish is totally unnecessary and children lose a father and the nation a contributing citizen with the whole family falling upon the Taxpayer.  That pleases only the feminist movement having their gender war against men funded by the Taxpayer who see the mother ‘empowered’.

Behind case confidentiality and suppression orders almost no one ever gets to see the case files and how ‘incomes’ and child support ‘amounts’ are derived whether according to law or the ‘fake’ template methodology.  The ‘normal’ taxable income methodology is of little problem.  The deceit begins on application to change to s6A Administrative Assessment’ at Reason 8 required by legislation to meet a certain legal status by investigation ‘due process’ before a change can be made.

It be noted that you ‘The Legislators’ set these conditions that by IMPARTIAL due process Public Servants are obliged to adhere to.

  • If the application is on the valid ‘government’ form and not falsely made by the applicant or by some unauthorized other as by ‘staff’.
  • If the claim for change has both the legal and case fact grounds alleged by the applicant as they apply to the applicant in the first instance
  • If the claim for change has both the legal and case fact grounds as required by The Legislature to allow the change

Here CSA and SSAT have omitted these processes to ensure the claim for change is lawful.  Instead they take the applicant mothers claim prima fascia and allege falsely that it is the investigation required by The Legislature.  This is the first action of the ‘resident’ insurgent and ‘template’ of FEMINISM governing by proxy out of staff members who are Commonwealth Public Servants paid by the Taxpayer but instead with loyalties to and insurgent ideology.

Thus the applicant mother always ‘wins’ and the general claim that “fathers never win a CSA or SSAT mater” is a truth because her ‘allegations’ are substituted as ‘fact’.  Irrespective of available family court orders mostly readily available alone proving the application to be ‘false’ and intentionally ‘fraudulent’ and prosecutable under Commonwealth law. [ IS THE FIRST PROSECUTABLE UNLAWFULNESS BY THESE COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVANT OFFICERS OF CSA AND SSAT. In an ‘abuse of office’.]

Having unlawfully moved on the payer is denied more legal due process and has substituted the ‘wormhole administration’ template.

These Public Servant Officers then ‘set’ incomes to be earned in contravention of the Australian Constitution on CIVIL CONSCRIPTION as apples to why Centrelink cannot make anyone take a job or do a particular job or amount of work applies universally.  But unlawfully by CSA and SSAT who ‘set’ incomes of self employed’s or subcontract labour ABOVE WHAT THEY EARN OR ARE CAPABLE OF EARNING as the base income on which the amount of child support is calculated.  Falsely alleging any low earner is a ‘cheat’ irrespective (a) no proper investigation (b) the case facts supporting a low income is the best the payer can earn according to the natural circumstances of their life.  As is the case of any Centrelink client.  The ‘intent’ of the CSA legislation CSA has to ‘prove’ on ‘facts’ as to a court {s117} that the lower income is the ‘intent’ of the payer to deceive child support.  CSA and SSAT simply take a low income as ‘proof’ of ‘intent’ and prosecute on their false and self serving hypothesis.

These unlawful ‘target’ incomes are impossible to meet but the shortfall is held out by CSA and SSAT as ‘arrears’ and the payer deemed  unlawfully a CSA defaulter and prosecuted in court in a ‘vexatious proceeding’ for ‘fraudulent’  arrears.  Which destroys the financial viability of self employment and capacity to earn an income and reverts to ‘dole’ recipients.  Falsely claimed by CSA and their ruling feminist movement as the father having done so to avoid paying child support and those who suicide to avoid paying child support.   When they suicide to end their unlawful victimization by the false claimant mother and CSA and SSAT colluding against him THE GOVERNMENT.  [IS THE SECOND PROSECUTABLE UNALWFULNESS BY THESE COMMONWEALTH PUBLIC SERVANTS.  In an ‘abuse of office’.]

There are other similar instances too numerous and extensive to discuss here.

Senators for a  moment just consider if you tax trebled on the hypothesis it was ‘thought’ you could earn three time what you earn and if you did no earn three times and only the one and you were then ‘cleaned out’ to still pay the tripled tax amount.  This is precisely what CSA and SSAT are doing behind case confidentiality and suppression orders imposing on fathers out of no proper investigation of false allegations only because an insurgent power ‘govern by proxy’ to favour women.  BY USING A SUBSTITUTED ‘DUE PROCESS’ AND REFUSING TO PROPERLY INVESTIGATE WOMEN APPLICANTS.

You are urged to urgently instigate a Government or Judicial Inquiry that MUST provide access to all cases ‘approved’ under a 6A application reveal this ‘wormhole’ substituted ‘due process’ and how it ‘stereotypes’ fathers and inversely stereotypes mothers as ‘infallibly correct and reveals serial law breaking by these certain Commonwealth Public Servants deceiving also THE GOVERNMENT for the insurgent ideology of feminism to ‘govern by proxy.

Emilys List Members will of course protest and vehemently protect their Public Service sisterhood insurgent but they are locked in a conflict of interest with the charter of their organisation and what is due back for being ‘elected to Government’ by their assistance.  The Constitution and The Legislature must prevail over the insurgent.

Robert E Kennedy          Coordinator        NT Office Status of Family. PO Box 988, Palmerston, NT 0831.     

 NT News one in a million.pdf
 Emilys List Politicians.pdf
 Emilys List control of Gov.pdf
 Email List Senators.doc
 email list MHR's.doc
 CW Omb CSA sterotye fathers.doc
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
ForumForumNews from Freed...News from Freed...News Parent ForumNews Parent ForumNews From Rober...News From Rober...22 July 2011 07:49 FW: Public Servant unlawfulness is intolerable22 July 2011 07:49 FW: Public Servant unlawfulness is intolerable