| News index |
Letters in response to Children tell MP: agency stole their life savings
Agency acts as if it were a law unto itself
THE ARTICLE on the Child Support Agency seizing children's funds is but one example of the arrogance of this agency (CT, January 8, p.3) . I expect that it will next seek to access shares and investments taken out by non-custodial parents and grandparents for the future benefit of the children. Another example of CSA arrogance is its seizing of tax refunds due to non-custodial parents, even when the level of child-support payments is in dispute with the CSA as a result of a change in financial circumstance. As a result of being retrenched, my income dropped substantially to the point where I was due for a tax refund for the first time for many years. Despite the change in income, the custodial parent still demanded the same high level of child support that we had agreed upon previously. The dispute was brought to the attention of the CSA, but despite the fact that proof was provided on the lower income level, which could be confirmed independently by the CSA, and despite the CSA not replying to correspondence on the matter, it went ahead and threatened legal action and then advised it was going to seize the tax refund due to me. When is something going to be done about this agency, which acts as though it is a law unto itself? C. HINGEE
Powers of agency need to be curbed
I NOTE with interest the news report and letter about the Child Support Agency seizing money from a children's trust account (CT, January 8, p.3, and January 12, p.10). The 1994 Joint Select Committee report to the Parliament contains numerous references of illegal activity by the CSA and considered the practice to be ". . . inconsistent with fundamental principles of natural justice". Nothing has ever been done about continuing illegalities in the CSA, no prosecutions, no dismissals, no restitution or compensation. The time is long overdue for this to be exposed and addressed. Unfortunately, it is obvious that neither the current nor previous Governments have had the courage to set up a Fitzgerald-style inquiry. Such an inquiry would never be allowed because too many powerful bureaucrats would stand to lose too much. Dr ROBERT KELSO
|