Disputed care before 1 July 2018 (15 May 2019 for WA Ex-nuptial cases) 277-18052500

Max and Faith have a court order setting out they will each have 50% care of Alex. Faith moves away from their hometown without consulting Max. Max has 0% actual care from 1 September. Max does not try to enforce the existing order because Faith’s new house is too far away for shared care to work well, however, Max is seeking a new parenting plan for care during all of the school holidays (resulting in 23% care).

The Service Officer is satisfied there are special circumstances (Faith moving a significant distance from Max without consulting with him about the care arrangements) and bases the care determination on the new parenting plan sought by Max for an interim period of 14 weeks (from 1 September to 8 December).

By 8 December, Max has not been successful in obtaining a new parenting plan. Max has commenced court action, but there are no special circumstances to extend the interim period beyond 14 weeks. The Service Officer sets the care percentage on the actual care occurring with 100% to Faith and 0% to Max effective from 9 December.

Matthew has 70% care of Alice and Fran has 30% care of Alice, according to their parenting plan. On 1 October, Matthew moves house with Alice and Fran does not take reasonable action to have care in accordance with the plan or to seek a new plan. Matthew notifies Child Support of the change on 5 November. Child Support makes a decision based on actual care (100% to Matthew, 0% to Fran) with an effective date of 5 November.

A parent has had care of the children every second weekend for the past three months. Both parents indicate this pattern is likely to continue. In this care, take this past pattern into account in assessing the likely future care.

An assessment is currently based on parent A having 0% care and parent B having 100% care. Parent A contacts Child Support and advises the care has changed and they now have 183 nights a year (with parent B having 182 nights). The Service Officer contacts parent B and although they agree the care has changed, they advise they still have 265 nights a year and parent A only has 100 nights per year. Neither parent can provide any documentary evidence to support their claims about the level of care. However each parent agrees that:

• parent A has at least 100 nights of care per year
• parent B has at least 182 nights of care per year

Based on the verbal information each parent provides about the pattern of care (such as why each parent believes they will have the level of care they claim) and relevant information on Cuba (for example, work/study patterns of each parent), the Service Officer makes a decision that the most likely care for each parent is:

• 120 nights for parent A
• 245 nights for parent B

The Service Officer determines that parent A has 32% care and parent B has 68% care.

This is not a ‘point of agreement’ decision. Decisions must be based on what is most likely to occur based on the information provided by both parents. This type of decision must be discussed with the customers.

Note: as this remains a decision based on the actual care occurring, record this decision under Actual care.