that is correct - do not take the word of a centrelink person for granted
years ago, watso had a quibble about an issue relating to the family tax benefit. watso, being a bit lazy, lodged his tax return late, and claimed a certain number of days, that he had his son ..about 50% of the year.. - trouble is, that the ex had claimed that she had the son for 90% of the year. what watso had on his side, was signed, statutory declarations, from the ex, for family court proceedings (where watso had violated court orders, and had his son, more often than the fortnightly access visits). watso eventually got legal custody of his son, and there were relevant dates on court documents. watso presented the information, a few times, to centrelink staff, he had interviews etc etc - and his claim for the family tax benefit was knocked back - watso was told to sort the issue out with the ex. . watso fought the issue for 2.5 years - and finally presented his case to the "appeals section" (or whatever) , and won his case. . if there are family court orders, that grant legal custody of the child, to the father, in march, then it simply does not make sense that the mother claims she had the child, till May (as regards to the family tax benefit)
