does she have a legitimate argument?
Prior to CS order, BM stood in court and claimed she lived with her parents and paid rent when she could.
Judge ordered BM to pay CS $420 monthly (25% of income. BM started making payments $50 first week, $100 three weeks later and then $270 one week after that. Since that last payment, BM has not paid anything.
Then, approximately 5 weeks after CS order, DH received notice that BM had moved into her own place.
We are trying to prepare ourselves for what could possibly happen when DH goes back to court. Could BM argue that because of her increased obligations (i.e. rent, utilities, etc) she is unable to pay the CS as ordered?
Also, if DH is CP, could BM argue inability to pay CS because she has paid for things like clothes/shoes (used only at her home) or a summer camp/swim lessons (activities during her 31 days of summer)?
I highly doubt it but it
I highly doubt it but it really depends on the judge.
Most judges don't give a crap what your financial obligations are because you have an obligation to your children first.
"Most judges don't give a
"Most judges don't give a crap what your financial obligations are because you have an obligation to your children first."
This is what makes sense to me, but very little of this experience has gone the way that seems logical, so I'm just trying to prepare myself for the worst.
CS is usually a percentage of
CS is usually a percentage of income, regardless of a person's financial obligations. Which includes what she buys for the kids out of her own pocket.
Thanks.
Thanks.
In my case, it didn't matter
In my case, it didn't matter to the judge whether I was renting a $450 room in my friend's home or a $1,000 apartment. They base CS off income and time spent with the child (at least in MI and here in Colorado).
I pay the same $500 per month in CS for my daughter whether I'm married or not, living alone or with family, whatever. Unless my or my ex's salaries go up or down significantly, there's no change in what my CS obligation is regardless of my living status.
Thanks for your input.
Thanks for your input.
Only depends on income and
Only depends on income and what time is spent with the child. What did help DH when they did the calculations, was keeping track of every dime spent on SS. Karate, Summer camp, everything. It was pretty even so, we forgo collecting from BM if she gave us full custody of SS since she had SD.
Well BM is currently pushing
Well BM is currently pushing for 50/50 split, we think to get out of the CS obligation so I doubt she would even give a second thought to giving up custody, even to skip CS.
As far as keeping track of every dime, we have records, but we try to only spend on necessities, clothes, school lunches, field trips and then we do an activity together about twice per month (movies, bowling, etc). I mean obviously we pay for food, utilities, etc at home. But since I work from home, we don't do a summer camp and we try to find as many free/discounted activities as we can.
BM parents make far more money than DH and I combined and are largely responsible for paying for the summer camps, swim lessons, clothes, shoes, excessive gifts, etc, but as was the case back when CS was ordered, BM brought the receipts to court and claimed to have paid for these kinds of things herself. I've yet to figure how BM or her parents justify buying anything for kids, but not paying CS. I mean I don't want them to not provide for the kids while in their custody, but it seems to me this is largely unfair since DH and I work very hard to provide for kids while BM seems to have no repercussions....
Sure doesn't matter for the
Sure doesn't matter for the NCP, so it shouldn't matter for the CP either. NCP could have a $1,000 mortgage to pay while CP lives in their mom's basement rent free, utility free, car payment free. Doesn't matter.
I sure hope the judge sees it
I sure hope the judge sees it the way we do.
When I went for CS the judge
When I went for CS the judge allowed my ex to deduct the money he paid for a crib off the total of back support.
Did he have to show proof
Did he have to show proof that he bought the crib? If he did purchase the crib, I guess I could see how that could be deducted since it was for your child and would have probably been bought with CS if your ex had paid CS.
In our case, BM told the judge that during DH and BM 2 yr separation before the court date, BM would take food to DH and kids. DH was living with his parents and kids at during that time...BM NEVER took food to DH. Judge didn't factor this into CS, but DH wasn't awarded back support either. Which makes me think Judge considered this payment enough, although it wasn't true.
In the state I live in it is
In the state I live in it is off your income, not what you owe to anyone. I think it is 21% of your income for the first child and then increase from there. Depending on how many kids you pay for. Unless there was a verbal agreement made between parties.
Verbal agreements are
Verbal agreements are allowed? Or does it have to be with a written agreement?
Lately we have noticed that BM has tried to add "remember when we discussed this" about things that have never been discussed (e.g. "remember we discussed that we will alternate weeks beginning with the first week of summer"...uh, no, BM, you asked if that was possible, DH said no, that is not a discussion).
It makes me wonder what BM has up her sleeve. I wouldn't put it past her to go to court and claim that she has been paying DH directly all along and to claim that she and DH agreed to do this.