BM closed her case with DCSE a couple of months back, and asked that I start sending payments directly to her, which I have been doing. I get paid on the firstm, and I send the check via certified mail on the 1st. Normally, since we live in neighboring towns, it only takes a day for the check to get to her, but the last 2 months it's taken a couple of extra days. As a result, BM is threatening me for being late on my child support payments.
She wants me to give her the money during pick-up/drop-off times, or send it early (she "promised" not to cash it before the 1st if she got it before then - right). I disagree with giving it to her early because (hello), it's illegal to post date or float a check. I disagree with giving to her in front of the kids as well because I think that's exposing them to things they shouldn't be exposed to.
Is the court going to find me at fault for it being late if I have the certified mail receipt stamped the 1st? I can't find anything that says when the support has to be paid.
>BM closed her case with DCSE a couple of months back, and
>asked that I start sending payments directly to her, which I
>have been doing. I get paid on the firstm, and I send the
>check via certified mail on the 1st. Normally, since we live
>in neighboring towns, it only takes a day for the check to get
>to her, but the last 2 months it's taken a couple of extra
>days. As a result, BM is threatening me for being late on my
>child support payments.
>
>She wants me to give her the money during pick-up/drop-off
>times, or send it early (she "promised" not to cash it before
>the 1st if she got it before then - right). I disagree with
>giving it to her early because (hello), it's illegal to post
>date or float a check. I disagree with giving to her in front
>of the kids as well because I think that's exposing them to
>things they shouldn't be exposed to.
>
>Is the court going to find me at fault for it being late if I
>have the certified mail receipt stamped the 1st? I can't find
>anything that says when the support has to be paid.
>
>
>
>
The court may not give you credit for the support that you paid as child support and consider it a gift.
If I were you, I would go and re-open the case and have it done via wage garnishment. This way you have conclusive proof that you paid it and you save the cost of certified mail.
How would they not give me credit for the support I paid as child support and consider it a gift?? It says on the check "Child Support for the Month of _________", and I have a letter from DCSE that says to pay her directly.
I think what you're saying only applies when you pay more than the set amount monthly and then try to claim that toward support. I pay the exact amount.
I am going to open the case myself, however, it could take up to 2 months for them to start deducting it. I'm just curious as to whether she's blowing smoke or actually could take me to court.
it could be a matter of what state,that decides on how easy it is going to be for you.
>How would they not give me credit for the support I paid as
>child support and consider it a gift?? It says on the check
>"Child Support for the Month of _________", and I have a
>letter from DCSE that says to pay her directly.
>
>I think what you're saying only applies when you pay more than
>the set amount monthly and then try to claim that toward
>support. I pay the exact amount.
>
>I am going to open the case myself, however, it could take up
>to 2 months for them to start deducting it. I'm just curious
>as to whether she's blowing smoke or actually could take me to
>court.
Here is an example:
My ex and I got divorced last October. Just before that, he messed around with the support (I stupidly didn't have it garnished from his wages).
The court order on the day that we got divorced (we had gone in for a pendente lite motion, not to get divorced) stated that child support started that day. Which meant that he had arrears. It didn't matter that he had been paying and paid the arrears. His checks had child support written on it.
I even gave him a signed statement stating that there were no arrears, that he wasn't due to pay until his next paycheck. And they wouldn't even accept that. They sent me a form that I had to actually have notarized stating that he was current.
Had I not done that, he would have had to pay an extra 2 weeks worth of child support. And there wouldn't have been a thing that he could do about it.
That doesn't make any sense at all. It sounds like he was supposed to be making the payments to "them" (whoever the "they" is in your anecdote) and made them to you instead - which is different than my case. How could DCSE order me to pay her directly, and then not give me credit for what I pay her? Something must be missing from your story. Thanks for your advice though. I will definitely be opening my own case with DCSE.
>That doesn't make any sense at all. It sounds like he was
>supposed to be making the payments to "them" (whoever the
>"they" is in your anecdote) and made them to you instead -
>which is different than my case. How could DCSE order me to
>pay her directly, and then not give me credit for what I pay
>her? Something must be missing from your story. Thanks for
>your advice though. I will definitely be opening my own case
>with DCSE.
>
>
They is the probation department. And this was arrears from before the court order, where it wasn't ordered garnished from his wages but paid directly to me. The court order, technically, should have started with his next paycheck.
Nothing missing from my story. Just telling you what I had to do to clear the "non-existent" arrears in my ex's case.
I wouldn't worry about it. She's getting the money. She's just pissed off because she's not getting it when SHE wants it. The key word here is "threatening". She's just trying to get you to do what she wants. Call her bluff.
Not sure where you live but the weather could have played a role in the last 2 months payments taking a couple of extra days. I doubt very seriously the court would give you much of a hassel over it.
Worse comes to worse and she does take you to court, just explain to the judge that you don't get paid until the 1st of the month and you mail the check the first of every month. Bring in your receipts showing when it was sent and when it was delivered. Maybe even request that the due date be changed from the 1st of the month to the 5th or something like that.
I wouldn't give her the money early either. Or, if you do, I'd date the check for the 1st of the month. Don't think the bank can cash it before the date on the check. I'm not a bank teller so don't know that for sure.
>I wouldn't worry about it. She's getting the money. She's
>just pissed off because she's not getting it when SHE wants
>it. The key word here is "threatening". She's just trying to
>get you to do what she wants. Call her bluff.
>
>Not sure where you live but the weather could have played a
>role in the last 2 months payments taking a couple of extra
>days. I doubt very seriously the court would give you much of
>a hassel over it.
>
>Worse comes to worse and she does take you to court, just
>explain to the judge that you don't get paid until the 1st of
>the month and you mail the check the first of every month.
>Bring in your receipts showing when it was sent and when it
>was delivered. Maybe even request that the due date be
>changed from the 1st of the month to the 5th or something like
>that.
>
>I wouldn't give her the money early either. Or, if you do,
>I'd date the check for the 1st of the month. Don't think the
>bank can cash it before the date on the check. I'm not a bank
>teller so don't know that for sure.
Yes, the bank can and will cash a check before the date. Had that happen to me once.
That's strange... Anyway, I'm pretty sure that won't happen in my case because I've followed the orders to the letter.
I think you hit the nail on the head - she's pissed. The support order doesn't have a due date on it, so I don't know if it is technically due on the first or not. I just send it when I get paid.
Let me start off by saying that the only posts I read here were by Gemini so I don't know what anyone else said.
The court order is the binding document period. If it doesn't say a due date, then there is none. You are paying monthly on a regular basis and you have your proof so there is no issue for contempt.
Continue on with the cover your ass provisions and let her cry as much as she wants.
Sounds to me like she is counting on YOUR money to pay HER bill that is due on the first and because YOU aren't paying HER it's late. Too bad for her that she can't handle her finances better. NOT YOUR PROBLEM.
I don't understand why she would have closed the DCSE case and started having you pay her directly except that she was equally unhappy with the payment receipt schedule in place with them.
I also don't see any reason why you should assume the burden and cost of re-opening a DCSE case when she is the one with the issue. As I said, if the court order does not give any direction, then there is none.
Sounds like your ex is a joy to deal with.
She closed her case with DCSE because she felt that they weren't allocating her enough money, and filed a motion with the court to amend, which was denied. That's where this "pissed" part comes in.
Thanks for your advice. I wanted to make sure that there wasn't anything she could actually do (except whine and complain). I feel the same way you do - she should handle her finances better. She knows when I get paid and when I send the check, and she should be managing her bills accordingly.
Of course, she doesn't see it that way. We also have a custody hearing coming up, and I think she's just grasping for straws to find a way to make me look bad. She's saying that she can't buy things for the kids because I'm late on my support, I'm putting her in a bad position because I'm late, etc.
But you see, you aren't late. Nothing you are doing is affecting the ability to take care of the children. You are consistently paying on a regular basis.
I think it is a wonderful idea to send the checks certified so you have your proof that you sent them.
I say keep silent on this issue. Let her go into court and say she doesn't have the ability to properly care for the children while blaming you the whole time and you come behind that with your supporting documentation that you have every ability to properly care for the children and do so every month. Maybe this will support a finding in which you get more custodial control with the kids. Wouldn't that be a hoot?
I am amazed I hit the nail on the head with the DCSE thing.
She is blowing smoke. Don't let her prode you into the reaction she's hoping for.
Did she bring the motion again this time? Sounds like she is abusing the system if so.
Yes, she did. We have had 4 motions just over support in less than a year. The judge finally said something to her the last time, mostly because she had filed a motion to set support, and told the judge that it had never been set, when it had been set and we had been to court 2 other times over it where they backed up the original order.
It's kind of complicated, even though it shouldn't be. We agreed on a set amount in our divorce decree based on the fact that I was taking on all of the debts we had accrued in the marriage (I didn't have a lawyer and didn't realize this was a bad idea - trying to be the "nice guy", you know) So as soon as the divorce was final she started filing trying to get the amount that she would get if the state calculated it. So far, she has been unsuccessful.
Now she's gotten a job to try and create a change in circumstance so she can ask to have it modified - even though she probably wouldn't get any more because they would have to include her income. Her aim is to get around our original order. Once she's done that she'll quit her job (she's never held one for more than 3 months) and have it recalculated based on one income. That's what she's working on, even though it will never work. The problem is that I have to keep going to court over it, and it's costing me a lot of time and money.
>Yes, she did. We have had 4 motions just over support in
>less than a year. The judge finally said something to her the
>last time, mostly because she had filed a motion to set
>support, and told the judge that it had never been set, when
>it had been set and we had been to court 2 other times over it
>where they backed up the original order.
>
>It's kind of complicated, even though it shouldn't be. We
>agreed on a set amount in our divorce decree based on the fact
>that I was taking on all of the debts we had accrued in the
>marriage (I didn't have a lawyer and didn't realize this was a
>bad idea - trying to be the "nice guy", you know) So as soon
>as the divorce was final she started filing trying to get the
>amount that she would get if the state calculated it. So far,
>she has been unsuccessful.
>
>Now she's gotten a job to try and create a change in
>circumstance so she can ask to have it modified - even though
>she probably wouldn't get any more because they would have to
>include her income. Her aim is to get around our original
>order. Once she's done that she'll quit her job (she's never
>held one for more than 3 months) and have it recalculated
>based on one income. That's what she's working on, even
>though it will never work. The problem is that I have to keep
>going to court over it, and it's costing me a lot of time and
>money.
I wouldn't be too sure about her not getting anymore because she is working. That depends on how your state computes child support.
My ex would actually pay less child support if I weren't working. The reason for this is that it is a shared computation. The higher the combined income, the higher the child support.
However, in my state the number of nights is calculated to determine the percentage of responsibility each parent owes for the CS. So, in my case # of nights equals sole custody worksheet. My income is higher then BM's so her percentage of responsiblity couples with the nights factored in is lower than mine.
CS calculations are a messed up system. I have found that the calcuations really don't mean a lot except as a guideline to begin negotiations. If you can't settle on an amount out of court, then the Judge will decide and I am sure how they feel that day affects the decisions.
The last time I was in for a hearing where CS was supposed to be one of the factors heard, the Judge ACTUALLY asked me if I wanted it raised or lowered. I said I want it to be CORRECT because it was not figured correctly 5 years ago. I want it to be what it is supposed to be. He said "You probably don't want me to decide on this then" and put off the final decision which STILL hasn't been resolved 8 months later!!!
It is unreal how such a simple situation has been twisted to meet whatever needs fit the bill for the moment. Poor kids that are the ones who are losing in the end.
If you have an attorney Gemini, I'd see about file a motion for a protective order from frivilous filings. AND ask in all of your filings that she be ordered to reimburse you your attorney fees and if you are pro-se - your court costs in the least.
Can be cashed at any time now. New law went into effect a few years ago. Actual date does not matter.
....when things don't happen when THEY want them to, right?
A few years back, DH got behind on CS a couple months, BM got her knickers in a twist and had the CS order filed with CSRU to have it garnished from DH. Prior to that, the order was with the county court and DH paid them. No problem, now we didn't have to remember to send a check twice a month.
Well, there's a lag time when it goes thru CSRU. In the CS order, DH is allowed to claim SS EVERY year on taxes if he's current on CS. Apparently that first year CSRU handled it all, she got a payment late (supposedly in Dec.). I filed our taxes by mid- to late January, claiming SS since DH was current via garnishment. Then BM tells him SHE'S claiming SS because CS was late, it wasn't auto-deposited into her acct. in time.
It took going back and forth numerous times and finally getting a notarized letter from CSRU for BM to prove to her that yes, he WAS current as of Dec. 31st. And guess what? By this time, it's almost MAY. We knew what had happened.
Sure enough, a couple days before Christmas, we got a letter from the IRS claiming that SS's SSN had been used on two returns, one of them ours. But the letter also said that if we had filed correctly, to ignore the letter. I managed to contact an actual human at the local IRS office and explained the situation.....she told us to do nothing. Then I asked her what to do about the next year's return. Quote her: 'File as soon as possible....he who claims first, gets it.'
To this day we have no idea if BM got in any hot water with the IRS in regards to this, but she has NEVER claimed DH is late with CS since. And she screwed herself TWICE with all this BS. #1: CSRU calculates when THEY receive the funds from the employer, NOT when it gets into the hands of the CP. And #2: By getting pissy and trying to get back at DH by garnishing his wages, she GUARANTEES we can claim SS every year!!!!
Gemini, she's only 'threatening' and there's absolutely nothing she can do beyond that. If DCSE has ordered it that way, it's because SHE initiated it by closing the case..........so she has only herself to blame. I LOVE it when their 'acts of purported revenge' come back to bite them...HARD!
>....when things don't happen when THEY want them to, right?
>
>A few years back, DH got behind on CS a couple months, BM got
>her knickers in a twist and had the CS order filed with CSRU
>to have it garnished from DH. Prior to that, the order was
>with the county court and DH paid them. No problem, now we
>didn't have to remember to send a check twice a month.
>
I can certainly understand why she got upset that your dh wasn't paying his child support. That is money for the children. And if the mother is on a tight budget, the missed payments can be a big deal.
That's one of the things that I like about automatic wage garnishment, the parent paying doesn't get to play around and forget to pay. And the parent receiving doesn't get to play around and claim not to have received it. Protects all parties involved (including the children) that way.
If BM closed her case with DCSE a couple of months back, then there doesn't seem to be a court order for you to pay child support?
Am I misunderstanding?
It was closed by DCSE but re-opened as private pay to pay her directly.
>If BM closed her case with DCSE a couple of months back, then
>there doesn't seem to be a court order for you to pay child
>support?
>
>Am I misunderstanding?
>
There's a court order. The bm just stopped it from getting garnished from the ncp's wages. He has to pay her directly.
So true Kitty!
Four years ago DH got laid off his job. At the same time he lost his job we found out I was pregnant with our DD. I was working and trying to pay all the bills. DH was collecting unemployment, which was wayyyy less than what he had been making. He was still paying (or at least attempting to pay) the court ordered amount of CS to his Ex even though his income had changed. He was paying every month but it wasn't the full amount every month. At that time, he wrote checks to the Ex for CS.
The Ex got pissy about him being in arrears and had her attorney send him a nasty letter. He got smart and filed for a modification. The MINUTE she got served with the notice that he was filing for a CS modification she realized she'd shot herself in the foot and called him up saying "We don't have to settle this through court." She tried her BEST to keep him from going back to court because she knew he'd get the modification and she'd end up getting less than what she'd been getting. She even had the nerve to tell DH that her attorney sent him the letter on his own...she didn't know anything about it. Can you say BS? Like DH told her, how the heck would your attoney know he was in arrears without her telling him? Dumba$$ $#%(*.
DH did get the modification and it's taken out of his paycheck every week. The money goes directly to the State and then they send her a check. Problem solved.
A few years back we had some bad ice storms and lots of businesses and government offices were closed. Due to the weather, the State was late in getting checks out. Ex calls DH trying to get the money out of him. He told her "Not my problem. It's already come out of my check and sent in to the State. Call them to complain about it." She tried to make him believe she called the State and they told her to see if he'd write her a check. Yeah...right! LOL
That's correct - there was, and always has been, a court order for CS. DCSE was responsible for collecting from NCP and distributing to the CP, but CP closed the case with them so that NCP has to pay her directly.
Not exactly sure why she did that, except that she somehow thought it would get in the way of getting the modification. Now it's just another avenue for harrassment.
BM decided several years back that she wasn't getting enough money. She told DH that she knew he was making more money so she was going to get more money.
Long story short, after getting it recalculated through DCSE then again through the courts, and both BM and DH having to get attorneys.... BM goes from getting $80/wk for CS and also having DH pay the $80 daycare bill to Dh paying BM $98/wk and BM paying the daycare bill. In the end she lost $62/wk b/c she opened her big mouth. DH didn't realize that he didn't have to pay the daycare, until his attorney told him that the child supprot was calculated to include BM paying for day care.
I always look at it as, what goes around comes around. BM has been a perfect example of that.
Anyways, if the court order doesn't designate a date, the courts can't punish you. The order states that you pay $X each month, and you do pay$X each month. You can't be in violation of not paying by a certain date that has never been designated. If she goes to court the only thing they can really do is make the order more specific to designate the date the money should be paid each month. I can't see that her going to court is really going to do much but make her look really petty.
We can't do that in NJ. It has to go through the probation department. If there is a court-ordered cs payment, then it has to go through them.
.........why are you always looking for all the negatives in a situation? Yes, DH was behind, but by ONLY a couple months ($800, not thousands). He'd been laid off from one position and was working at another much lower paying job, then just got hired to the position he currently has. He even talked to her about it and she 'appeared' to agree to work it out (he would pay extra every month to catch up). Then she filed with CSRU, just another one of her tactics to 'get back at him'.
And she certainly wasn't on a tight budget, since her and her husband worked at the same facility and had just purchased a new VCR and video game station for 5 y.o. SS (6 mos. before his birthday) with a baby on the way. They were spending money like it grew on trees.
My post was 'actually' about how stupid some BM's can be, to the point that the BS they create comes back to shoot them in the foot. I've always loved great karma. So before you make judgement calls about a personal situation, you should have a thorough knowledge about it first. And try looking at the positive side of a situation once in a while. Then maybe you wouldn't appear so abrasive to others......
Jade is appearing to have quite the chip on her shoulder about financial matters and step-moms. Sorry Jade, but I call it like I see it. I've seen you treat people pretty harshly on here. There's really no need for it.
I thought most orders actually say to be paid directly to CP, or through the court, or through DCSE. If it says through DCSE I would go talk to the court clerk.
My original order says to me...but, I applied to DCSE after my ex stopped paying. If my ex sends it to me instead of DCSE, it would be a gift and not CS, regardless of even what I said.
Also, I would much rather go through DCSE because you dont have to deal directly with the other person when it is late......as you stated, harrassment.
Back to your original question, the order states when the CS is due...usually on or before a certain date each month. A day or two is not going to upset a judge, but the key for someone depending on it is just consistency.
I totally agree that money should not be passed in front of the children....
Haven't read all the other responses so not if this has been answered yet.
When is CS considered late? We are in Georgia. DH has one case here in GA and one in FL. Neither GA or FL consider CS late until it is 30 days past. DH has payed his CS both ways - directly to the CP and through OCSE. The experience with OCSE (at least in FL) is that it took them at least 2 weeks to turn the money over to the CP. He has been paying directly to the CP for 5 years.
The CP in FL has us send her CS to a PO Box, which she checks once a week. If she checks the box and the check's not there then she calls and threatens court action. Mind you she may go to the box the day after CS is due or 7 days later, but she always calls. In the past 5 years her CS has been mailed consistently within 3 days of the due date (one time in 5 years it was mailed 10 days after). In those 5 years she has had her attorney file no less than 10 "motions of contempt for non-payment of CS". All were denied; at one point the judge telling her that she was lucky to get paid consistent CS (and in full).
The CP in GA gets her CS within a couple of days.
I have a friend who's ex pays his CS on the 30th day every month and he is still within the guidelines according to her attorney.