Messages

The Support Office is only an Agency, they have no Executive or judicial Power, there purely Investigative, if they call you a liar, make them prove it, at there exspense, there's a hundred ways to play this game of theres, and it doesn't always have to be at youre exspense.


The only quality in reading, is what You read.

Not to be rude, but under who's authority does a Pro-se Case have to be reviewed by the Social Services"and yes that is the Social Services"
Boy you all need to come to grip, and put some law behind you.
Just for thought, no rule of court can abrogate youre rights, "Subdue" if you will, I Pro-Se in the federal courts, just fine,
I would find out who allegedly made that law, and pursue it, because it would not stand if challenged, the state cannot force you to Bias Representantion, nor can it Force you to except Benefits.

nothing can be figured out untill it is resolved who the controlling state is.
The false claim, can be easily accounted for, as long as it wasn't cash,
but you need"they need to decide who the controlling state is, and the other one then can go to hell.

just out of curriousness why was the order Retro? Most of not all retroactive orders are illegal, unless there was a pending modification.

if you wnat to play in there back yard, then yes they can take all the time they want, its there money alloted to them,
in that same token you can file into the court youreself, without there assistance.

illegal, its called discrimination.Equal protection of the laws, of course Child Support is whole nother creation, but such legislation,"Guidelines" would not hold in the higher courts.
You realy need to Email me, there is what they call Cooperative Agreements "Private law" the states dont want to admit they exist, but I have two states right now "Alaska, and Texas" every state has them implemented, as mandated by Congress under Title IV-d of the Social Security Act, Title 42 United States Code, Subsection 654-666, and Reconfirmed under Title 45 Code of Fedral Regulations.
The states and the Agencies have Agreed by Contract to abide by the federal laws, and under the fedral side they cannot do it, which the contracts make all OF IT, FEDERAL LAW, under the Exspenditure Clause.
The enaction of the Contracts also violates several sections of the U.S Constitution, but knowone has been pleading them, and so the states get away with what they do,,, I have a case in the Ninth Circuit right now on the Cooperative  Agreements and other issues, the lower courts refused to even discuss it, but the more people that spread the word, sooner or later the public is going to be outraged.

P.S did you know the Agency, the AG of youre state, the Judge all have a Pecuinary enterest in every child support case, and they are bound by the contract to perform to acheive the HIGHEST amount of award as possible, ask youre judge or any Attorney about the Cooperative AGreements"Private LAW" and they will deny it, or ignore you, they exist in every state, with signatures, dates, transmittal numbers and ETC..

Additional dependants, are of no legal, or financial consequense or burden to you.
If you feel the need, you may Email me,
Secondly, so you mean there is actual legislation, or pending legislation as far as the custodial being able to claim there dependants as a need to increase,  This is very important///
if you are for true Email me

sounds like a lot of BS to me, more important is, someone and its not you, needs to decide who has jurisidiction or there in violation of fedral law, under title IV-d of the Social Swcurity act, title 42 U.S.C, and the interstate support Act.
Would you be enterested in a Copy of the TEXAS Cooperative Agreements, the one where the AG for the state of TEXAS has a direct Pecuinary enterest in every child support case, legit or not.

of course the other part to that is, the states without aythority have been abrogating hundreds of contracts of similarity like the one youre talking about, then forcing there own contracts upon the people, its ilegal as Hell, but they do it, some people have tried to appeal up to the fedral courts to get out of the arena of the Cooperative(court bound agreements) contracts, but then the states just use the defunct Roooker Feildman Doctrine against them, to keep the cases from getting reconized, it has become the system of Administrative Slavery Entrapment, and in many cases is not welcomed by either party
I always say if you dont have the resources(access to Federal cases, case law, United States Code, and the CFR's) be very carefull, it can create a long battle, always be wary of the Trogan horse.

there is no real right or true answer, besides she actualy doesn't even have to apply for assistance, out of spite she could just apply for enforcement, and the state would automaticly assist her, its under the same form though, which makes it even more enteresting.