A Scary Note on the Maryland Child Support Enforcement process.

[my3sons]

Not sure how many others out there are dealing with the state of MD, but this is happening to me and is down right scary, so I thought I'd share.

My ex and I have 50/50 split custody, but MD law says I still need to pay support.  Fine, no problem here.  Don't like it, but oh well.  So I pay.  And each month I pay.  

As per our agreement, for 5 years, I've been paying her directly.  Well, it just so happens that my employer recieves a court order to take a wage lien (at her request) and send it in.  Still no problem.

But...I look at the wage lien documentation and it's for $145 more per paycheck then my actual support order.  As it turns out, the support enforcement agency has an erroneous arrears of $6200 listed (because they didn't know, and she failed to tell them, that I had been paying her directly since the official date of the order, which was last April), so they're docking my check for that.  So I head down to the agency to show them each month's statement from my bank showing I've paid her and she's cashed the check.  Not good enough say they!  The ONLY way they will take the arrears off the record is if she gives them a notarized letter stating that the arrears is false.  

So I ask them, "You mean to tell me that her word means more than my documented bank records?"  Their answer, in short "Yes."

So, they call her and ask her for the letter, but she's so busy and doesn't have any idea when she could possibly do this, so for now, the extra money will be taken from me.

My options - wait until she writes the letter

-or-

hire an attorney, and spend thousands in court proving that there is no arrears.  

Pretty darn scary that the word of a hostile ex-spouse means more to the child support enforcement agency than actual bank records proving payment.  I understand that there are plenty of accounts out there that have legitimate arrears, but it should not be that the paying parent is at the complete mercy of the other.  

[leon clugston]

you want to here the more crappy part of it, did you reead the papers CSED is sending you, bet you a hundred bucks it says you are the non custodial parent on them. For the states to collect, even from custodial parents they cannot acknowledge you as a custodian. The federal regulations,(the law they are supposed to be following, and the one they signed contracts to) doesn't let them take monie from custodial parents,.We have the same interpretive laws here in Alaska, one which right now ime fighting in the lower court and getting ready to file in a federal court. There is a way to fight these guys in youre case but hireing an attorney probally wont do you any good, however if you have the recaipts you will win in the long run, what these guys do is drag things out knowing most people cannot or wont take the time or monie to fight, and so they get away with this. Dont give in, dont give up, these guys count on you to do that.

[reagantrooper]

You can do this without an atorney! Just file with the court and show up with you documents should not be a bid deal.

[my3sons]

Thanks for the reply.  I'm actually considering doing just that.  I think I may file pro-se, submit my bank records and fight this bogus arrears and see what happens.  Can't be worse off than I am now, so why not?

Thanks again.

[leon clugston]

what would help you even more, since I know exactly how CSED will respond to youre fileing is the state plan and the cooperative agreements for that state. CSED will contend you two could not enter into agreements between the two of you for suppoprt distribution but unless you show in the state plan and under the code of federal regulations where you can enter into between the two of you distribution you will lose.email and I will explain, thefireman#gci.net, everyday we dont so something they get away w/ more.

[POC]

You might want to consider treating the Maryland CSE as a creditor who is falsely reporting payments. In effect, the CSE is no different than a collection company. In fact, it is a collection company. If a collection company was trying to collect on a bill, say for your cell phone, that you provided evidence of payment, they would be required to respond within a certain time frame - I believe 30 days. I don't know what all the time frames are, but after a certain point if the creditor does not desist from making unsubstantiated allegations about your credit, they can be held for slander of your credit. In your case, I would send certified letters to both your ex and CSE that you have provided evidence of payment and are treating their response and/or lack thereof as slander of your credit.

You might want to ask Soc if this approach has any merit. I have never heard of it before, but I know it works for people trying to obtain mortgages, and I also know that child support keeps a lot of people from getting a mortgage or refinancing. If you happen to be trying to either you may be sustaining damages.

[leon clugston]

the problem with labeling them with slander, is in the cooperative agreements under section 3.1 of the state plan, they have a process agreed upon with the courts that they have a rebuttable presumption to any wrong order, or that its amount is false, you would end up banging youre head against the wall and the Attorney Generals office, since they represent CSED,CSSD. But this is just my opinion, backed by law though.CSED is a agency, however when dealing with them you are nothing more than a third party beneficuary, A debtor, the differenec here is a mortage company is a contract you enter into willingly, here most cases we do not enter into willingly, therefor the rules of service and obligations are quite different.

[POC]

I am of the belief that no person or entity has the right or authority to slander your credit. Proof of payment has been produced. You are not raising the issue of if the debt is just and appropriate. Therefore, the question of willingness to accept the debt is moot. You are simply saying, "You are adversely and wrongly slandering my credit - QUIT!"

Again, ask Soc. There has got to be a way to deal with this issue from the false credit reporting angle. And, yes, judgements adversely affect your credit.

[leon clugston]

I agree with you a hundred percent, but to prove an agency is wrong is a ball game that most people dont know how to play in the judicial sense to win on correctly,I personally except nothing that they enter nor do i consent nor do I sign anything they send, since ,ost papers if you look and read close enough if you sign you consent to there estlishment of the fact. What they do is challenge you to see if you are willing to take the time and money to fight them, what you have to remember is they have the taxpayers funds and service to drag these issues out as long as they want, at are expense, and at no lost to them.Never surrender, but be sure of what you present you can back one hundred percent, and always know what youre talking about, and always have a rebuttle to any possibility, what they will do is try to claim in court you are siimply recircuming the issues, and unless you can rebut with facts of law, and facts of proof they will derail you.You have to know the whole picture of the processes, for there is almost a backdoor for these guys in every issue.

[POC]

Did you ask Soc?

[leon clugston]

i posted my comments for the first person. I personally dont know SOC, you need to comment to the first post for that question. This that I post is from experiences in dealing w/ CSSD in Alaska, and assisting others in other states,w/ similiar cases.

[POC]

I stand by my understanding of the law that no person or entity has the right or authority to slander your credit. Slander is when you publicy defame or discredit someone or entity in a way which is not true. In this case, his credit is being slandered. Most likely there are damages associated with that slander.

[leon clugston]

I agree w/ you one hundred percent again,but like I said unless they know how to fight it correctly, and be able to rebute the answer that CSED, CSSD,etc has as required by federal law to rebut any presumption or claim of wrong doing there in for a fight that the average person wont win. Slander is what it is,theres no doubt to that, but ive seen a lot of claims and never a win against these guys, at least in the courts.

[POC]

>I agree w/ you one hundred percent again,but like I said
>unless they know how to fight it correctly, and be able to
>rebute the answer that CSED, CSSD,etc has as required by
>federal law to rebut any presumption or claim of wrong doing
>there in for a fight that the average person wont win. Slander
>is what it is,theres no doubt to that, but ive seen a lot of
>claims and never a win against these guys, at least in the
>courts.

A separarate slander suit, with the exw and CSE named as plaintiffs does not require any knowledge of how CSE runs its agency. I'ts a fairly simple prcoess:

1) You are claiming that I owe XXX amount of dollars.
2) I have provided sufficient evidence (same standard as for any other creditor or collection agency) that said amount has been paid in full. Please see exhibits A, B, C, etc...
3) Since you have been provided said evidence, you have continued to slander my credit.
4) Ample time and opportunity has been made for you to retract such accusations, but you have failed to do so.
5) Plaintiff has incurred damages from the willful acts of the defendents' slander.
6) Plaintiff requests compensation from the defendents to make plaintiff whole again.
7) In light of the defendents' refusal to act in good faith, even after they were made aware of their negligence, the defendant requests punitive damages to serve as additional incentive to act appropriately in the future.
8) Plaintiff requests that all attorneys fees and court costs be paid by the defendants.

In a nuthshell, CSE and the exw know what they are doing is wrong. The obligor has done everything right. Quit slandering his credit, and since you failed to do so when you knew that you should have, now it's going to cost you more than if you had done what you were supposed to do.

[Giggles]

I too live in MD and the CSE offices are a total JOKE...anywho...

You say your X got a wage withholding order...HOW??  Were you not served with a court date?  If not then it's an unlawful order and you were not properly served...this  is an angle I would persue!!!  Wage withholding orders just don't magically appear!!!!

[leon clugston]

The Unfortunate part to that claim is the agencys were granted the authority under congress through the Social Security Act, and reaffirmed under the CFr in Title 45 to issue such orders regaurdless of the wether there is a court order or not. To explain this in a since of how this was acheived and to bypass the courts, all one has to understand is that we when we excepted are social security numbers denaturalized areselves from are citezship status as citizens of the United Stattes of America protected under the constitution to citizens of the United States, the welfare States, and therefor stepped out of the constitutional side, the federal courts have upheld this in the Haybrin case and others. The origination of the agencies was for they were to be envetigatorial, fact finding, but throuth the social security act and other federal implemented welfare programs,(gratuites) they have acquired the power of executive and judicial sense. When you live in a Administrative world you are open to enterpretation and quasi judicial authoritys, for if it was not created under the constitution, it can not be held or protected under the constitution.

[Giggles]

issue a bench warrent for failure to pay on my X?  He is now over 15K in arrears and hasn't paid a dime of support in over a year.  I keep giving them his address, phone numbers, places where he works and NOTHING!!!  He still has his Drivers License, and of the 2 times they tried to do a "Show Cause", they couldn't serve him so they dropped it...ugh!!