Messages

>
>It may not lower the monthly gross income as the courts can
>(and have in the past) imputed income to a full 40 hours for
>parents who don't work or who aren't working a full 40 hours a
>week.  

At the surface that is true.  When it can be shown that the peson is deliberately keeping hours down so as to diminish support then income will be deemed at the number of hours that would constitute a full work week for that job.  
Another exception to this woudl be if, for example, the person is trained as say a nurse but is working in a convenience store.  Unless good reason can be shown for that person to be working at half (or more ) the pay than the person could be earning in a job they are already trained for, then income may be deemed at whatever the going rate is for a nurse of that experience for a full week (generally 36 hours) regardless of what the actual income is.

As this number of hours is the norm for everyone working there and it is over 36 hours a week (which is considered full time for most folks in NC) then actual income is most likely to be what is used.  This is particularly true as she has another younger child to care for.
That said, it is going to come down to that particular judge's interpretation on what constitutes a full work week.  From the information given, it appears that the person is "on the job" 40 hours but is only paid for 37.5 due to the amount being reduced by lunch which is "off the clock".  This is something which is beyond her control. IMHO, This should be deemed as full time and actual income should be used. Were it my hearing I woudl certainly argue it. Now' whether or not the judge would see it the same way is an alltogether different matter. :)

D

"So I printed up her time card since the first of the year to show her hours. This will definitely lower her gross monthly income from their calculations."

If your print-off also shows what her base wages are per hour then that should be sufficient to accurrately show her true income.  It would be best if she can have the total per month ready.  You have to figure it this way:

$/hr X # hours worked per week X 52 weeks / 12

or

$/hr x # hours worked per week X 4.3

I have personally seen DSS use the later formula most often but she should figure which one will give her the lowest amount.  It will be pretty close.

This is her monthly gross.
Her annual gross is the amount before the division or multiplication (I'm sure you knew that, just keeping myself in line)

They will only make sure that they leave her the reserve amount listed as 816 but they do take into account that she has to care and support another child.

To figure that amount is kinda tricky.  You have to use the worksheet for the appropriate custody arrangement she has with that child's father.  If she lives with the child's father then it is joint custody with time factored at 50% each and you have to then figure the percentage of total income she contributes and look it up on the chart.  If she has sole custody and cares for the child then you use that sheet and unless she knows what he earns (and has a way to prove it) then his income will be deemed at minimum wages.

Now be sure to check the income guidelines and see if she falls in the shaded area (before subtracting anything) if she does then there is a default support amount.

If her gross income is higher than that in the shaded area she will have to fill out the appropriate worksheet based on the custody arrangement.

In the sole custody where she is the non custodial parent (in this case custody means physical custody only) her income and expenses are the only ones that matter.
In short  the formula is :
gross pay - child care costs - costs of other children - extrordiany expenses (if the child had to have specialized schooling or such) - cost of child's share of insurance ( since what she pays for insurance is the cost of having the family plan vs only having herself covered she would be able to take a credit here for half.  The other half for the other child would be calculated in the contribution to care of other children)=

income used to calculate support *look on support guidelines to determine the support obligation for one child based on her income.

her income alone will be used to determine her support obligation, there will be no consideration in regards to the other absent parent as that is really a seperate issue. (his income would determine his own support obligation)

They do not have to allow the insurance deduction but if it puts her below that SSR or really close they usually do.

This SHOULD be the way it works.  

If she is offered to have an attorney appointed to her case she should NEVER give up that right.  Yes it will cost her $50 even if she meets indengency criteria (which she probably would) but some legal advice is better than none and the attorneys generally try to do what is right and explain it to the client.  Since this in not a show cause case it is not likely she would have that offered and if she cannot afford to hire an attorney she will have to sign that she understands that she has that right but choses to proceed without an attorney.

I don't know if this will help much as her hearing is in the morning but I hope so.  I wish her the best and my hat is off to you for being a good friend.

D

Let me preface this by saying I am NOT an attorney or anything near it.
NC has IMHO one of the most aggressive support enforcement systems....especially it seems if you DO try to pay your support.
I do understand that your are not privy to all the particulars so I will try to keep things general as well but understand that the particulars may very well be what makes a difference between one case and another.
If you will look at the dhhs website you will find that support is very structured.
Some of the things that might help you to understand is who exactly is asking for the increase...the custodian or the state... either way your friend is entitled to have her day in court to explain why she shouldnt be paying more.

You can estimate that her portion of support is going to be approximately 30% of her pretax income.  Yes that's right...what she makes before taxes.
They also have to leave her a minimum each month to live on.  At last count that was only about $800 a month. (which isn't squat)
The court also has to take into account that she has to raise another child.  If she receives support for that child or if she has a spouse she only recieves half of the credit.
As to the insurance.... if her income after her support has been paid and taxes taken out would be less than the 800 a month cost of living amount then the insurance would be deemed as unreasonable. Bear in mind the only amount that is looked at is the cost of the "child's" insurance.
The whole catch to this is the system will only take...it doesn't give back.  What I mean by this is after looking at everything if she believes that paying the insurance is cost prohibative or the support is excessive and wants it lowered she is going to have to ask for it...they aren't going to call her up and say...hey I noticed that you don't have enough money after paying support to live off of.. she has to be proactive and that's not easy.

No the agreement does not explicitly have the word "temporary" in it.  It was well understood by all parties as well as others that it was meant to be temporary.

As for dad....not in the picture at all, and has not been from child's birth. Has never seen dgd and doesn't call or support her.

If mga is using this agreement to substantiate her claim then I would have as much obligation as one of her legal gaurdians.

My personal feelings....  I don't think that remaining with mga is in child's best interest because mga will not foster a relationship with dd and child and has actively sought to thwart contact.

DD was with dgd each time mga brought her down except now she won't bring her down and as dd has no transportation all that has been left for her is to try to call...mga is not answering phone or returning messages to call (we have call records of all attempts to contact over past three months when mga stopped coming down)  DD did arrange to go to dgd's dance recital and was going to see her after the dance but mga left immediately and would not answer phone or let dd see dgd.

Presently there is no court order in effect, only a written agreement for gaurdianship.  It was understood from the very get go that this was to be a temporary arrangement.

We do not want dgd to be upset by this and that is the only reason dd has not gone to retrieve dgd immediately. We had thought it best to check with an attorney within the area of jurisdiction first.

dgd has been with mga since a little over 2 years.  during that time dd has visited her when mga brought her down to visit. As i said, dd does not drive so it is an extreme hardship for dd to try to go to mga's to visit.  she does try to call but for the past two months no one answers nor does she get her calls returned.

As with most cases there are multiple factors but none that I can see would be deemed as making her unfit.  If that were true then dgs2 would have been removed from her care after mga made a complaint to CPS saying she was afraid dgs2 was being neglected and that dd was "unstable" - both this allegations were refuted by the psychologist that evaluated dd and the socialworker who made home visits several times.

Now what about my part in this?  I am also named as a defendant but I have not personally been served.  Will I be?  And do we reply together in one answer to the complaint  or do we respond seperately?

Thanks for your help.

D

Thsi is gonna be a little long so I apologize in advance:

This began right at 2 years ago.  My daughter(dd) was having serious problems with her now exh, enough so that I (mgm) and my sis (mga) were concerned for her daugher(dgd).  DD agreed that I and mga would have shared custody of dgd until my dd was better able to provide for dgd.  As I was going to school full time and working full time and mga was a stay at home mom of 1 it was agreed that she was in the best position to provide a stable environment. This is complicated by me and mga being 2 hours apart.

Two months later dd was able to leave and move back home with me and we believed that after she secured a job and worked a couple more months she would be able to get her own place and dgd would go back to her.

unfortunately we found out dd was pregnant and that meant no job.  she was sick through much of the pregnance but delievered a healthy boy (dgs2).

because she does not drive (yet) it has taken a while for  her to secure employment but she is now working and plans to take her driver's test next week.

However, now she has recieved custody papers from mga and I am also named as a defendant. I am livid. what was meant to be a help to her is now hurting both her and dgd.

there are lots of issues but I was wondering if anyone else had dealt with anything similar...someone other than grandparents involved. And what to do next.  I have not yet been served, I'm going tonight to get a copy of papers from dd.

I know as defendants we have 30 days to answer the complaint but do we answer it together or seperately? I finished school in may and have been in orientation for my new job this week so I am in a much better position to help my daughter out and she has been wonderful with dgs2 and greatly misses dgd. mga will not return her calls when dd tries to call to speak with dgd.

The agreement she signed was for gaurdianship and was not court ordered custody.  What do you think the chances of her going to retrieve her daughter are? I am just not sure how cooperative the sherriff's department would be since there is a complaint filed...or if that even matters.

I am so mad I could....never mind...I just dont understand how or why mga would do such a thing. Anyway I'm open to comment or suggestions.  Sorry so long and hope you can understand all this.  It's never easy is it?

D