Messages

Yes, you will need to file for a modification of the child support order due to the significant change in circumstances (new child in the family).

My state says that the judge needs to account for my additional expenses as well as the reduction in my ex's expenses. So most judges use a cross-credit formula.

However, this judge is now claiming that NCP don't have any additional expenses so in this case we need to document that my expenses are real. In terms of being able to afford it, both parents in this case have net monthly incomes over $5k so we can both easily afford to raise our children without child support.

The parenting plan is done, signed by the judge, in the records. Yes, I really did hit everything including timing on vacations, how we transitioned from regular to vacation time, etc...

Property division is also a done deal, signed by both parties.

The only part left is child support. The good news: I have emails to/from my attorney back in September asking that the property division be written such that if I didn't have the kids for at least 150 days/year, I didn't want to keep the house (reason given, too expensive). I was advised at that time that it wasn't possible to make property division contingent upon parenting time. So now I can look at the incremental cost of owning a house vs. renting a 2 bedroom apartment. And I have the perfect example for what it costs to live in a 2-bedroom/1 bath apartment in this town: My wife currently lives in just such an apartment! I can rigorously document that I pay ~$800/mo more than she does for housing and claim that as my incremental cost associated with having the kids for more than every other weekend. That leaves her attorney in a bind. She can't claim that her client's housing is substandard, can she?!

I also have receipts showing that I spent ~$100/mo on girls clothing since we separated last June. I have receipts showing that I paid for gymnastics lessons $50/mo and transported my daughter to the town over once a week. I spent $900 for a piano so my daughter could practice in my house. Etc... Glad I hang on to all my receipts.

If the judge rules against me with this mountain of documentary evidence then I think we have a real shot at taking him down on appeal.

This is part of the divorce. After a week of prodding, it turned out that we had no orders, there is no judgement, and what my attorney told me was a judgement was really advisory. She and the other attorney met the judge in chambers. The key point is that if my attorney had signed an agreement with my wife's attorney, it would have been legally an uncontested agreement not possible to appeal. Since I wouldn't let my attorney sign the agreement we will now get a hearing.

Here is the basis for the Judges advisory opinion on child support:

Once you have the kids 1/7 of the time (ever other weekend, 14%), then most child-rearing costs are fixed (food being the major exception). At 1/7 I don't exceed the threshold needed to receive a residential credit. So he only gives me credit for time over 1/7, and only computes how much more food I would need to purchase in increasing my residential time from 14% to 40%.

Here is the logical fallacy in his reasoning:
1)The judge is arguing that once you have at least 14% residence, most child-rearing costs are fixed (other than food).
2) If this is true, then custodial and non-custodial parents have the same child rearing costs (other than food), even when they have as much as an 86-14 residence split.
3) Following this logic, since food accounts for only 21% of basic child-rearing expenses (USDA Expenditures on Children by Families, 2010), child support transfers should be reduced by 79%.

Is this judge really advocating the abolition of child support as we know it?

I find it truly amazing that people with almost zero understanding of economics and basic algebra are allowed to make these sorts of decisions. This judge, for the past year or so, hasn't been giving non-custodial parents more than ~$200/mo residence credit even when they have as much as 45% residence. The only time you get credit proportional to residence is if you have a 50/50 plan.

My attorney is actually defending the judge's stance on residential credit. Accordingly, I gave her the sack and have hired someone willing to challenge the judge.

I was recently given 40% custody of two girls ages 3 and 7. (Celebration! I really wanted 50/50 but in my conservative county that was never going to happen.) But because this was settled a few days before we were scheduled for trial, the trial was cancelled and we were given a hearing instead. Now the strange thing is that the hearing never happened. I had planned to attend but my attorney told me I couldn't and then I found out afterwards they didn't actually have a hearing but instead the two attorneys met with the judge in his chambers and he made a child support ruling.

The reason for my concern is that though I have the girls 40% of the time, the judge only gave me residential credit for 13% of their child rearing expenses. My wife and I have almost identical net incomes (hers is slightly higher), we are WAY over the poverty line and she is getting $250k in the property division so there is no issue of her not being able to make it.  And I can demonstrate with hard evidence that I spend far more on the girls than my soon-to-be ex (I provide them with their own bedrooms and bath in a nice house with yard, gymnastics lessons, buy their clothes, etc... and my wife keeps them in a small 2-bed/1bath student apt. with no yard). I have also never missed even a single hour of residence time over the past 9 months and visit the girls at school/daycare at least once and usually twice a week during the time when I don't have them.

I would like to appeal since according to my attorney, the judge didn't make any reference to my child-rearing expenses in his judgement (required). This is a good basis for an appeal, but since there was no hearing I'm not sure there are technically any deliberations. From my reading of the Washington State Superior Court rules, it seems that all contested child support disputes require a public hearing. So what just happened?

This took place a week ago, and I can't get my attorney to explain what happened. I've ordered her not to sign anything on my behalf, but sooner or later I will have to make a decision as to how to proceed. If I refuse to sign (or let my attorney sign) the child support order my ex-wife's attorney has drawn up, do I get a hearing?