NEED HELP QUICKLY!!!

[hisliltulip]

Ok, here's the scoop.

DH was awarded custody of DSS in January.  BM was ordered to provide her paystubs immediately so that counsel could come to an agreement on her CS obligation.  If there is no agreement, then it is to be set at minimum wage.

She finally turned them in last week, and it shows 21.5 hours for TWO WEEKS of work in February.  On the MN child support worksheet, it doesn't even register the amount is so low.

So, at trial last summer, she said that she was working about 20-25 hours per week, because she wanted the extra time to spend time with SS (whom she only had every other week...)

My feeling is that now that DH has custody, that should open her schedule up to 40 hours per week like a normal person.  But instead she drops her hours to 10.25 per week?  I worked more hours a week in high school!

Anyway, our attorney doesn't know what to do.  I am attaching the letter we are sending to him.

Please let me know what you think!

THANKS!

PS BM is claiming that she is continuing to work part time because she wants to go back to school.  This will be the third time in four years, and she never lasts more than two months...

___________________________________________________



Dear Attorney:
I have received your letter concerning BM's child support obligation.

As her paystub reads, BM worked 21.50 hours over a two week time period from February 2nd through February 15th.  However, it also shows that those earnings are all she has year to date.  Therefore, it is impossible to know when her start date was, and how many hours she is working week to week.  From this, we can logically conclude that coming to an agreement with her attorney could prove to be difficult.  

In paragraph 10 of D.C. File No. F6-02-xxxx, Judge Johnson stated:  "Respondent will furnish her current earnings information to the petitioner through counsel, and they will endeavor to agree on a child support amount.  Absent an agreement, child support shall be calculated based on minimum wage."  I read this as meaning, if an agreement cannot be made, then child support will be calculated at $5.15/hour, for a normal 40 hour work week.  At this calculation, BM's monthly income would be $892.67 and monthly support for Child would be $196.39.

On the other hand, as I am aware that BM would like to further her education at this time, which would be in Child's best interest, I would be willing to compromise.  At the time of trial, BM testified that she was working 20-25 hours each week.  At this time, I think it would be fair to all parties concerned if income was calculated from those numbers.  At BM's current net income wages of $5.54/hour at 23 hours per week, her monthly net income would be $552.15 with a monthly obligation to Child at $88.34.

Should you have any questions or comments, please let me know

Sincerely,


DH

[MixedBag]

Hmmm....I know my EX's fake-wife also feels that I should be working 40 hours a week commensurate with my education so that they can collect a larger amount of child support.....careful.  They despise the fact that I am self-employed.....I too would like to have more time with my son and can't do that IF I take a normal M-F job like I used to have.  But they don't care....they want money and they REFUSED to agree to any additional time from the original order.

Dad is entitled to CS.  No doubt.

I think that you've offered a fair compromise for now, and may I suggest a time limit to your offer to say a maximum of 4 years at which time child support will be recalculated based on a 40 hour work week.

Why?

Well, I think that the fact that my EX said/agreed to $50 a month back when I was working full time is what hurt him when he went back and asked the court to impute my wages back to what it was when I retired.  Fake-wife came along and is quite upset because I don't "support" my son with enough money when it's the EX who agreed to the amount.

4 years is long enough to give her a fair chance to go through college.  (which she will probably never finish....I agree with you on that).

Also, get her to pay 50/50 on medical stuff and maybe to do all the transportation...?

[hisliltulip]

I understand where you're coming from with your situation.  I would love to stay home with my son too.  Unfortunetly, I have no way of doing so without going on assistance, which I refuse to do.

This woman is a leech of the system, her family, her friends, DH....  On top of that, she can't seem to put the crack-pipe down.

The thing I had against her only working 20 hours a week when she had ss every other week, is that when she wasn't working, she rarely had him anyway.  She would leave him with her alcoholic, crack-addict mother and father.  Or her Aunt.

I DO believe that she should be working full time.  DH does, always has.  I do, always have.  There is no reason for her not to work, other than it interferes with her partying.  Being self-employed is one thing, being a crack smoking, coke snorting $lut is another.

The way the papers are written right now, DH takes care of all of preschool, which is over $400/mo, SS is covered on his insurance $350/month, and any out of pocket expenses will be cut in half (which will never happen).

On the upside, ALL transportation is on her shoulders.  She picks him up from preschool in afternoon and drops him off the next morning for her parenting time.

[MixedBag]

Then work on two things:

#1  Work on getting her busted for the possession of crack or get the court to order drug testing or ... well, you get what I mean.  

#2  Shorten the time limit for reduced support to say 2 years...  My point with that is mainly that it shouldn't be there "forever" and she should know when full CS based at least on minimum wages kicks in.

When someone uses the system, that gets me too....and believe me, I know someone who does this quite well.  I worked and retired, that was my entitlement or benefit from my employer.  I earned it.....(and I'm loving it!)  Huge difference and I never thought I would be here today if you asked me to predict the future 5 years ago.

[misstifyd]

Sorry I didn't see this sooner...I know the judge and town and all and I am gonna say something completely different here than what you are offering.
First why offer that? She is an adult an capable of working full-time right?
If she has no handicaps then I would say ask Johnson to impute her income.
When you put an offer like that up then you may get less...I say go for the limit...the guidelines and maybe you will end up with what you were going to offer.
Good luck and keep me posted.

Linda

[nosonew]

I think your proposal is very (more than) fair.  However, I would state that you would like copies of her grades- or at least proof of attending college, and she must carry at least full-time status in college for her to only work 23 hours per week.  I would put in there that if she stops going, or fails, it automatically goes to 40 hours per week, based on the higher wage. Good luck, keep us informed.

[hisliltulip]

Well, DH changed his mind.  He's pretty torked that BM purposely worked less hours than before just to get CS at a lesser amount.

Sooooo, he's decided to give her attorney the option of 40 hrs at her current pay, or 40 hrs at minimum wage.  Which is what human resources said they would impute anyway.

So, thanks for your imput!

BETH