Receipts

[momx3stepx1]

Custodial Parent is required to submit daycare and out of pocket medical receipts to non custodial parent for reimbursement of 1/2.

What is considered a timely manner for Custodial parent to submit receipts to non custodial parent?

The reason I ask is the Custodial Parent has been holding on to monthly daycare receipts & medical receipts  for over a 90 day period and submitting them all at once and Custodial Parent expects payment of 1/2 immediately.

Many medical/Dental bills are sent to collections before being paid by custodial parent. ( medical bills are anywhere from $20.00 to $60.00)


The receipts do get reimbursed for 1/2 but over a period of 90 days.

If/When Custodial parent does submits a receipt within 30 days of payment, the receipt is reimbursed for the 1/2 due by non custodial parent with in 30days.

Child Support of over $300.00 is current, not in rear-age, and is paid bi monthly on a regular basis.

What is considered a timely manner to submit receipts?

Is the custodial parent allowed, in the courts eyes, to hold on to the receipts for so long?

[MixedBag]

sometimes you can find more details in the state's law.

sometimes it's in the court order.

sometimes it's in pamphlets or brochures that the county publishes as guidelines.

I've read where parents have saved receipts for much longer and then requested reimbursement.

"in the courts eyes" is really dependent on the individual judge.

On a positive note, be thankful you're getting them at all in order to comply with the order and reimburse the custodial parent.

As for the stuff that goes to collections, you can fight that.  I believe it's the Fair Credit Reporting Act that governs this stuff.  If you didn't take the child to the doctor and therefore sign for responsibility -- you have a leg to stand on.  The person who took the child to the doc needs to use the family court system to get reimbursed.

IMHO....

[momx3stepx1]

"As for the stuff that goes to collections, you can fight that. I believe it's the Fair Credit Reporting Act that governs this stuff. If you didn't take the child to the doctor and therefore sign for responsibility -- you have a leg to stand on. The person who took the child to the doc needs to use the family court system to get reimbursed."

If CP takes the Child to the Doctors and signs for responsibility. The Medical bill is sent to collections for non payment by CP.
Why would the CP need to use the Family Court System for reimbursement from NCP?

I don't understand.

I know late fees and interest fees from late payments by CP are not the NCP responsibility.

In our court order it just states CP is to give NCP receipts in a timely manner and NCP is responsible for 50%.
That's it.

I called the clerk of the district court to find out if 30 days from the time of received receipt, is considered a reasonable time for reimbursement . They said yes.
But now that CP is holding onto the receipts for 60 to 90 days and then giving them to use all at once.
I believe we have the same amount of time to reimburse CP. Making payments towards the receipts and having them paid in full with in 60 to 90 days.

That's my opinion.

[mistoffolees]

>"As for the stuff that goes to collections, you can fight
>that. I believe it's the Fair Credit Reporting Act that
>governs this stuff. If you didn't take the child to the doctor
>and therefore sign for responsibility -- you have a leg to
>stand on. The person who took the child to the doc needs to
>use the family court system to get reimbursed."
>
>If CP takes the Child to the Doctors and signs for
>responsibility. The Medical bill is sent to collections for
>non payment by CP.
>Why would the CP need to use the Family Court System for
>reimbursement from NCP?
>
>I don't understand.
>
>I know late fees and interest fees from late payments by CP
>are not the NCP responsibility.
>
>In our court order it just states CP is to give NCP receipts
>in a timely manner and NCP is responsible for 50%.
>That's it.

Legally, the person who takes the child(ren) to the doctor's office is responsible for paying the bill (that's what they sign when they check in). Any medical bills are between the parent who signs the child in and the doctor.

The family court system says that the other party is responsible for reimbursing half. That means that the family court system is responsible only for the reimbursement of the parent who takes the child to the doctor.

>
>I called the clerk of the district court to find out if 30
>days from the time of received receipt, is considered a
>reasonable time for reimbursement . They said yes.
>But now that CP is holding onto the receipts for 60 to 90 days
>and then giving them to use all at once.
>I believe we have the same amount of time to reimburse CP.
>Making payments towards the receipts and having them paid in
>full with in 60 to 90 days.
>

I think you're fighting a losing battle. I can't see the court doing more than asking the other person to give you the receipts in a more timely fashion, but I doubt if they'd do anything if they don't.

In the interest of picking your battles, I'd say forget it. After all, since the CP is the one who is legally responsible for paying the doctor, they're the ones who are out money for 90 days. If I were you, I'd put some money into a savings account every month and collect interest on it. When CP finaly gives you the bill, pay them - and keep the interest.

[momx3stepx1]

We do not plan on taking CP to court on this.
Just curious and want to protect ourselves.

Didn't know if CP can hold on to the receipts and give them to us all at once and expect full payment immediately. If we pay them over a reasonable amount of time(same amount she had to pay them or held on to them) we won't be held in contempt.

As for the savings account idea.
We are living on a pretty tight budget right now, but in a few months that will change. So that's a good idea to keep in mind.
Thank You

[mistoffolees]

The other possibility would be this. If the CP gives you a receipt that's 90 days old, you pay her the money after 90 days. Basically, whatever time she considers to be reasonable for giving you a receipt is the amount of time you allow for paying her back. If she wants to get paid sooner, she needs to give you the receipts sooner.

Personally, I wouldn't do that because if you ever DO end up in front of the judge, you want to be reasonable. This seems too much like gamesmanship. However, I don't think you'd get in any trouble if you did it.

[momx3stepx1]

We have been making 'payments' towards the receipts.
 Example if she gives us the receipt with in 30 days of the time she paid. We pay in full with in 30 days.
 BUT If she holds onto a bunch of receipts over a 90 day period.
And the total of the receipts are $300.00. We are responsible for $150.00
We will give her $50.00 a month and it will be paid with in 90 days.

That way she can't claim we are not paying.
Hopefully, if she ever brought it up in court, it won't look bad on our part. Because like you said, ......,if she wants to be paid sooner ~ turn in the receipts with in 30 days.



Thanks!

[ocean]

Send her a certified letter stating that you will pay any medical/daycare costs with a receipt within the 30 days ONLY. Then stick with it. (Save the other money is the bank if she brings you to court.) Here the law is 30 days for each side to give or pay the receipts.

You could pay the daycare yourself too??? That would be one less thing. Call them and tell them you will be paying half every month directly to them. OR if she is willing you will pay every other month....

[MixedBag]

I think you're doing fine IMHO with that approach.

And if at all possible, pay her back a bit faster (like maybe 60 days).

But I think you already know that.

Sorry about trying to explain the credit report problems and stuff, but I think mist jumped in fine.

[mistoffolees]

I'd be careful with this approach. I don't believe the 30 day rule applies everywhere. Arbitrarily making a rule like that in the places where it's not specifically supported by law can easily get you a contempt of court ruling.