Need help fast plse anyone read

[jenjen]

state of florida

finally was able to get a default entered on my motion to modify cust, support and other relief.

custody given to me in 2002 by another court division, then original final orders,  other parent missing.

acting pro se and trying to schedule hearing, pro se office silent havent set case for hearing, just foune out case has been transfered to divison that gave me custody, child support enforcement is now harrassing me again for support and have frozen bank accounts. (just before hearing date is set) also my employer only pays by direct deposit so freezing my accounts holds 100% of my desposible income.(every penny i earn)


1. can I file a motion for the court to stop the inforcement against me. since this case is pending a hearing date?

2. if so can this be done as an emergency motion?

[MixedBag]

you have another PM....with an idea.

[jenjen]

Thanks, It appears the dept of revenue is trying to keep my case from being heard by a judge.  There trying to force me into an agreement with them. I know if I do this it will undermind my case when presented before a judge. I also know that the dept of revenue could careless what happens to my kids, the only place i can find(hope to find) relief is from the courts regarding my custodial children

[mistoffolees]

I would think you could get an emergency motion on this. I don't understand why they are pursuing support if you have custody and the other parent is missing.

Frankly, I'd march myself into their office on Monday and speak to the highest level person in the office and tell them that if they don't remove the block by the next day that you're going to file a massive law suit and report their abuse to the papers.

Alternatively, have an attorney write them a letter threatening the same thing.

As you've presented the facts, they have no grounds to touch you. HOWEVER, there may be other facts missing. For example - is their action on the basis of arrears built up before you got custody? If so, then they do have a right to pursue you to collect the arrears - even though you have cusotdy now.

[jenjen]

Yes, there was a past due amount that was alledged and the court put it in what they called "reserved" aftyer the court recalculated the amount which was 15,000 less then what the dept of revenue was claiming.

the dept then said it was assistance the other parent recieved but, that turned out not to be the case due to the fact that any assitance had been settled.

now it's alledged to be past support, however the other parent owes a duty of support to me and the amount of obligation is reflected in the original court order.    

[mistoffolees]

>Yes, there was a past due amount that was alledged and the
>court put it in what they called "reserved" aftyer the court
>recalculated the amount which was 15,000 less then what the
>dept of revenue was claiming.
>
>the dept then said it was assistance the other parent recieved
>but, that turned out not to be the case due to the fact that
>any assitance had been settled.
>
>now it's alledged to be past support, however the other parent
>owes a duty of support to me and the amount of obligation is
>reflected in the original court order.    

Sorry, I can't make sense of that. It SOUNDS like there are arrears. If so, the agency has the right to seize your assets. If that's not correct, you need to be more clear. Do you or do you not owe money - as per the original court order OR the modified order.

[jenjen]

yes, according to the dept of revenue for child support enforcement, however, I am now the custodial parent for the children and have been so for the past 5years.

child support that is  taken from this family is for the benefit of the children but, it cant benefit the children. only hurt them, because it takes away from there care, as it is taken from the home that they reside it.

in the original order the court files reflects percentage and  amounts of support obligation from each parent.

the other parent has an obligation of support and the amount of there obligation would offset the amount the dept of revenue is claiming i owe and in fact put's the other parent in arrears.

  freezing 100% of one's desposible income in itself cannot be legal?
these children have doctors appointments, medicine that has to brought,
etc.

[mistoffolees]

>yes, according to the dept of revenue for child support
>enforcement, however, I am now the custodial parent for the
>children and have been so for the past 5years.
>
>child support that is  taken from this family is for the
>benefit of the children but, it cant benefit the children.
>only hurt them, because it takes away from there care, as it
>is taken from the home that they reside it.
>
>in the original order the court files reflects percentage and
>amounts of support obligation from each parent.
>
>the other parent has an obligation of support and the amount
>of there obligation would offset the amount the dept of
>revenue is claiming i owe and in fact put's the other parent
>in arrears.
>
>  freezing 100% of one's desposible income in itself cannot be
>legal?
>these children have doctors appointments, medicine that has to
>brought,
>etc.


If you have arrears, then they can sieze your assets. The fact that the order has been changed doesn't remove any arrears - unless your court order specifically does so.

If you think that the arrears are in error, you can either try to convice the revenue agency of that or go to court to correct the error. But that's not what it sounds like. It sounds to me like you were the NCP and owed support for years and only recently changed that. The fact that the kids lived with you for 5 years doesn't change the fact that you owed support - only the court order matters.

They can not typically take 100% of your disposable income, but they're not technically doing that. They froze an asset. The fact that you are using that bank account for direct deposit is not their problem. You need to find another way to get paid where all the money doesn't go through that frozen account. That doesn't relieve your responsibility to  pay a large percentage of your income to clear up the arrears.

[jenjen]

I have had custody for the past 5 years. so what your saying is the dept of revenue will collect from me and just hold it? there is no one for them to send it to.  (the other parent was found by the court to have neglected these children and step parent was arrested twice for lewd and lacivious on the children. they have since fled the country)


the other parent is in arrears now and the dept of revenue should freeze, levie against the other parents assets as well. but there are no assets......except the unclaimed child support and that should be sent back to me...right?

I owe you 20.00 and you owe me 20.00...were even

[mistoffolees]

>I have had custody for the past 5 years. so what your saying
>is the dept of revenue will collect from me and just hold it?

What I'm saying is that if you have a decree in 2000 that says the other person gets custody and you owe $1,000 per month, then you owe $1,000 per month. EVERY month until the court changes it. If the child(ren) moved into your house and you didn't change the child support, then you STILL owe $1,000 per month to the other party. Even if the court changed custody, you STILL Owe $1,000 per month to the other party unless the court also changed the child support.

The court order is the only thing that matters.

As for holding it, they're not going to do that. They're going to try to send it to the person the court order sends it to. If they can't find that person, I believe it goes into the State funds.


>there is no one for them to send it to.  (the other parent was
>found by the court to have neglected these children and step
>parent was arrested twice for lewd and lacivious on the
>children. they have since fled the country)

None of which has any bearing on the matter at hand.

>
>
>the other parent is in arrears now and the dept of revenue
>should freeze, levie against the other parents assets as well.

Yes.

>but there are no assets......except the unclaimed child
>support and that should be sent back to me...right?

The two events are not linked. If you owe $20,000, then you STILL owe $20,000 - even if you can make the claim that the other person owes you money, too.

>
>I owe you 20.00 and you owe me 20.00...were even

It doesn't work that way. They're going to try to collect both judgments to the best of their ability.

As I said, you're going to need to see an attorney to get this straighened out. Even then, they may not be able to do anything about the arrears.