I (CP) want to waive arrears but the CS office is giving ME a hard time?!

[zapped]

Hi there. This is my first time posting.

I'm just curious as to why on earth a CP (me!) would be questioned about WHY I want to waive arrears against my ex. When I called the CS office today to ask what the process was in order to waive arrears, I got the third degree. The child support worker gave me the hardest time. She basically sounded like she didn't want me to waive the $2690.00 that my ex managed to build up while he was unemployed. Just for the record, my DH is an NCP and this year they took ALL our taxes b/c DH was laid off a few times and also had some arrears. I agree that some "deadbeats" deserve some IRS interception, but when the arrears are built up due to unemployment (totally not NCP's fault), I don't see the point in literally taking someone's hard earned money at the end of the year (which they might have been waiting for like we had been all year).  

I have to GO to the CS office, sign the paperwork and basically "talk" to an "investigator" just to waive arrears. Maybe this is standard, but I just can't believe that I was being treated that way (City and County of SF, California.)

Do the CS offices get somesort of kickback for all the interest that is accrued due to arrears? Or what's the deal with the attitude towards my choice to waive? I still receive current support which is fine with me anyway. Just curious. Thanks!

[socrateaser]

>Do the CS offices get somesort of kickback for all the
>interest that is accrued due to arrears? Or what's the deal
>with the attitude towards my choice to waive? I still receive
>current support which is fine with me anyway. Just curious.
>Thanks!

Yes, the Federal government pays each State approximately 15 cents for every dollar of child support collected through the State's child support enforcement agency (in CA, called Dept. of Child Support Services).

Once you request that the state establish or modify a support order, the state, purportedly acting to advance its interests in the best interests of the children, will attempt to extract the maximum amount of money possible from any child support obligor, in order to maximize the federal government reimbursements.

In fact, the state doesn't have to agree to settle or waive an arrearage, however, in practice, it will, as long as the obligee parent never assigned his/her right to support to the State in return for public assistance (welfare).

The reason that the State will agree to waive under the above-stated conditions, is because there is nothing that the state can do to stop you from filing a stipulated order in court yourself, agreeing with the obligor parent that the arrears have been satisfied. And, if you do this, then the court will sign the order, and the State (and you) will be SOL.

The state investigator wants to see you, both to try to convince you to not waive the arrears, and to make sure that you are not being coerced in some way to waive. After all, very few people give up their right to money owed, especially for child support.

As a tip, if this is something that you really want to do, then don't tell the State that you want to waive the arrears. Tell them that you have already received payment in full, and that you want to stipulate to a satisfaction of judgment on the arrears. If you do this, then the State will have nothing to investigate. They could ask you for a receipt, but you don't have to give it to them. Your sworn statement would be sufficient evidence of the debt's satisfaction. The fact that you weren't actually paid is irrelevant -- legally the debt will be satisfied.

[zapped]

>As a tip, if this is something that you really want to do,
>then don't tell the State that you want to waive the arrears.
>Tell them that you have already received payment in full, and
>that you want to stipulate to a satisfaction of judgment on
>the arrears. If you do this, then the State will have nothing
>to investigate. They could ask you for a receipt, but you
>don't have to give it to them. Your sworn statement would be
>sufficient evidence of the debt's satisfaction. The fact that
>you weren't actually paid is irrelevant -- legally the debt
>will be satisfied.

I have already told them on the phone that I want the arrears waived (too late to tell them that it's paid so they don't question me). I'm sure that they'll remember me since I doubt there are many CPs calling to ask how to waive arrears.

Just want to clarify that I am well within my rights to waive backpay no matter what, correct?  I don't want to walk into the child support office only to get the third degree. Please advise on what to expect once I get to the child support office to sign the paperwork. Thanks, socrateaser!

BTW, I still can't believe the agencies get a piece of the pie, too! )( That's something I don't think they announce, do they? ;)

[socrateaser]

>Just want to clarify that I am well within my rights to waive
>backpay no matter what, correct?  I don't want to walk into
>the child support office only to get the third degree. Please
>advise on what to expect once I get to the child support
>office to sign the paperwork. Thanks, socrateaser!

You are within your rights, however, there is a legal difference between a waiver and an admission of satisfaction of judgment. A waiver can be revoked later, and the court does not not have to order it.

Even if the DCSS agents remember you, as a layperson, you are not expected to understand the legal differences between a waiver and a satisfaction.

I cannot suggest that you lie on your declaration, that would be suborning perjury, however, you can receive payment by means of a check, and not cash it until judgment is signed. Then you could give the check back, and tell the obligor that it's your gift.

>
>BTW, I still can't believe the agencies get a piece of the
>pie, too! )( That's something I don't think they announce, do
>they?

The interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the federal government from imposing laws on states that only affect those state's internal affairs. So, the Congress routinely drafts legislation that offers (aka bribes) the states to enact similar legislation into state law, in order to be obtain grants of federal funds. Examples:

1. Public assistance (welfare).
2. Child support.
3. Educational aid.
4. Intrastate public transportation (buses, trains, etc., not across state lines).
5. Domestic violence laws.
6. Money for the state militia -- yes, a state militia is NOT part of the U.S. Military, UNLESS and UNTIL it accepts federal money, equipment, etc. -- then the militia becomes part of the "national guard."

If a private entity/person were to do this sort of thing, it would be considered an illegal bribe/kickback, but the federal government can and does do this regularly routinely and it's considered "promoting the general welfare."

If you don't like this sort of thing, then you should ask U.S. Congressperson to author a bill ammending the U.S. Constitution to prohibit it. LOL...but then how would your congressional representatives get you to vote for them, if they couldn't wave the carrot of federal tax rebates in front of your nose?

Ain't gonna happen -- no how, no way -- not in this country, not ever.

Viva la Revolution

[zapped]

>You are within your rights, however, there is a legal
>difference between a waiver and an admission of satisfaction
>of judgment. A waiver can be revoked later, and the court does
>not not have to order it.
>
>Even if the DCSS agents remember you, as a layperson, you are
>not expected to understand the legal differences between a
>waiver and a satisfaction.
>
>I cannot suggest that you lie on your declaration, that would
>be suborning perjury, however, you can receive payment by
>means of a check, and not cash it until judgment is signed.
>Then you could give the check back, and tell the obligor that
>it's your gift.

Thanks for your time, Socrateaser. A few more questions, please. Promise.

1. Per your reply, I can receive "payment by means of a check" (meaning a check payable to me from my ex, correct?) and present this at the time of signing. Hope I am following this clearly. Then I can just give the check back to my ex and it's done? (arrears are done, technically?)

2. And since they cannot prove (or have no business, rather) about what goes on afterwards (meaning I give the check back to my ex) then that keeps me from (technically) lying that I received payment, correct? Just want to make sure I don't break any rules or get myself into trouble.

3. If I just sign a "waiver", that means I can go ahead and change my mind a few years down the road?

Thanks again. And I truly appreciate this board. You're a great help.

[socrateaser]

>1. Per your reply, I can receive "payment by means of a check"
>(meaning a check payable to me from my ex, correct?) and
>present this at the time of signing. Hope I am following this
>clearly. Then I can just give the check back to my ex and it's
>done? (arrears are done, technically?)

Yep.

>
>2. And since they cannot prove (or have no business, rather)
>about what goes on afterwards (meaning I give the check back
>to my ex) then that keeps me from (technically) lying that I
>received payment, correct? Just want to make sure I don't
>break any rules or get myself into trouble.

Yep.

>
>3. If I just sign a "waiver", that means I can go ahead and
>change my mind a few years down the road?

Yep.