Financial Affidavit Question

[1angrystepmom]

CS order is in FL, Final hearing for CS mod DH petitioned for due to his disability.  (BM and SD live in CA)

BM received SSDI benefits in addition to regular CS amount due to DH's disability.

On the financial affidavit, BM failed to disclose the SSDI benefits.  (even though there is a specific spot for the money distributed from SSA)

Our arguement, for the mod, is that DH is disabled, and that due to the SSDI payments BM recieves as a Representative Payee, for SD, DH should be entitled to an offset.

CSE, has certified documentation from SSDI of the amounts she has received, and for how long they have been dispursed to BM.

1) Is it uncommon for such a blatant failure to disclose the income in question, to be noticed by the Magistrate, and the BM sanctioned for perjury?

2) Any other input you would like to add would be wonderful!

Hope you have a wonderful Independence Day Weekend!!

Amber

[socrateaser]

Perjury is a material misrepresentation. Disability benefits are not "income" for the purposes of calculating child support. It is compensation for a loss, and since your facts state that the other party is receiving SSDI, this would not be income and thus not material for the purposes of proving perjury.

Under Kern v. Castle, a party can have their income imputed if they are relieved of obligations that cause them to have an improved station in life, so you could argue, that to the extent that the SSDI benefits received, relieved the recipient of other obligations that would ordinarily be imposed, that the recipient's income should be imputed. If the amount of benefits were substantial, it could make the failure to disclose SSDI material, however, I doubt it, because I'm fairly certain that the amount received is probably small.

[1angrystepmom]

I am a little confused.  DH is NCP, BM is CP, BM receives the SSDI due to the NCP's disability as a Representative Payee for the minor child.  

FL CSE said, CS can be reduced dollar for dollar for the SSDI recieved by CP due to NCP's disability.

On the financial affidavit, BM failed to disclose she even receives this money, although there is a specific spot for this financial information to be disclosed.

I guess what you are saying isn't sinking in, or I didn't clarify well enough in my question.

1) Is your answer still the same?

[socrateaser]

>1) Is your answer still the same?

No, my answer is different. If the person suffering the loss is the NCP, and the CP is being paid, then that would be income, not compensation for loss, i.e., if the NCP was receiving, instead, then it would be income to the NCP.

Nevertheless, the CP could simply claim that she forgot, or didn't realize that the money was income, so it's for you to raise the issue and get your reduction. As for proving a perjury, that would require you to question the CP on the issue, and for her to still deny receiving the payments.