Wi Sctf??? I am just reading your post. I live in WI and my son's father is currently paying child support to both me and his daughter's mom. They $222 biweekly is not that much because it is a percentage of his income (17% to be exact). He pays about that much to her lone. I am almost positive it shows on his credit because my boyfriend(son's father) was denied credit and the reason they gave was garnishments among other things-late payments. The only advice I can give is to check the report. Also, the reason the payments probably aren't effecting his balance is because a small percentage is going to back child support or birthing cost ($2000+ per child) depending on what all the court asked for and the rest is for his current child support. There is a number that you can call to verify exactly what's going on. It's his right to know where the money is going if it is not going to his child.
Re: Re: Wi Sctf??? Well, let's hope that is true for NC as well, but I have seen case after case, (friends, relatives, even my own mother) who never got a dime after the child reached age 18. In every case, it just seemed to become a non-issue. Maybe technically the money is still owed, but I've never seen the courts push it or still go after the parent that owes the money once the child reaches 18. My own mom was still owed over $12,000 when my younger brother reached 18, but one he did, the couts quit chasing him down, didn't garnish anything, nothing on his CR's, etc .,,... and I've seen the same thing with several of my friends. As for me, this might be good then, cause my ex is still about $5,000 in arrears and my children at 15 and 16 now, so maybe I can still collect this money, even after they turn 18. That's one reason why I believe my ex nevers pays on time/pays full amount, is that she also believes that once the kids turn 18 - she's off the hook, and she has probably known plenty of others where that is exactly what happens. As for the child support rules in general, I agree. I don't see how the Courts came up with their amounts. What they say is the amount of money or support that should go to a child, is to me, ridiculous. In my exampe, the combined income of me my ex was somewhere around $3800 a month, or $45K a year. For 2 kids, their formual said that $1,200 was the amount of "support" the kids would have received from us had we stayed together. Don't know about the rest of you, but for a family making $45k, I don't see too many putting out $1,200 a month for their 2 kids. Hell, that almost a third of the montly income! Here's how the rules should change to reflect real-world circumstances. For example, during the time frame my ex had the kids, she claimed that she had to rent a 3 bedroom apartment, cost $475. The kids were 3 and 4 at the time, why couldn't they share a bedroom? That would lower their support costs. Okay fine, so they each get their own bedroom. Well, she said it costs her $475 for the 3 bedroom apartment, but I argued that a 1 bedroom for just herself rented for $375 in the same complex, therefore I should only have to pay support on the difference between the 1 bedroom and the 3 bedroom apartment.... Logical right? No kids, she pays $375 for rent, for 2 kids she pays $475 for rent, so I pay my obligated percentage of support on that extra $100, right? No way, the Court said it cost my ex $475 for a 3 bedroom apartment, and so I had to pay my calculated percentage times the whole $475!!1 Now, how is that fair? This is why so many men, or non-custodial parents fight this or don't pay, and many times are unable because the sppt amount is so high, they can't even afford a small 1 bedroom apartment and a car for themselves. The same went for the food, groceries, light bill, etc .... my percentage of income to our combined income was like 70 percent, so they calculated and made me pay 70 percent of all her bills, not just 70 percent of the difference between what it cost her to live my herself vs. herself and 2 kids. Oh well, enough. I know I sound like Jeckyl and Hyde, being that I'm the one receiving support payments now, but the system really is not fair. BTW, I'm receiving no where near what I should for child support, my ex cried and moaned and had a near nervous breakdown (and did all the other things that a female can do to sway the male judge into her favor) and negotiated for a lower, more "reasonable" amount. I agreed, cause I'm not out for her blood, and was just happy to start getting "something." I figure if it's low enough she will pay regularly vs. if it's too much she won't pay at all. BTW again, I was wrong even on that, cause she hardly even pays a reduced amount of child supprt. Also, the first year they intercepted her tax refund cause she was in arrears. Being that her lower income means she will usually get a refund, she has not filed the last 2 years, just so I won't get the money. She is waiting for the kids to turn 18, at which time (wether this is the law or not) she will be free of paying the support to include arrears, and then she will file her returns and get her money.
Re: Re: Wi Sctf??? But, we have gotten off topic here, the main thrust of the original post was about the Garishment showing up on the CR and ruining his credit. Just have this heard in court again, explain to the Judge that the ex ran off with the kid and your DH did not know where to send payments. Then, out of the clear blue sky he gets slammed with a garnishment! Ask that the worksheet be re-calculated for the amount if support he owes, and ask that he be allowed the chance to make regular payments, (either at the local court house, or with those vouchers and send a check in the mail, or to your State's Capital office of Child Support) and say that the issue is not that he doesn't/wouldn't pay, jsut that he knew not where she was. Explain that he deserves a chance to pay this in a normal fashion, to show he's no deadbeat, and deserves to have his good name and CR cleared up. FedUp2003
