So back to the situation that was the basis for this blog. There has been an order out for child support for 49 months. Out of that 49 months there have only been two months that there have not been arrears.
That a modification would be filed at this point really blew me away. I guess I don’t understand what goes through someone’s head when they are trying to lower child support when it’s imputed at minimum wage. It doesn’t go lower than that, so what does he think really? That this child doesn’t deserve child support? I mean, in our situation the NCP already pretends this child doesn’t exist. So that’s fine, but it doesn’t mean the child’s needs don’t exist. If it costs one parent over $500 a month for each child, what makes that parent think it would cost any less for a one parent, one child home in OC?
I’m amused and annoyed that the NCP doesn’t think there are child care costs associated with his daughter. Seriously? He doesn’t even pay it {the large arrears were satisfied, but certainly not because he paid it willingly}, so I’m not sure what the point of the request is. But I’ll bring in the proof for the next court date.
By the way, I didn’t request a modification when my child care costs more than tripled what the order was for last year, nor did I complain about it – I just took care of it because she’s my child and I want the best for her. I think what annoys me out of this is, he’s never asked a question about it, but assumes that child care is not needed; and then doesn’t even bring documentation into court. Complete waste of everyone’s time.
For the record, my daughter is five – she needs care when I am not at home with her, yes I work a lot at night when she’s asleep, but I still have client meetings, client projects, marketing, research time where I need quiet and need someone else attending to my child.
Although I do wonder if the NCP takes his 18 month old on the hauling jobs (that he doesn’t do, because he’s hurt.)?
The amused part is that he would read my blog and take things out of context to suit his desire to lower child support.
I really thought that after the arrears were settled, we could act like adults and go forward. That he would just take care of his daughter. He doesn’t do anything else, that he could just do the minimal financial support was all I was asking. I wasn’t going to file a modification to raise the child support. It is apparent that acting like two adults is not possible, I’m disappointed to say the least.
There was a comment made at the end of our modification before a continuance was granted that I want to reply to since I know this is read so carefully. I posted something almost two years ago that is still in effect, and you can be sure that I’ll be seeing what can be done about this.
This became effective earlier this year (2007)
Child Support (AB 2440)
This bill improves child support collections and helps curtail the underground economy by making liable any person or business entity that knowingly assists a child support obligor in evading his or her responsibility for three times the value of the assistance provided, up to the total amount of the child support debt. The term “knowingly assists” is defined to include: (1) with actual knowledge of the child support obligation, helping to hide or transfer assets, as specified; (2) if the individual or entity knew or should have known of the child support obligation, hiring the child support obligor as an employee or independent contractor and failing to timely report the hire to the California New Employee Registry maintained by the Employment Development Department (“EDD”); or (3) if the individual or entity knew or should have known of the child support obligation, when engaged in a trade or business, paying wages to the obligor that are not reported to EDD, such as payment in cash, or via barter or trade.
* Hmmmmm “making liable any person or business entity that knowingly assists a child support obligor in evading his or her responsibility for three times the value of the assistance provided, up to the total amount of the child support debt.” That is interesting to me, and would indicate business partners, including spouses, brother in laws, parents, etc would be liable for civil lawsuits when they help deadbeats with cash under the table jobs, or putting business or other assets in their name instead of the deadbeat. Kind of even puts “cheating spouses” into a new light in my perspective.