• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Arrears and Bi-weekly payments

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

rmeglior

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

Hello. I have a court order for child support/alimony in the amount of $3000/monthly and $100 for arrears. As I understand it arrears only come into play if a payment is late. Here's where I get confused. My payments come directly out of my paycheck on a biweekly basis (again via the court system). I'm being charged the arrears now because of the goofey math associated with biweekly payments vs monthly. So is this extra $100 going into a holding 'pool' of some sort until my pay checks catch up (2 months out of the year we get a third payment)? If not, is this simply a penalty charge of some sorts that I'll never see again? Any thoughts on the matter? Thanks for taking the time to read this and for your help!
 


LdiJ

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

Hello. I have a court order for child support/alimony in the amount of $3000/monthly and $100 for arrears. As I understand it arrears only come into play if a payment is late. Here's where I get confused. My payments come directly out of my paycheck on a biweekly basis (again via the court system). I'm being charged the arrears now because of the goofey math associated with biweekly payments vs monthly. So is this extra $100 going into a holding 'pool' of some sort until my pay checks catch up (2 months out of the year we get a third payment)? If not, is this simply a penalty charge of some sorts that I'll never see again? Any thoughts on the matter? Thanks for taking the time to read this and for your help!
I would guess that the arrears are not due to "the math" but more likely due to your support being backdated to a date earlier than the court date. Quite often support is backdated to the date it was filed for.
 

rmeglior

Junior Member
Thanks for the quick reply! I guess the one thing I would love clarification on for peace of mind is what an arrear is. With a credit card, if I'm late on a payment. I get hit with a late fee that I never see again. Is that what arrears are or are they something that goes into 'holding pen' into regular payments are caught up. Bottom line is that I want to make sure I'm ultimately paying the 3k a month and not 3100.

Also, the backdate support was already resolved so I'm certain this isn't that amount. Thanks again!!
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
Thanks for the quick reply! I guess the one thing I would love clarification on for peace of mind is what an arrear is. With a credit card, if I'm late on a payment. I get hit with a late fee that I never see again. Is that what arrears are or are they something that goes into 'holding pen' into regular payments are caught up. Bottom line is that I want to make sure I'm ultimately paying the 3k a month and not 3100.

Also, the backdate support was already resolved so I'm certain this isn't that amount. Thanks again!!
Arrears are support that should have been paid but are still outstanding. You need to look at your court orders to see what the arrearages represent.
 

CJane

Senior Member
If your order requires you to pay $3000/month as your regular payments (and they're broken down between child support and alimony, right?), and $100 towards "arrears", then you were behind in payments at the time the order was issued.

An arrears payment is something you "never see again" because it's intended to pay up the amount that was previously unpaid.

As a concrete example, my ex is $3000 or so in arrears on child support. He's supposed to pay the ordered amount of X plus a smaller amount Y until that arrears no longer exists. There is no "pool".
 

CSO286

Senior Member
Ok, so if you are ordered to pay 3000 per month and you get paid biweekly the math looks a little like this:


3000 x 12 months: 36,000 annually

The Income withholding order probably says something like:
"If paid monthly, send 3,000
If paid semi-monthly, send 1,500
If paid biweekly, send 1,384.62"

The way the money flows is that all through the year, you will be building an arrears balance. the first 3 paycheck month on my schedule occurs in July. by July, if you are paid biweekly, you will have paid: 13,846.20. so, by July, you would owe an arrears balance of 1153.80 in addition to the July obligation.
You would end up overpaying in July by about $230.82, which would go into the "pool"(on hold, or in suspense) you mentioned. And it would cycle back around again to the next 3 payday month, which (again--by my schedule) occurs in December.

By then you should be all caught up for the year.

Of course you talk to your employer about doing a voluntary withholding of the $1500 bimonthly.

There is an employer in my area who pay their employees on a biweekly cycle, but does the withholding on a semi-monthly one. That way in those 3 paycheck months, the NCPs who work there feel like it's a bonus almost.

And the NCP is then always current on the support.
 
Last edited:

CSO286

Senior Member
If your order requires you to pay $3000/month as your regular payments (and they're broken down between child support and alimony, right?), and $100 towards "arrears", then you were behind in payments at the time the order was issued.

An arrears payment is something you "never see again" because it's intended to pay up the amount that was previously unpaid.

As a concrete example, my ex is $3000 or so in arrears on child support. He's supposed to pay the ordered amount of X plus a smaller amount Y until that arrears no longer exists. There is no "pool".
It's possible that the court decided to order an amount for the arrears payback. In some states it's usually an add'l 20%, unless the court order dictates otherwise.
 

CJane

Senior Member
It's possible that the court decided to order an amount for the arrears payback. In some states it's usually an add'l 20%, unless the court order dictates otherwise.
I'm confused by the scenario you presented above.

I don't pay spousal support, but I do pay child support. I have it set up as a withholding from my paycheck, and I'm paid every other week (so, in some months, I'm paid 3 times). My obligation is around $250/month. I broke that down to 115.38 every two weeks - and I'm never considered to be in arrears. There is no additional obligation owed as a "catch up" payment.

That said, in my state, one is not considered to be in arrears until the 15th of the month following the due date of the obligation. So, even in "short" months, there is another payment received by the 15th of the following month that "catches up" that missing $30 or so.
 

CSO286

Senior Member
I'm confused by the scenario you presented above.

I don't pay spousal support, but I do pay child support. I have it set up as a withholding from my paycheck, and I'm paid every other week (so, in some months, I'm paid 3 times). My obligation is around $250/month. I broke that down to 115.38 every two weeks - and I'm never considered to be in arrears. There is no additional obligation owed as a "catch up" payment.

That said, in my state, one is not considered to be in arrears until the 15th of the month following the due date of the obligation. So, even in "short" months, there is another payment received by the 15th of the following month that "catches up" that missing $30 or so.
In my state and the others that I am most familiar with, the payment becomes an arrears balance after the last day of the month, so there isn't a grace period there.

And any payment that comes in always pays current first, so it's likely and expected that those who are paid biweekly will build a gradual arrears balance until the 3 payday months.
 

CJane

Senior Member
In my state and the others that I am most familiar with, the payment becomes an arrears balance after the last day of the month, so there isn't a grace period there.

And any payment that comes in always pays current first, so it's likely and expected that those who are paid biweekly will build a gradual arrears balance until the 3 payday months.
Even if that's the case though, the expectation is that you'd be "caught up" by the end of the year, due to the 3 payday months.

If OP has an ordered amount to pay towards arrears, then it's almost guaranteed that there was an arrears amount at the time of the order, not an anticipated arrears amount that would eventually be caught up by making the regular payments.

I don't think there can be an order to pay an extra $100/month towards arrears that do not exist yet.
 

CSO286

Senior Member
Even if that's the case though, the expectation is that you'd be "caught up" by the end of the year, due to the 3 payday months.

If OP has an ordered amount to pay towards arrears, then it's almost guaranteed that there was an arrears amount at the time of the order, not an anticipated arrears amount that would eventually be caught up by making the regular payments.

I don't think there can be an order to pay an extra $100/month towards arrears that do not exist yet.
True, and my experience would be that the CSED would not attempt collection on arrears balance by tacking on the add'l 20% or 100$ unless the arrears balance is equal to or greater than a full month's obligation.

So my best inference on the 100$ is that the court is setting a payment against any possible arrears balance to be collected should arrears (in excess of a full month's obligation) accrue.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top