retroactive modification of support

[bethdetroit]

The case is in Michigan. My husband pays suport on his 2yr old son. We were revewing the order and also the summons. In it the mom stated that she was unemployed, had the abbility to make only a small amount, that my husband had one other child, that she was not sure if my husband was employed at the time but he had the abbility to make a outrageous amount.
The only problem with all of this is that
1. she neglected to say that my husband pays child support on his other child (99.00 a week)
2. she spelled the name of his other child wrong and gave them the wrong age.
3. we have her past check stubs and her ability to earn was much higher than she stated.
4. we have bank deposit slips that are from my husbands pay checks that she signed and deposited.
5. they had a joint account so she knew what he was capible of making but lied anyways.
We just had the support modified but when we asked if they would make it retroactive because of the proof that we have of her giving false information, the referee said he would not put it in his recomendation to the judge.
And in Michigan you can do this, as of 1997 if you can prove someone knowling gave false info then it can be retroactively modified.
Can we file a motion specificly for retroactive modification of support and use the proof we have to get it changed?
Is the proof that we have enough. We also have a e-mail that the mom sent my husband when they were still together where she acknowledges that he is paying support on his other child.
And the origional order was ex parte so they never asked my husband for any financial info and it was sent by certified mail that he could only sign for. My husband was out of town when it was delivered so by the time he actually got the order it was to late to object to it
Please any info would be great.

 

[bethdetroit]

any advice please?????

 

[nurse1969]

retroactive mod. issues

Hi there,
I totally understand your frustration and your desire to nail her in all of her lies and to have this addressed both past and present.
My husband's ex lies in court documents and files nonsense motions and tries to steal money any way she can too.
Here is what I have learned in my state of Connecticut:
Child support is absolutely NOT retroactive and that works both ways. CONSIDER THIS: If child support is made retroactive by the courts, this means that fathers can take the bullet too. For example, if the court were to find out that the father had been making more money for several months or perhaps longer, they could ask him to pay what he owed retroactively...based on all of that time at a higher income rate plus keeping up with current child support payments.
Based on my understanding of current CT laws, child support can only be increased or decreased from the time that the motion for modification is filed...with no owing of anything retroactively.
You mentioned that in Michigan, child support issues are retroactive. Are you certain? That could work against you if the above scenario were to take place.
I am sorry if this did not help much. I have been in your shoes and I wanted every red penny that was stolen from me paid back.
It is too bad that these mothers abuse the system.

 

[thorpe]

I wish I could find out if this is the Case in Arizona. I got a new job about 3 years ago making more money now she is taking me back and I am worried that they will try and make me pay retoactive support ammounts to the day I got the job.

 

[bethdetroit]

Effective January1, 1997 Michigan Law created an important exception to the rule that support cannot be retroactively modified. The court now may modify support retroactively where a party knowingly and intentionally fails to report, refuses to report, or knowingly misrepresents income that was required by the court to be reported to the friend of the Court.


This is what the law says here in MI but it is hard as hell to get a judge to agree to do it. All because it is not required that the judge modifiey it retroactively if proper cause exsists. It says the court may do it.
I personally think it is total bullsh*t. If you can prove that the other party of the case knowlingly misrepresents income, then it is a clear case of fraud. If we cant get the court to do it in our case we are going to take the mom to small claims court, and sue her for it or at least try.