child support for everyone?

[peanutgallery]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

What if a NCP is paying child support which the ex and new spouse use for their own needs? The step parent hasn't worked in years but lives in the house with the CP and kid. There is little to no income from either of them to support the home, they're strictly living off the child support money. Can the NCP request a revision of the child support as little of the money is going to the child?

 

[Proserpina]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

What if a NCP is paying child support which the ex and new spouse use for their own needs? The step parent hasn't worked in years but lives in the house with the CP and kid. There is little to no income from either of them to support the home, they're strictly living off the child support money. Can the NCP request a revision of the child support as little of the money is going to the child?

Nope.

New York takes a straight percentage of the NCP's income and the CP is not required to provide an accounting of how the money is used. You need to rethink your position; how much do you think it takes to raise a child? Is the child not being fed? Clothed? Housed? All of these things? Then you're doing your job. Congratulations!

(do we know you from another legal forum, per chance?)

 

[single317dad]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

What if a NCP is paying child support which the ex and new spouse use for their own needs? The step parent hasn't worked in years but lives in the house with the CP and kid. There is little to no income from either of them to support the home, they're strictly living off the child support money. Can the NCP request a revision of the child support as little of the money is going to the child?

Child support in NY is based on a percentage of the NCP's gross income (17% for one child). Any "revision" would be a deviation from guidelines, which is not common, unless there's a change of circumstance (e.g. you got a raise since the last order).

If you read around "men's rights" websites, you'll see talk of going back to court to order the CP to provide you with an accounting of where support funds are spent, and limiting support expenditures to items directly related to the child. I do not recommend you follow that advice; it's highly unlikely you'd ever get that kind of order, and it's hard to enforce at any rate.

Child support is what it is: your contribution toward providing for the child, in an amount calculated by the state. Whether "they" have a job or not, "they" are providing a home, food, education, and clothing for the child somehow (presumably).

Edit: ^^^ Yeah, what she said.

 

[peanutgallery]

Nope.

New York takes a straight percentage of the NCP's income and the CP is not required to provide an accounting of how the money is used. You need to rethink your position; how much do you think it takes to raise a child? Is the child not being fed? Clothed? Housed? All of these things? Then you're doing your job. Congratulations!

(do we know you from another legal forum, per chance?)

Another forum? No, this is my first time on any law forum.

And yes, there are times there are problems with things in those areas not being provided regularly while CP and SP go on vacations, buy themselves things and eat out often while the kid eat chips for lunch and wear ill fitting clothes. There is a roof over their heads. Several appliances don't work, the plumbing has issues, the house needs major repairs. Roof, yes, but it won't be long until that roof needs to be replaced too.

I know exactly how much it costs to raise a child and that money is provided, the problem here is that the money is not going to the kid while the adults enjoy the money themselves.

 

[Proserpina]

Another forum? No, this is my first time on any law forum.

And yes, there are times there are problems with things in those areas not being provided regularly while CP and SP go on vacations, buy themselves things and eat out often while the kid eat chips for lunch and wear ill fitting clothes. There is a roof over their heads. Several appliances don't work, the plumbing has issues, the house needs major repairs. Roof, yes, but it won't be long until that roof needs to be replaced too.

I know exactly how much it costs to raise a child and that money is provided, the problem here is that the money is not going to the kid while the adults enjoy the money themselves.

But you're missing the point. The money is being spent on the entire family situation - there are no laws mandating that child support must be used directly and only on the child.

I'll use misto's swimming pool analogy. Switch pronouns as applicable.

Treat your checking account like a swimming pool. Every month, you add 500 gallons of water from child support. You add another 1000 gallons from your job. Maybe you have a birthday and get another 50 gallons for gifts.

Now, you take 300 gallons out to pay your rent. You take 200 gallons out for food. Another 200 gallons for medical care.

How in the world would you be expected to know that the gallons you took out for food, clothing, etc was the same as the money that went in for child care? Obviously, you can't.

Makes sense now, yes?

 

[Proserpina]

If you truly feel that the living arrangements are unsuitable, then by all means petition the court for custody.

If that was truly the case though, you wouldn't have posted in the child support forum first....

 

[Silverplum]

If you truly feel that the living arrangements are unsuitable, then by all means petition the court for custody.

If that was truly the case though, you wouldn't have posted in the child support forum first....

I don't believe the OP has the standing, if you know what I mean.

 

[peanutgallery]

But you're missing the point. The money is being spent on the entire family situation - there are no laws mandating that child support must be used directly and only on the child.

I'll use misto's swimming pool analogy. Switch pronouns as applicable.



Makes sense now, yes?

lol, in this case it's more like the 1000 gallons (and it's over the CSSA cap) is the child support and 5 gallons is the income. BTW, I'm not the parent so filing for custody is out of the question. Just tired of seeing my family member go through this constantly and providing things that should be paid for from child support for the kid involved because the CP and SP won't get jobs to pay their own way. If it were just the CP, ok... but the gold digger who latched on is the bigger problem. My thought was lowered, at least to the state cap, would make them at least get jobs.

 

[Silverplum]

lol, in this case it's more like the 1000 gallons (and it's over the CSSA cap) is the child support and 5 gallons is the income. BTW, I'm not the parent so filing for custody is out of the question. Just tired of seeing my family member go through this constantly and providing things that should be paid for from child support for the kid involved because the CP and SP won't get jobs to pay their own way. If it were just the CP, ok... but the gold digger who latched on is the bigger problem. My thought was lowered, at least to the state cap, would make them at least get jobs.

Alrighty.

 

[Proserpina]

lol, in this case it's more like the 1000 gallons (and it's over the CSSA cap) is the child support and 5 gallons is the income. BTW, I'm not the parent so filing for custody is out of the question. Just tired of seeing my family member go through this constantly and providing things that should be paid for from child support for the kid involved because the CP and SP won't get jobs to pay their own way. If it were just the CP, ok... but the gold digger who latched on is the bigger problem. My thought was lowered, at least to the state cap, would make them at least get jobs.

Then frankly you have no business interfering.

End of story.