Child Support Reimbursement

[rnbri]

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

I have a bit of an issue I hope someone can help with. In 2005 I was about to move out of state and in our parenting agreement I offered to reimburse child support that I receive while the father has summer visitation. The exact wording on the court order states: The petitioner agrees to reimburse to the respondent any child child support payment she may receive during the summer months in which the respondent has actual possession of the minor children.

He didn't begin taking the kids for the summer until 2 years ago, this being the 3rd year. Both years prior, anytime I received a payment, I mailed it to him and stopped once kids came back. This year I was doing the same, I'm back in KY so I call him and let know and he picks the payment up, but he now says that the order means that I am supposed to reimburse him anything that comes out of his check while the kids are with him, even after the come back to me because I will receive those payments eventually.

I thought the order was pretty clear cut and to the point, if I get a payment then I give it back and when the kids come back, I stop. If I were to get 20 payments while they are with their father, then I give all 20 back, if I get 0 then there's nothing to reimburse and all reimbursement stops once the kids are back with me. He has had them for 4 weeks and I've received and reimbursed 3 payments so far, however he is demanding that I give him more even after the kids come back and I disagree. Am I wrong here? He is being pretty forceful about this...

Thank you in advance!

 

[ecmst12]

He is wrong, according to that wording.

 

[BL]

How is CS paid ?

Weekly ,monthly ?

 

[rnbri]

How is CS paid ?

Weekly ,monthly ?

It get's taken out of his checks weekly but there is always a lag between then and when I receive it. His employer has 10 days to send the payment in and the child support office takes about 2 days to process it. It's not unusual to not get anything for 2 or 3 weeks, get 2 payments in a week then nothing again for a week and then get it every week for a month. That was how last month was, nothing for the first 2 weeks he had them and then 2 payments in a week, those were the 1st and 2nd reimbursements, and now one this week that was reimbursed but he is saying that I owe more and I have to pay it from payments after I get the kids back.

 

[stealth2]

I would think that you reimburse him what was taken out of his pay while he had them, regardless of when you get the actual payment. So if (for example) the kids are with him until July 30, and CS is garnished on the 28th, but you don't receive it until August 7, he is entitled to that amount back... If, on the other hand, it was garnished in August 1? You keep it.

 

[LdiJ]

He is wrong, according to that wording.

I agree with this, but also, here is where his logic fails as well...

Some of the money that you "receive" while he has the children would actually have been withheld from his paycheck BEFORE he received the children. Therefore, under HIS logic, you shouldn't pay him back THAT money, because it was deducted from his pay while YOU had the children.

 

[BL]

Bottom line is this.

Say he has the child(ren) during summer visits for 3 weeks.

You reimburse for 3 weeks .

If you owe him any of it after the child(ren) are returned to you ,you owe it .

Simple.

 

[CJane]

Honestly, I think I'd try to get the language clarified. It IS "to the point". However, the way it's worded is that you reimburse payments you RECEIVE while he has the kids. Which means the way you've been doing it is correct. But let's say that he has the kids for the month of June. You only receive one payment in May, 6 in June, and one in July. The way the order is written, you have to reimburse him for all SIX June payments, even though technically some of those should have applied to May.

And while I get why you agreed to this arrangement, it would be MUCH simpler to just have the child support changed to reflect the amount that would be paid with the summer visitation removed. So, instead of paying (for example) $100/month, and you reimburse him, he could instead pay 91.67/month which represents that same $100/month over the course of 11 months instead of 12, but paid every month.

 

[Antigone*]

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

I have a bit of an issue I hope someone can help with. In 2005 I was about to move out of state and in our parenting agreement I offered to reimburse child support that I receive while the father has summer visitation. The exact wording on the court order states: The petitioner agrees to reimburse to the respondent any child child support payment she may receive during the summer months in which the respondent has actual possession of the minor children.

He didn't begin taking the kids for the summer until 2 years ago, this being the 3rd year. Both years prior, anytime I received a payment, I mailed it to him and stopped once kids came back. This year I was doing the same, I'm back in KY so I call him and let know and he picks the payment up, but he now says that the order means that I am supposed to reimburse him anything that comes out of his check while the kids are with him, even after the come back to me because I will receive those payments eventually.

I thought the order was pretty clear cut and to the point, if I get a payment then I give it back and when the kids come back, I stop. If I were to get 20 payments while they are with their father, then I give all 20 back, if I get 0 then there's nothing to reimburse and all reimbursement stops once the kids are back with me. He has had them for 4 weeks and I've received and reimbursed 3 payments so far, however he is demanding that I give him more even after the kids come back and I disagree. Am I wrong here? He is being pretty forceful about this...

Thank you in advance!

Be forceful back, say "No that is not how it works. If you feel differently, take me to court. And by the way, I'll make sure to ask the judge that you pay for my attorney's fees."