• 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.

employer did not deduct

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

RoseG

Junior Member
What is the name of your state? CA

I have an earnings withholding against my ex who lives in MD for $600.00 a month for child support. His new employer choose to deduct $300.00 every two weeks (that is thier payday) rather than what is in the order. His previous employer never did this , it's always monthy. Now, he went on vacation without pay for two weeks and his employer only send me $300.00 because they said he did not recieve any paycheck during that time.I was angry because my argument is why they did not deduct the whole $600.00 from the next paycheck he recieve. I will qoute thier explanation to me thru e-mail......" We are responsible for withholding the child support amount from his pay and sending the funds to the appropriate parties. If he is not paid, there is nothing for us to collect from him. The amount that wasn’t collected needs to be taken up with someone in the court system. That pay period becomes an arrears balance, and the court needs to update the garnishment order so that we can collect the arrears amount."....

Is this true??...I don't quite get it because if there is no money to collect for that pay period can't they collect the whole amount the next pay period? The order is for monthly deduction anyway not every paycheck ( every two weeks ) Can anybody explain this to me...thank you
 


justalayman

Senior Member
Do you have a copy of the court order? I presume so and also presume it does state $600 monthly.
If so, send the employer a copy of the order and tell him that, yes, it does involve the courts but not as an arrearage, as a contempt situation and is against the employer.
 

wrongfather

Junior Member
as far as i know it does become apart of his arrears. the court will only take but so much out of his paycheck. let's say that he gets $700 and his job pulls out $300 to give you that leaves him with $400. now if he goes into arrears they are not going to pull out the $600 to leave him with only $100 to work with. That's what happened with me. What they did do was pull out extra until his arrears got caught up. so if anything the courts might decide to pull out an extra $100 until he gets caught up. i think it depends on how much the guy is making. For me the courts pulled out an extra $50 until he got caught up. but the best thing to do is to call child support and not the job.
 

fairisfair

Senior Member
wrongfather said:
as far as i know it does become apart of his arrears. the court will only take but so much out of his paycheck. let's say that he gets $700 and his job pulls out $300 to give you that leaves him with $400. now if he goes into arrears they are not going to pull out the $600 to leave him with only $100 to work with. That's what happened with me. What they did do was pull out extra until his arrears got caught up. so if anything the courts might decide to pull out an extra $100 until he gets caught up. i think it depends on how much the guy is making. For me the courts pulled out an extra $50 until he got caught up. but the best thing to do is to call child support and not the job.
https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?p=1375977&posted=1#post1375977

although in this case, your information may be somewhat pertinent, considering that your child support is coming from the wrong man altogether, you might want to think twice before you start giving advice on this forum
 

Shay-Pari'e

Senior Member
wrongfather said:
as far as i know it does become apart of his arrears. the court will only take but so much out of his paycheck. let's say that he gets $700 and his job pulls out $300 to give you that leaves him with $400. now if he goes into arrears they are not going to pull out the $600 to leave him with only $100 to work with. That's what happened with me. What they did do was pull out extra until his arrears got caught up. so if anything the courts might decide to pull out an extra $100 until he gets caught up. i think it depends on how much the guy is making. For me the courts pulled out an extra $50 until he got caught up. but the best thing to do is to call child support and not the job.

Untill who caught up? The poor sucker who thought your kid was his? Just wait and see what they pull out of yours to pay him back.
 

Shawna

Member
RoseG said:
What is the name of your state? CA

I have an earnings withholding against my ex who lives in MD for $600.00 a month for child support. His new employer choose to deduct $300.00 every two weeks (that is thier payday) rather than what is in the order. His previous employer never did this , it's always monthy. Now, he went on vacation without pay for two weeks and his employer only send me $300.00 because they said he did not recieve any paycheck during that time.I was angry because my argument is why they did not deduct the whole $600.00 from the next paycheck he recieve. I will qoute thier explanation to me thru e-mail......" We are responsible for withholding the child support amount from his pay and sending the funds to the appropriate parties. If he is not paid, there is nothing for us to collect from him. The amount that wasn’t collected needs to be taken up with someone in the court system. That pay period becomes an arrears balance, and the court needs to update the garnishment order so that we can collect the arrears amount."....

Is this true??...I don't quite get it because if there is no money to collect for that pay period can't they collect the whole amount the next pay period? The order is for monthly deduction anyway not every paycheck ( every two weeks ) Can anybody explain this to me...thank you

Fax the employer a copy and see what he says. If he still doesn't comply file contempt on the employer. What difference does it make if you get a $600 payment in lump sum or $300 every 2 weeks? IMO it's the same and probably easier to budget your monthly expenses.
 

RoseG

Junior Member
justalayman said:
Do you have a copy of the court order? I presume so and also presume it does state $600 monthly.
If so, send the employer a copy of the order and tell him that, yes, it does involve the courts but not as an arrearage, as a contempt situation and is against the employer.
Yes I do have the copy of the order that say and I qoute....."the earnings witholding be and hereby in effect on the earnings of the defendant in the sum of $600.00 per month"...
and the employer have a copy also. The employer and I have different interpretation of the order. I sought the garnishment order so that I don't have to go to court all the time and now the employer is telling me to go to court to get the arrears amount?...I just don't understand why they did not deduct it from his next paycheck, and by the way he recieve $1126 every two weeks (before taxes) I need advise from anybody who have knowledge in this kind of situation and what are my options...who do I need to call. Thank you
 

justalayman

Senior Member
RoseG said:
Yes I do have the copy of the order that say and I qoute....."the earnings witholding be and hereby in effect on the earnings of the defendant in the sum of $600.00 per month"...
and the employer have a copy also. The employer and I have different interpretation of the order. I sought the garnishment order so that I don't have to go to court all the time and now the employer is telling me to go to court to get the arrears amount?...I just don't understand why they did not deduct it from his next paycheck, and by the way he recieve $1126 every two weeks (before taxes) I need advise from anybody who have knowledge in this kind of situation and what are my options...who do I need to call. Thank you
Not being an attorney I am not going to give legal advice but here is what I would do:

Photocopy the order, highlight the "$600 per month" part.
Send it to the empoyer with a letter explaining that the order is for that amount, not $300 per paycheck. Due to <the employers> failure to withhold the entire $600 as ordered by the court that you believe< him> to be in contempt and if the additional funds are not remitted within (a limited period of time) that you have no other recourse other than ask the courts to find <the employer> in contempt of court and punish them accordingly.


It's real difficult to mis-interpret "the sum of $600 per month" and this is not an issue of arrearages per se. It is a matter of the employer failing to follow a court order, causing an arrearage.

Hang on though. Hopefully one of the legal eagles will toss in an idea or two as to how to get this done.
 

RoseG

Junior Member
justalayman said:
Not being an attorney I am not going to give legal advice but here is what I would do:

Photocopy the order, highlight the "$600 per month" part.
Send it to the empoyer with a letter explaining that the order is for that amount, not $300 per paycheck. Due to <the employers> failure to withhold the entire $600 as ordered by the court that you believe< him> to be in contempt and if the additional funds are not remitted within (a limited period of time) that you have no other recourse other than ask the courts to find <the employer> in contempt of court and punish them accordingly.


It's real difficult to mis-interpret "the sum of $600 per month" and this is not an issue of arrearages per se. It is a matter of the employer failing to follow a court order, causing an arrearage.

Hang on though. Hopefully one of the legal eagles will toss in an idea or two as to how to get this done.

Thank you. This is very frustrating, I e-mail him again and fax the court order and this is his response, and I qoute..." I completely understand what you are saying, but although the sum on the garnishment says $600 per month, it is still based upon the employees pay cycle. If you would like, you can have the child support jurisdiction give us a call to work it out. Legally, we can not deduct $600 from 1 of his checks because it exceeds the federal and state limits for child support deductions from his net pay. This again, is another reason why it’s imperative that we make the deduction each pay period. I do apologize about how this incident is transpiring for you. But, we are doing everything that we are obligated to do as an employer within the law. To collect the missing $300, you really should contact the child support agency to amend your current order. "...

I did not went to child support agency when I ask for garnishment, I took him directly to court. Are they the right agency to talk to or I have to go to court again?
 

nextwife

Senior Member
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs30.htm

Fact Sheet #30: The Federal Wage Garnishment Law, Consumer Credit Protection Act's Title 3 (CCPA)


This fact sheet provides general information concerning the amount that may be withheld from a person's earnings under the CCPA and the law's protection from termination because of garnishment for any single debt.
What is a wage garnishment?

A wage garnishment is any legal or equitable procedure through which some portion of a person's earnings is required to be withheld by an employer for the payment of a debt. Most garnishments are made by court order. Other types of legal or equitable procedures include IRS or state tax collection agency levies for unpaid taxes and federal agency administrative garnishments for non-tax debts owed the federal government.

Wage garnishments do not include voluntary wage assignments - that is, situations in which employees voluntarily agree that their employers may turn over some specified amount of their earnings to a creditor or creditors.
Which Federal law regulates wage garnishment?

Title III of the Consumer Credit Protection Act limits the amount of an employee's earnings that may be garnished and protects an employee from being fired if pay is garnished for only one debt. Title III is administered by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor's Employment Standards Administration. The Wage and Hour Division has no other authority with regard to garnishments. Questions over issues other than the amount being garnished or termination should be referred to the court or agency initiating the withholding action. For example, questions regarding the priority given to certain garnishments over others are not matters covered by Title III and may be referred to the court or agency initiating the garnishment action.
To whom does the law apply?

The law protects everyone receiving personal earnings, i.e., wages, salaries, commissions, bonuses, or other income - including earnings from a pension or retirement program. Tips are generally not considered earnings for the purposes of the wage garnishment law.

The law applies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and all U.S. territories and possessions.
Back to top Back to Top
What is the protection against discharge when wages are garnished?

The CCPA prohibits an employer from firing an employee whose earnings are subject to garnishment for any one debt, regardless of the number of levies made or proceedings brought to collect that debt, because of the single garnishment. The Act does not prohibit discharge because an employee's earnings are separately garnished for two or more debts.
What are the restrictions on wage garnishment?

The amount of pay subject to garnishment is based on an employee's "disposable earnings," which is the amount left after legally required deductions are made. Examples of such deductions include federal, state, and local taxes, the employee's share of State Unemployment Insurance and Social Security. It also includes withholdings for employee retirement systems required by law.

Deductions not required by law - such as those for voluntary wage assignments, union dues, health and life insurance, contributions to charitable causes, purchases of savings bonds, retirement plan contributions (except those required by law) and payments to employers for payroll advances or purchases of merchandise - usually may not be subtracted from gross earnings when calculating disposable earnings under the CCPA.

The law sets the maximum amount that may be garnished in any workweek or pay period, regardless of the number of garnishment orders received by the employer. For ordinary garnishments (i.e., those not for support, bankruptcy, or any state or federal tax), the weekly amount may not exceed the lesser of two figures: 25 percent of the employee's disposable earnings, or the amount by which an employee's disposable earnings are greater than 30 times the federal minimum wage (currently $5.15 an hour).

For illustration, if the pay period is weekly and disposable earnings are $154.50 ($5.15 X 30) or less, there can be no garnishment. If disposable earnings are more than $154.50 but less than $206.00 ($5.15 X 40), the amount above $154.50 can be garnished. A maximum of 25 percent can be garnished, if disposable income earnings are $206.00 or more. When pay periods cover more than one week, multiples of the weekly restrictions must be used to calculate the maximum amounts that may be garnished. The table and examples at the end of this fact sheet illustrate these amounts.
Back to top Back to Top
What about child support and alimony?

Specific restrictions apply to court orders for child support or alimony. The garnishment law allows up to 50 percent of a worker's disposable earnings to be garnished for these purposes if the worker is supporting another spouse or child, or up to 60 percent if the worker is not. An additional 5 percent may be garnished for support payments more than l2 weeks in arrears.

Are there any exceptions to the law?

The wage garnishment law specifies that the garnishment restrictions do not apply to certain bankruptcy court orders, or to debts due for federal or state taxes.

If a state wage garnishment law differs from the CCPA, the law resulting in the smaller garnishment must be observed.
What about non-tax debts owed Federal Agencies?

The Debt Collection Improvement Act authorizes federal agencies or collection agencies under contract with them to garnish up to 15% of disposable earnings to repay defaulted debts owed the U.S. government. The Higher Education Act authorizes the Department of Education's guaranty agencies to garnish up to 10% of disposable earnings to repay defaulted federal student loans. Such withholding is also subject to the provisions of the federal wage garnishment law, but not state garnishment laws. Unless the total of all garnishments exceeds 25% of disposable earnings, questions regarding such garnishments should be referred to the agency initiating the withholding action.
Back to top Back to Top
EXAMPLES OF AMOUNTS SUBJECT TO GARNISHMENT BASED ON THE $5.15 AN HOUR MINIMUM WAGE

The following examples illustrate the statutory tests for determining the amounts subject to garnishment.

1. An employee's gross earnings in a particular week are $235.00. After deductions required by law, the disposable earnings are $205.00. In this week $50.50 may be garnished, since only the amount over $154.50 may be garnished where the disposable earnings are $206.00 or less. The employee would be paid $154.50.

2. An employee's gross earnings in a particular workweek are $240.00. After deductions required by law, the disposable earnings are $210.00. In this week 25 percent of the disposable earnings may be garnished. ($210.00 X 25% = $52.50) The employee would be paid $157.50.

3. A garnishment order is received after the second work day of the week. It requires a garnishment based on wages earned up to that day be withheld. The employee is paid $60.00 a day. Since less than $154.50 has been earned, no garnishment is permitted. However, if another garnishment is received when the workweek is complete, or in states where continuing garnishments are issued, the employer will withhold on the basis of the earnings for the entire week.

4. An employee paid every other week has disposable earnings of $400.00 for the first week and $40.00 for the second week of the pay period, for a total of $440.00. In a biweekly pay period, when disposable earnings are above $412.00 for the pay period 25% may be garnished. It does not matter that the disposable earnings in the second week are less than $154.50 - 25% of the $440.00 ($110.00) is subject to garnishment.

5. An employee on a $320.00 weekly draw against commissions has disposable earnings each week of $285.00. Commissions, paid monthly, total $2,000.00 for July after deductions required by law. Each draw and the balance due at the monthly settlement are separately subject to the law's restrictions. Thus, 25% ($71.25 in this example) of each draw may be garnished. At the end of the month, the $1,140.00 previously drawn is subtracted from the $2,000.00 settlement figure, and 25% of the balance may be garnished. In this example, the garnishable amount is $215.00.

6. Pursuant to a garnishment order (with priority) for child support an employer withholds $90.00 a week from the wages of an employee who has disposable earnings of $240.00 a week. A garnishment order for the collection of a defaulted student loan is also served. The limit for normal garnishments of 25% applies to the debt for the outstanding student loan. Under the formula for normal garnishments, a maximum of $60.00 (25% of $240.00) is garnishable. The $90.00 support payments may be withheld, because the normal restrictions do not apply to court orders for support. No withholding for the defaulted student loan may be made, because the amount already withheld is more than the amount that may be withheld for normal garnishments. Additional withholdings could be made to collect support, delinquent federal or state taxes and certain bankruptcy court ordered payments.

Back to top Back to Top
 

VeronicaGia

Senior Member
You are reading the order too literally. If he gets paid weekly, the employer spread the amount out weekly. If he gets paid twice a month, the employer can spread it out over those paychecks. If your ex doesn't make enough to garnish $600 from one paycheck, the employer cannot, by federal law take more than he makes or more than 50% of his pay.

What I'm saying is that while your order may say one amount, if that amount exceeds federal law, the employer cannot take the money.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
VeronicaGia said:
You are reading the order too literally. If he gets paid weekly, the employer spread the amount out weekly. If he gets paid twice a month, the employer can spread it out over those paychecks. If your ex doesn't make enough to garnish $600 from one paycheck, the employer cannot, by federal law take more than he makes or more than 50% of his pay.

What I'm saying is that while your order may say one amount, if that amount exceeds federal law, the employer cannot take the money.
So you are saying that if a person with wages being garnished is sick for , say as an arbitrary figure, 3 days of a one week pay period. The garnishment must cease for that pay period?? and it is not allowed to be made up from other weeks , assuming there is enough in other weeks that would allow additional $ to be taken?

If so, then this would need to be taken back to court as an arrearage and the employer is correct. If there is a mechanism to allow the "missed" garnishments to be recouped without court, maybe VeronicaGia will know.
 

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
Of course, if OP would do the math, she'd realize that she gets more by the employer garnishing $300 every two weeks than if they garnished $600 every month.

$600 x 12mo/yr = $7200/yr

$300 x 26wk/yr = $7800.

So she may want to quit the whining.

(edit) So by their not garnishing for that one pay period, she's not out anything from what is court ordered.
 

Neal1421

Senior Member
stealth2 said:
Of course, if OP would do the math, she'd realize that she gets more by the employer garnishing $300 every two weeks than if they garnished $600 every month.

$600 x 12mo/yr = $7200/yr

$300 x 26wk/yr = $7800.

So she may want to quit the whining.

(edit) So by their not garnishing for that one pay period, she's not out anything from what is court ordered.
Well see here's the thing with that though. My fiance's job does the same thing, it deducts 350 each time he gets paid except in the instance where he gets paid 3 time a month which happens about 3-4 times a year. They will only deduct what the court order says to deduct per month which is $700, once that amount has been deducted if he gets paid again that month, nothing comes out of his check until the next month.

I can't say for a fact that is what is happening in this particular situation, however it does happen this way.
 
justalayman said:
So you are saying that if a person with wages being garnished is sick for , say as an arbitrary figure, 3 days of a one week pay period. The garnishment must cease for that pay period?? and it is not allowed to be made up from other weeks , assuming there is enough in other weeks that would allow additional $ to be taken?

If so, then this would need to be taken back to court as an arrearage and the employer is correct. If there is a mechanism to allow the "missed" garnishments to be recouped without court, maybe VeronicaGia will know.
I don't know that the garnishment would cease, but it would more likely decrease to 50% of the take home. :) I think. Haven't had my coffee yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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