spouse income

[ranyone]

What is the name of your state? California

Here's my question: I have been paying my ex wife child support for about 5 years now, based on the dissomaster numbers that we agreed on when we were officially divorced. Since then, she has remarried and has chosen not to go back to work. (she wasn't working when we made the original calculations) She married a man who makes a lot more money than me, and so I am stuck paying her $250 a month, while I live in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment and they live in a 4,000 sq. ft home with all that they want, travelling all the time and spending money like crazy. I have always been told that the spouses income cannot be considered when child support is arranged, and in theory I agree. I want to support my daughter in every way possible, but with our situation...where she lives with me 50% and her mom 50% of the time, how can this situation be right??

here's another twist....I will be getting married this summer, so even if my ex's spouse is considered, wouldn't we then have to consider my wife's income after we are married as well?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state? California

Here's my question: I have been paying my ex wife child support for about 5 years now, based on the dissomaster numbers that we agreed on when we were officially divorced. Since then, she has remarried and has chosen not to go back to work. (she wasn't working when we made the original calculations) She married a man who makes a lot more money than me, and so I am stuck paying her $250 a month, while I live in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment and they live in a 4,000 sq. ft home with all that they want, travelling all the time and spending money like crazy. I have always been told that the spouses income cannot be considered when child support is arranged, and in theory I agree. I want to support my daughter in every way possible, but with our situation...where she lives with me 50% and her mom 50% of the time, how can this situation be right??

here's another twist....I will be getting married this summer, so even if my ex's spouse is considered, wouldn't we then have to consider my wife's income after we are married as well?

\


My response:

I've got a very tiny violin I'm playing for you. It's a sad tune, from "Schinder's List".

New spouse income is not considered. All because your ex "move up" on the financial scale, doesn't obviate your responsibilities.

You shouldn't get married. You can't afford it.

IAAL

 

[nextwife]

He should find a spouse who makes more than he does, like his ex did.

 

[ranyone]

\


My response:

I've got a very tiny violin I'm playing for you. It's a sad tune, from "Schinder's List".

New spouse income is not considered. All because your ex "move up" on the financial scale, doesn't obviate your responsibilities.

You shouldn't get married. You can't afford it.

IAAL

Enough with the violin...I am asking a legitimate question. If she was down and out and couldn't provide at all, I assume that I would be asked for more money, and vice-versa...if she marries a guy with a ton of money I shouldn't have to pay as much. It seems to make sense to me. What is the purpose of child support anyway? isn't it to make sure that the child is provided for?...well, if both parents can do that at an equal level, then why have any support? If it was the other way around, I would feel guilty asking for money. Like I said in my original post, "I want to support my daughter in every way possible". I am doing that, have done that, and will continue to do that. I used to care for my daughter 100% of the time, from when she was 2-6 years old, she rarely if ever saw her mom...now she comes back, marries rich, and gets money from me...
maybe i'm not even talking about a legal problem anymore....just a moral one.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? California

Here's my question: I have been paying my ex wife child support for about 5 years now, based on the dissomaster numbers that we agreed on when we were officially divorced. Since then, she has remarried and has chosen not to go back to work. (she wasn't working when we made the original calculations) She married a man who makes a lot more money than me, and so I am stuck paying her $250 a month, while I live in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment and they live in a 4,000 sq. ft home with all that they want, travelling all the time and spending money like crazy. I have always been told that the spouses income cannot be considered when child support is arranged, and in theory I agree. I want to support my daughter in every way possible, but with our situation...where she lives with me 50% and her mom 50% of the time, how can this situation be right??

here's another twist....I will be getting married this summer, so even if my ex's spouse is considered, wouldn't we then have to consider my wife's income after we are married as well?

Do you realize that $250.00 a month is actually a very low child support payment? Do you realize that if you make more money now than you did when your support was first calculated that you could actually end up with a increase rather than a decrease?

If I had a dollar for every case I have seen where a parent tried to get a child support reduction in situations similar to yours, and ended up with an increase instead, I would be able to pay off my mortgage.

 

[linm]

Enough with the violin...I am asking a legitimate question. If she was down and out and couldn't provide at all, I assume that I would be asked for more money, and vice-versa...if she marries a guy with a ton of money I shouldn't have to pay as much. It seems to make sense to me. What is the purpose of child support anyway? isn't it to make sure that the child is provided for?...well, if both parents can do that at an equal level, then why have any support? If it was the other way around, I would feel guilty asking for money. Like I said in my original post, "I want to support my daughter in every way possible". I am doing that, have done that, and will continue to do that. I used to care for my daughter 100% of the time, from when she was 2-6 years old, she rarely if ever saw her mom...now she comes back, marries rich, and gets money from me...
maybe i'm not even talking about a legal problem anymore....just a moral one.

I too, am going to assume your ex hasn't asked for any increases since the remarriage. I'm not sure about California, but I know in Florida in rare circumstances, income from a new spouse or significant other can be considered. In one case I read, household contributions from a live in boyfriend were considered and caused a reduction in alimony, which I think is totally fair.

So here's what you need to do: Go see an attorney. Around here they're anywhere from $300 - $400 per hour. In CA it's probably more. Now, you know your ex has money and she's going to fight, on principle, cos you're probably barely paying the kid's lunch money each week. So, after mediation and a couple of hearings, you're going to rack up anywhere from $10,000 to $50,000 in attorney fees. And after all is said and done, if they actually calculate a contribution to your ex from her new spouse, it's not very likely going to be for a 4000 sq ft house; it's going to be a small part of it, like a couple of hundred rent, a couple of hundred food and so on. And then your support amount is going to get raised. And you're probably going to get stuck with her attorney fees too, as the prevailing party.

So, since it's a moral issue to you, go ahead and spend tens of thousands of dollars to try to get out of $250 a month for your child.

 

[haiku]

well 250 IS enough, if it was come to fairly, and it is paid in full every month. Obviously we are not talking about people whether, NCP or CP. who were "rich" to begin with.

But I think the problem here is the OP does not understand that the ONLY people obligated to support HIS child are him and his exwife.

Its great that his ex made a great financial choice in marriage, but that step dad does not have to contribute a dime to his step child. Its not his responsibility.

the OP can also remarry "well" and add more income to his home too, that his ex and child will not be entitled to.

We can use that logic in a different way and say that now that there is a STEP dad in the house, there is no need for a DAD, right?

 

[rmet4nzkx]

I too, am going to assume your ex hasn't asked for any increases since the remarriage. I'm not sure about California, but I know in Florida in rare circumstances, income from a new spouse or significant other can be considered. In one case I read, household contributions from a live in boyfriend were considered and caused a reduction in alimony, which I think is totally fair.

So here's what you need to do: Go see an attorney. Around here they're anywhere from $300 - $400 per hour. In CA it's probably more. Now, you know your ex has money and she's going to fight, on principle, cos you're probably barely paying the kid's lunch money each week. So, after mediation and a couple of hearings, you're going to rack up anywhere from $10,000 to $50,000 in attorney fees. And after all is said and done, if they actually calculate a contribution to your ex from her new spouse, it's not very likely going to be for a 4000 sq ft house; it's going to be a small part of it, like a couple of hundred rent, a couple of hundred food and so on. And then your support amount is going to get raised. And you're probably going to get stuck with her attorney fees too, as the prevailing party.

So, since it's a moral issue to you, go ahead and spend tens of thousands of dollars to try to get out of $250 a month for your child.

PLeazzzzz
Limn,
Don't answer questions with a bunch of gibberish that has nothing to do with California law!
OP can file for modification if they so chose, if they actually have 50/50 physical custody there might be an adjustment but they need to weigh all their options and potential consequences.
OP should go to their superior court site and access the family law section and become educated before they take any action.
$250 is not much child support but perhaps with 50/50 parenting time it might make a difference.
The income for a new spouse isn't usually considered.
If the judge originally ordered the mother to work, and didn't, then there might be some adjustment, but that isn't even certain.

 

[ranyone]

okay...here's a more basic question:

Beleive me. I have considered all of this information before. And thank you all for your ideas. I know how much money and effort would be expended trying to fight my situation, and in the end it probably wouldn't be a big adjustment anyway. On top of that, it would create a great deal of animosity between her mom and I where it doesn't exsist now. oh, and another thing, on paper I am the custodial parent, with 51% custody..though in practice it's equal time.


Onwards.....here's a question I asked in one of my posts:

if there is 50/50 custody, and both parents can provide for the child in a similar and adequate way, why should there be support payments at all?

 

[somedude]

What almost everyone on here has seemed to miss (probably because they were too busy TRYING to be funny -- key word "trying" -- but even doing a piss poor job at that), is that you said your ex-wife is not working.

Why is that?

As someone mentioned, you could wind up paying more, but I've read where most states just because the custodial parent doesn't work doesn't exempt them from their financial support (meaning YOU pay more). She CAN work, but refuses.

Do some state research into this and see what your options are without getting an attorney. The fact that you are supporting your child and she technically isn't (her new hubby is) says alot about her. And it's NOT good.

Like I said, many seemed to forget the whole "she's not working" part. No wonder this site has become more and more of a joke and more of a laugh riot from these so-called regular posters claiming legal knowledge.

 

[linm]

I, for one, did not miss the whole 'she's not working part.' She wasn't working when the support amount was determined. In my state, if not all, then at least minimum wage would be imputed to her to calculate the proper amount of support for both parties. I think the rest of us just took it for granted that's how it went or the poster had seriously bad representation in the first place and made no complaints.

However, I do agree with you on one point. That the woman chooses not to work does say a lot about her. Rather than chase the all mighty dollar and be able to afford a better vacation spot in the Hamptons, she chooses to stay home and raise her child. I cannot agree that the woman should be compelled to work and the child relegated to some sort of babysitter, when clearly, her husband is able and willing to provide at least a normal lifestyle for the child. Or do you suggest she should work 40 hours a week in addition to full time child care in the hopes that somehow the noncustodial's support will go down?

Think of the child first and what's best for the child. If you always do that, everything else will work out.

 

[linm]

well 250 IS enough, if it was come to fairly, and it is paid in full every month. Obviously we are not talking about people whether, NCP or CP. who were "rich" to begin with.

But I think the problem here is the OP does not understand that the ONLY people obligated to support HIS child are him and his exwife.

Its great that his ex made a great financial choice in marriage, but that step dad does not have to contribute a dime to his step child. Its not his responsibility.

the OP can also remarry "well" and add more income to his home too, that his ex and child will not be entitled to.

We can use that logic in a different way and say that now that there is a STEP dad in the house, there is no need for a DAD, right?

applause applause. Very well said, haiku.

 

[audster]

However, I do agree with you on one point. That the woman chooses not to work does say a lot about her. Rather than chase the all mighty dollar and be able to afford a better vacation spot in the Hamptons, she chooses to stay home and raise her child. I cannot agree that the woman should be compelled to work and the child relegated to some sort of babysitter, when clearly, her husband is able and willing to provide at least a normal lifestyle for the child. Or do you suggest she should work 40 hours a week in addition to full time child care in the hopes that somehow the noncustodial's support will go down?

Think of the child first and what's best for the child. If you always do that, everything else will work out.

No, i think your missing an important point: 50/50 parenting time! I understand OP's concern....both bio parents have equal time with children, which should translate to equal financial responsiblity. The cost of raising chlid is the same no matter what home the child is in. I know this is more of a moral debate, rather than a legal one, but by your logic CP's should be allowed to remain home and the burden of support should rest solely on the NCP. You cannot condone that and the whole "step parents have no responsibility" theory at the same time....kinda' like having your cake and eating it". If only bioparents are responsible for thier children (no problem with that) then both parents have a responsability to financially support children (read=work!!!!).
Your being kind of a hypocrit here....besides....it's the 21st century....most married couples are 2 income families anyway!

but that's just my opinion....i could be wrong.....NOT!!!!

 

[linm]

No, i think your missing an important point: 50/50 parenting time! I understand OP's concern....both bio parents have equal time with children, which should translate to equal financial responsiblity. The cost of raising chlid is the same no matter what home the child is in. I know this is more of a moral debate, rather than a legal one, but by your logic CP's should be allowed to remain home and the burden of support should rest solely on the NCP. You cannot condone that and the whole "step parents have no responsibility" theory at the same time....kinda' like having your cake and eating it". If only bioparents are responsible for thier children (no problem with that) then both parents have a responsability to financially support children (read=work!!!!).
Your being kind of a hypocrit here....besides....it's the 21st century....most married couples are 2 income families anyway!

but that's just my opinion....i could be wrong.....NOT!!!!

You know, this isn't really my fight and I don't generally respond to being baited because it's a pretty childish thing to do. However, I do think you're being sincere, so let me clarify:

1. My initial point was that since it appears nothing has changed since the initial order except the former spouse rewed, it is not likely the support amount will do anything but go up from here. Even trying it may be a lengthy and expensive battle that I really don't think would be worth it to OP, especially since OP opined that it would destroy what is now a good relationship with the ex.

2. Yes, each parent has a duty to provide support for their child and the stepparent has no responsibility for the child. What difference does it make to OP whether the contribution comes from a paycheck earned exclusively by the former spouse, an inheritance or lottery winnings, for that matter? So long as her contibution is made and by the way, saving him from the additional cost of having to kick in for after school and summer care, who on earth cares what perfectly legal source it comes from? Again, she can work 40 hours and have even more jewelry or she can stay home with the child. Since her contibution is made either way, I think she's making the right choice. I think it's great when there can be a stay at home parent and have known many of both genders. No one has said anything about the child suffering any financial lack because the CP isn't working, nor has OP made any complaint about the ex's parenting skills.

3. Bottom line, OP should think it through, potential benefits v. potential losses and if he still feels it's worth doing, maybe look into mediation rather than a full blown court battle. Myself, I'd much rather pay the money to the ex and be pretty sure at least some would go to the child rather than pay it out to an attorney in hopes of not paying the ex. But that's just my opinion. The general rule for modification is a substantial change in circumstances. Once again, the only change I have read is that the ex remarried.

 

[karma1]

Pick me!! Pick me!! BTDT in CA

What is the name of your state? California

Here's my question: I have been paying my ex wife child support for about 5 years now, based on the dissomaster numbers that we agreed on when we were officially divorced. Since then, she has remarried and has chosen not to go back to work. (she wasn't working when we made the original calculations) She married a man who makes a lot more money than me, and so I am stuck paying her $250 a month, while I live in a tiny 1 bedroom apartment and they live in a 4,000 sq. ft home with all that they want, travelling all the time and spending money like crazy. I have always been told that the spouses income cannot be considered when child support is arranged, and in theory I agree. I want to support my daughter in every way possible, but with our situation...where she lives with me 50% and her mom 50% of the time, how can this situation be right??

here's another twist....I will be getting married this summer, so even if my ex's spouse is considered, wouldn't we then have to consider my wife's income after we are married as well?

but a question first---how old is your child?

Kay, from my own experience---my husbands ex filed for a modification for support AFTER we got married. My income was NOT included in any way, shape or form for the calculations.....now, she was not working at the time of the original order but considering the children were of school age when she filed for the last modification, the judge did imput income to her since she was only working part time.....there was NO reason she could not be working full time since the kids were in school---that's why I ask how old your child is. She, in fact, had to appear before the judge to answer why she was NOT working full time?
So, Id be consulting attorneys, if for nothing else, to get a detailed look at your whole custody/visitation/support order and see what might be changed. There are many in the phone book that offer free first consults....

Good luck~