What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas
Ok, the long story.
I am dad. Mom dropped the children off on my doorstep in 1998 and signed over custody to me. She was ordered in 1998 to pay $340/month in child support. She was given a standard visitation schedule, etc.
Long story short, she never paid support. I never withheld the girls from her and she was able to always exercise her visitation. In 2000, she remarried and began having more children. Any time I asked for support or help I got the "Blood from a turnip" line and hung up on.
Fast forward. 2005, she decides she is going to try to file for custody. We go to court and the court sees that she is 22K in arrearages. She is questioned and says she cannot pay because she is unemployed. When asked further, its revealed she is unemployed by choice, as she and her husband decided that it would be cheaper for her to be a stay-at-home mom of their 3 children. So, judge upholds order of $340/month. In addition, she places mother of our girls under arrest. She is given probation, had to pay 5K bond to get out of jail. She is now also ordered $200/month arrearages on top of her regular order.
The terms of her probation state that if she falls 45 days behind, she is to serve the remainder of her 180 day sentence.
She has fallen multiple months behind on numerous occasions since then. The only guaranteed money is when they take her tax refund. When she was almost 2 years behind, the Texas AG FINALLY had a warrant issued for her arrest (never mind the whole 45 day probation thing). She was put in jail and had to pay 10K bond to be released.
We go back to court, presumably in regards to the probation violation. Instead, it turns into a hearing for modification. She is now working a part-time job and her lawyer states that she has been ordered to pay too much for her income (mind you-- her support was based on her wages in 1998--- 9 bucks an hour). I argue that she is on probation for non-support and in the 2005 case it was determined that her voluntary underemployment was not considered. The judge looks at the case and says "in terms of non-payment, I've seen worse".. and LOWERS her support order. To $214/month.
The order was to be temporary since she had just started the job. We go back to court in December. She has started working less hours in anticipation of the court date (I know, because the checks I'm getting that they are taking out of her wages are getting smaller and smaller). Not only has she NOT met the $214 ONCE in the 6 months since the last court date, she has not paid ANY of the arrearages.
The final kick in the head? Her lawyer is petitioning for her probation to be dropped (it was set for 10 years) on the grounds that with the 10K bond she posted, her arrears are currently under 5K.
So the question is-- what is the point of an order if it isn't enforced? If the gender was switched, I can guarantee she'd be in jail over this. Why such a gender bias in court?
Ok, the long story.
I am dad. Mom dropped the children off on my doorstep in 1998 and signed over custody to me. She was ordered in 1998 to pay $340/month in child support. She was given a standard visitation schedule, etc.
Long story short, she never paid support. I never withheld the girls from her and she was able to always exercise her visitation. In 2000, she remarried and began having more children. Any time I asked for support or help I got the "Blood from a turnip" line and hung up on.
Fast forward. 2005, she decides she is going to try to file for custody. We go to court and the court sees that she is 22K in arrearages. She is questioned and says she cannot pay because she is unemployed. When asked further, its revealed she is unemployed by choice, as she and her husband decided that it would be cheaper for her to be a stay-at-home mom of their 3 children. So, judge upholds order of $340/month. In addition, she places mother of our girls under arrest. She is given probation, had to pay 5K bond to get out of jail. She is now also ordered $200/month arrearages on top of her regular order.
The terms of her probation state that if she falls 45 days behind, she is to serve the remainder of her 180 day sentence.
She has fallen multiple months behind on numerous occasions since then. The only guaranteed money is when they take her tax refund. When she was almost 2 years behind, the Texas AG FINALLY had a warrant issued for her arrest (never mind the whole 45 day probation thing). She was put in jail and had to pay 10K bond to be released.
We go back to court, presumably in regards to the probation violation. Instead, it turns into a hearing for modification. She is now working a part-time job and her lawyer states that she has been ordered to pay too much for her income (mind you-- her support was based on her wages in 1998--- 9 bucks an hour). I argue that she is on probation for non-support and in the 2005 case it was determined that her voluntary underemployment was not considered. The judge looks at the case and says "in terms of non-payment, I've seen worse".. and LOWERS her support order. To $214/month.
The order was to be temporary since she had just started the job. We go back to court in December. She has started working less hours in anticipation of the court date (I know, because the checks I'm getting that they are taking out of her wages are getting smaller and smaller). Not only has she NOT met the $214 ONCE in the 6 months since the last court date, she has not paid ANY of the arrearages.
The final kick in the head? Her lawyer is petitioning for her probation to be dropped (it was set for 10 years) on the grounds that with the 10K bond she posted, her arrears are currently under 5K.
So the question is-- what is the point of an order if it isn't enforced? If the gender was switched, I can guarantee she'd be in jail over this. Why such a gender bias in court?
Be patient and you will likely get it via her federal taxes.