Confused

[Neal1421]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? TN

My son's dad also has an older daughter by another woman. They have been garnishing his wages for over a year however yesterday he received a letter from the child support office that he is behind in his payments. When the original order was set, they included an amount for arrears in his payments which have also been garnished from his check. How can they come now stating that he is behind in his payments if they have been taking it out of his check when he gets paid?

 

[seniorjudge]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? TN

My son's dad also has an older daughter by another woman. They have been garnishing his wages for over a year however yesterday he received a letter from the child support office that he is behind in his payments. When the original order was set, they included an amount for arrears in his payments which have also been garnished from his check. How can they come now stating that he is behind in his payments if they have been taking it out of his check when he gets paid?

Your question is a good one and pa needs to be asking the child support people your question.

They are famous for screwing up records.

 

[Content]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? TN

My son's dad also has an older daughter by another woman. They have been garnishing his wages for over a year however yesterday he received a letter from the child support office that he is behind in his payments. When the original order was set, they included an amount for arrears in his payments which have also been garnished from his check. How can they come now stating that he is behind in his payments if they have been taking it out of his check when he gets paid?

My DH has a case right now in TN that is originally from Michigan. He hasn't paid a single penny on the case in 2 years. Because each time they try to determine how much is owed they come back with completely new numbers!! We have been in front of the judge 4 times now and the judge has told them to get a final number and present it to them and they will sign saying that's the final amount owed. Keep in mind since it's not being paid it's not going to the girl anyways, it's all money owed to the state of michigan for medical expenses etc...so none of it would ever go to the girl. And the states are NOT working together to get a final amount due!!! TN has sorta tried. But at the same time they keep saying he should pay!! When the last 3 years before that when he paid they can't find half of the payments even though we have money order receipts!! Watch them VERY closely TN hires the biggest morons I have ever meet in my life. Don't trust them and keep VERY good records of all payments EVER made. Also check in every so often to make sure all payments are being credited properly and keep copies of all correspondance with them.

 

[Neal1421]

Confusing part

Another thing that is confusing about the situation is that the support is set up to be paid bi-weekly. He gets paid on Saturdays and there have been several times when he has gotten 3 checks in a month like in Oct. They only took the money out of his check for first 2 checks in the usual amount paid per month which left his 3rd check free to pay other expenses and he thinks that this might be what they are coming after him for. Could this be possible? Also if that is they case, wouldn't that be their mistake not his? Can they make him pay more?

 

[Zephyr]

Another thing that is confusing about the situation is that the support is set up to be paid bi-weekly. He gets paid on Saturdays and there have been several times when he has gotten 3 checks in a month like in Oct. They only took the money out of his check for first 2 checks in the usual amount paid per month which left his 3rd check free to pay other expenses and he thinks that this might be what they are coming after him for. Could this be possible? Also if that is they case, wouldn't that be their mistake not his? Can they make him pay more?

it would be their mistake and not his, however he would still owe the money

 

[Content]

it would be their mistake and not his, however he would still owe the money

I would think it would be his employer's mistake as well. They are supposed to follow the court order, and I haven't seen any orders that say the 1 and 2nd paycheck of the month only.....soooo...while the money is still owed employer hasn't been deducting it like they were supposed to and the cs office has just now caught the mistake.

 

[seniorjudge]

I would think it would be his employer's mistake as well. They are supposed to follow the court order, and I haven't seen any orders that say the 1 and 2nd paycheck of the month only.....soooo...while the money is still owed employer hasn't been deducting it like they were supposed to and the cs office has just now caught the mistake.

Look, your husband knew how much he had to pay.

Just because the bureaucrats and the boss make mistakes, that does NOT relieve him of his responsibilities.

 

[Zephyr]

I would think it would be his employer's mistake as well. They are supposed to follow the court order, and I haven't seen any orders that say the 1 and 2nd paycheck of the month only.....soooo...while the money is still owed employer hasn't been deducting it like they were supposed to and the cs office has just now caught the mistake.

doesn't mean he still doesn't owe it...

 

[Content]

I would think it would be his employer's mistake as well. They are supposed to follow the court order, and I haven't seen any orders that say the 1 and 2nd paycheck of the month only.....soooo...while the money is still owed employer hasn't been deducting it like they were supposed to and the cs office has just now caught the mistake.

I never said it wasn't owed!!!!!

 

[Neal1421]

No need to be rude here

Look, your husband knew how much he had to pay.

Just because the bureaucrats and the boss make mistakes, that does NOT relieve him of his responsibilities.

He knew that he was obligated to pay $700 a month to be deducted from his check bi-weekly which was taken out of his check. He is not trying to be relieved from his responsibilities because he take GOOD care of his daughter, unlike the mother who never does her hair, makes her wear clothes and shoes that are too small, and doesn't try to teach the child good hygeine. He under the assumption that since she had already gotten the alotted $700 for the month that he did not owe anything else especially since they were garnishing his check.

 

[Zephyr]

He knew that he was obligated to pay $700 a month to be deducted from his check bi-weekly which was taken out of his check. He is not trying to be relieved from his responsibilities because he take GOOD care of his daughter, unlike the mother who never does her hair, makes her wear clothes and shoes that are too small, and doesn't try to teach the child good hygeine. He under the assumption that since she had already gotten the alotted $700 for the month that he did not owe anything else especially since they were garnishing his check.

however, usually when a month has an extra pay period the next month is actually a little shorter, at the end of the year he can easily look at everything he has paid and see if it works out to 700 per month. and in the end it is his obligation to pay and his responsibilty to make sure it is handled coreectly so that he is subjected to the mess he is in now.

 

[topsidder]

My experience:

If your state has made a mistake in it's record keeping and / or reporting - remember what your legal remedy is - and this will not cost you a dime - take them to court - small claims. You cannot seek attorney fees from the state or federal government - however you may seek damages. Check your state statues; my understanding is that all states are federally mandated to accuratly report all collections and disbursements in a timely fashion. Any deviation jeapordizes their federal funding.