ex-wife wants more & more & more

[Humusluvr]

Or toes. Some people have freakishly long and/or creative toes.

Ewwww, creative toes.

 

[Isis1]

you've been looking at my feet, have you? *sigh* yes, i know i can hail a cab with my big toe .

but hey, if dad still can come online, i'm sure someone would help HIM. even my 10 year old boy figured out how to google a few years ago. who is marrying these people? 12 years ago it was mandatory to take a typing class in high school. what happened???

 

[stealth2]

As I posted in shogrl's thread, if my elderly mother and kids' other grandma can sort out how to use a computer, surely big old burly manly man can figure out how an on switch works and how to use the funny little buttons on the keyboard. Just tell him it's like a big tv remote.

 

[Humusluvr]

What are our options here?

My husband's ex-wife left him several years ago. She had a good job at the time. She has a college education. In the past 4 years, she has had 6 jobs and has moved 8 times. They have shared custody - equal time with child. She is required to live locally so as to keep the child in the same school. She gets child support but not the full 20%. She is required to pay 1/2 daycare, medical and dental but refuses. So, to keep the bills paid, we pay them, in addition to all of the extras (we are not complaining about paying for the child). Every few months, she threatens to go to court for more money. When she quits a job or loses a husband/boyfriend, she cries to us for more money. She often quits a job without having one in line and moves in with her parents. She has also since re-married and divorced. She has a problem (addiction) with prescription drugs and has recently been diagnosed as bi-polar. She currently has no job and seeking legal help to take my husband back to court for 20%.

What are our options here? We do not want to keep the child from seeing her mother but she really needs stability. Is there a case for custody? Can she get the full 20% (state of IL) when she is doing nothing to help herself? My husband and I both have good, steady jobs and she wants to cash in on that.

Legal Answer - mom can threaten and cry all she wants. Until she actually does something, like filing, your hubby should follow the order to the letter.

Yes, she can get all the child support the child is entitled to. You aren't paying for mom, your hubby is paying for his child.

All exes think the other ex is psycho/whiny/stupid. That's why they are an ex.

 

[mom_2_2]

Yeah, the jokes are real cute! You must really be bored and need a better job!

For anyone that would like to give real advice:

Let me clarify myself**************..I have done nothing to interefere in any of the proceedings between Mom and Dad. I don't discuss issues with Mom or the attorney. I sit back and support my husband like all the little "how to be a good step-mom" pamphlets say.

Again, all Dad wants to know is what can happen in this scenario? One thing I forgot to add is she has no job because she failed a drug test. Due to not having a job, Mom feels she is entitled to more child support. Would it be likely that a judge would agree?

Thanks!

 

[StampGirl]

Yeah, the jokes are real cute! You must really be bored and need a better job!

For anyone that would like to give real advice:

Let me clarify myself**************..I have done nothing to interefere in any of the proceedings between Mom and Dad. I don't discuss issues with Mom or the attorney. I sit back and support my husband like all the little "how to be a good step-mom" pamphlets say.

Again, all Dad wants to know is what can happen in this scenario? One thing I forgot to add is she has no job because she failed a drug test. Due to not having a job, Mom feels she is entitled to more child support. Would it be likely that a judge would agree?

Thanks!

Let me clarify something for you: When Dad gets his own handle, and posts his own questions (like a big boy), then you will get your legal answer.

But because I am feeling generous I will say this: I would say that its a 44.33% chance the Judge may or may not side with the Mom. On the other hand the crystal ball says there is a 33.690% chance the judge may or may not side with Dad.

But a 1000% chance the judge will NOT side with YOU.

 

[CJane]

The fact is that in Illinois, the custodial parent is entitled to a certain % of the NCP's income regardless of the amount of time the NCP spends w/the child(ren) or what else they pay for. It's a straight percentage based on number of kids of the marriage.

So yes, Mom could definitely go back and file for the full 20% and have a really decent shot at getting it.

And yes, I think if DAD were to file for custody based on mom's apparent instability in housing, he'd have a decent shot at getting primary custody.

ETA: ****Mom's (CP's) income is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to CS matters in IL as well. Mom could be unemployed or making $2 Billion/year and she'd still be entitled to 20% of Dad's income.

 

[StampGirl]

The fact is that in Illinois, the custodial parent is entitled to a certain % of the NCP's income regardless of the amount of time the NCP spends w/the child(ren) or what else they pay for. It's a straight percentage based on number of kids of the marriage.

So yes, Mom could definitely go back and file for the full 20% and have a really decent shot at getting it.

And yes, I think if DAD were to file for custody based on mom's apparent instability in housing, he'd have a decent shot at getting primary custody.

CJane? I have a question.

If her moving so much wasn't an issue before (meaning Dad never took the issue before a judge etc), wouldn't it be considered a moot point now? I would think it would look like he was only bringing it to gain custody because Mom is filing for an increase in child support.

 

[stealth2]

CJane? I have a question.

If her moving so much wasn't an issue before (meaning Dad never took the issue before a judge etc), wouldn't it be considered a mute point now? I would think it would look like he was only bringing it to gain custody because Mom is filing for an increase in child support.

Moot, moot, moot, I say!

 

[StampGirl]

Moot, moot, moot, I say!

LOL oops sorry

 

[CJane]

CJane? I have a question.

If her moving so much wasn't an issue before (meaning Dad never took the issue before a judge etc), wouldn't it be considered a moot point now? I would think it would look like he was only bringing it to gain custody because Mom is filing for an increase in child support.

Not necessarily.

Sometimes instablility doesn't have as detrimental an impact on younger children as it does older. Or perhaps Mom has become less stable as time has worn on. Or perhaps Dad has become MORE stable.

Maybe Dad just didn't know that Mom's moving around (even if staying in the district) was a change in circumstances.

Also, Smom has said that this has all taken place in the past 4 years. That's a relatively short time span.

 

[StampGirl]

Not necessarily.

Sometimes instablility doesn't have as detrimental an impact on younger children as it does older. Or perhaps Mom has become less stable as time has worn on. Or perhaps Dad has become MORE stable.

Maybe Dad just didn't know that Mom's moving around (even if staying in the district) was a change in circumstances.

Also, Smom has said that this has all taken place in the past 4 years. That's a relatively short time span.

Thanks CJane

Again, a GREAT reason to have DAD post here. Then we know all the facts.

 

[CJane]

Thanks CJane

Again, a GREAT reason to have DAD post here. Then we know all the facts.

Yeah, well I'm not quite the **** about third parties as some people are. Granted, we don't have all the facts from the 3rd party, but we don't have ALL the facts from the CP or NCP either. We have THEIR version of the facts... and we all know that's never the whole story.

It was a general question. And frankly, just in case someone ever actually searches before asking a question, I'd rather they found a general answer (CS in IL is a %, etc) than a bunch of us kvetching about 3rd parties. How is THAT helping anyone?

/soapbox

 

[StampGirl]

Yeah, well I'm not quite the **** about third parties as some people are. Granted, we don't have all the facts from the 3rd party, but we don't have ALL the facts from the CP or NCP either. We have THEIR version of the facts... and we all know that's never the whole story.

It was a general question. And frankly, just in case someone ever actually searches before asking a question, I'd rather they found a general answer (CS in IL is a %, etc) than a bunch of us kvetching about 3rd parties. How is THAT helping anyone?

/soapbox

True.

Just frustrating when people feel they need to lie in order to help their spouse. Its easier to just say "Hey, my husband has a question about blahblahblah."

Guess the over-stepping issue has me going today....

 

[SopranoKris]

The fact is that in Illinois, the custodial parent is entitled to a certain % of the NCP's income regardless of the amount of time the NCP spends w/the child(ren) or what else they pay for. It's a straight percentage based on number of kids of the marriage.

So yes, Mom could definitely go back and file for the full 20% and have a really decent shot at getting it.

And yes, I think if DAD were to file for custody based on mom's apparent instability in housing, he'd have a decent shot at getting primary custody.

ETA: ****Mom's (CP's) income is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to CS matters in IL as well. Mom could be unemployed or making $2 Billion/year and she'd still be entitled to 20% of Dad's income.

Having just gone through a divorce in IL, the judge only signed off on an amount lower than 20% if BOTH parties agreed to it and there's a valid reason. In my case, because we agreed to other concessions with each other (in lieu of alimony or unallocated support), we chose to have a lower amount than the standard 20%. We had to explain to the judge our reasons and he questioned us in great DETAIL about our reasons and asked several times if we were both in agreement and neither one of us under duress to agree to the lower amount. So, I would assume that if they have an existing order for an amount lower than 20%, they were in agreement about it when the divorce took place.

For mom to quit a job of her own accord or to be fired for drug use, in my opinion, is not a valid reason for her to go back and start asking for the full 20%. Especially if there are existing orders for her to pay medical, dental & 1/2 daycare (which she is not doing, according to the OP).

I know in my situation, my ex never has held down a full time job for longer than 8 months in the whole 16 years we were married rolleyes. I wanted to make sure that we wouldn't be trotting back to court all the time for the "poor me, I'm broke" routine everytime he's out of work. Since I was not only footing the full responsibility for medical, dental, sports, tuition, etc., but also still providing medical & car insurance for my ex for a set duration, we decided on a lower CS %.

So if the ex in this case has already agreed to that lower amount, she's going to have to show a good reason to get the current CS orders modified. Correct? Wouldn't the judge look at the fact that she's not even living up to her portion of the orders? Just playing devil's advocate. And please, correct me if I'm wrong. I don't claim to be an expert