What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Mississippi
Hello all! I have a question, and it's a little confusing so I'll try to explain as best I can.
OK, I have physical custody of mine and my exwife's 3 kids. Regarding child support, she is ordered to pay $900 per month, with $450 being due the 1st of each month and $450 being due the 15th of each month. She is currently in arrears in the amount of $2,950.
The exact wording of the order is as follows:
"The parties have agreed that (exwife) does not have to pay child support for periods that she has the children for an uninterrupted period of 7 days or more. Child support during that time shall be prorated according to the following calculation:
1. $900 divided by total # of days in the month being prorated = X
2. X times # of days being prorated (# of days (exwife) has the minor children during that month) = Y
3. $900 minus Y = Z
Z= amount of child support payable by (exwife) to (me) for that month."
Example: IF she had the kids from July 1-July 20, the calculation would be:
$900/31 = $29
$29 X 20 = $580
$900 - $580 = $320
$320 is the amount she would have to pay me for July.
Her summer visitation is ordered as follows:
"(Exwife) shall have the children for summer visitation beginning on June 24th at 6 pm and ending at 6 pm on the date that is 1 week prior to the children starting the new school year. The parties have agreed that it is in the children's best interest to be home for the week prior to school beginning."
This year, school starts August 4th, so her visitation would have been June 24th to July 28th.
She lives 8 hours away, and because of her work schedule, she won't have the kids at all this summer. (Not downing her for it, gotta do what ya gotta do to pay the bills.)
She and I spoke at the end of June, and she said she was going to try to get the kids on July 1st and keep them for a few weeks. She said that when she did that, she would still send the full amount of child support for July (even though it should/would be prorated) and the extra above the proration would go towards her $2950 arrears balance. Cool. I was fine with that.
July 1st came and went and I didn't hear from her about getting the kids. She emailed me late last week and said that because of work and the distance, she's not going to be able to get the kids at all this summer. Neither of us mentioned child support.
I got a payment of $450 from her today, and the memo says "back support." Because she isn't getting the kids, I am crediting it to current support that is due on the 15th. Leaving her arrears balance still at $2950. I emailed her about it so we would be on the same page.
She responded that because this is her court-ordered visitation time, she should get a proration whether she has the kids or not and wants the whole $450 and the $450 she sent on the 1st to be credited to her arrears. She said that leaves an arrears balance of $2050.
I think our order is specific and clear that she only gets a proration when she actually has the kids for 7 days or more, not when she's SUPPOSED to have them.
Which of us is interpreting the order correctly?
Hello all! I have a question, and it's a little confusing so I'll try to explain as best I can.
OK, I have physical custody of mine and my exwife's 3 kids. Regarding child support, she is ordered to pay $900 per month, with $450 being due the 1st of each month and $450 being due the 15th of each month. She is currently in arrears in the amount of $2,950.
The exact wording of the order is as follows:
"The parties have agreed that (exwife) does not have to pay child support for periods that she has the children for an uninterrupted period of 7 days or more. Child support during that time shall be prorated according to the following calculation:
1. $900 divided by total # of days in the month being prorated = X
2. X times # of days being prorated (# of days (exwife) has the minor children during that month) = Y
3. $900 minus Y = Z
Z= amount of child support payable by (exwife) to (me) for that month."
Example: IF she had the kids from July 1-July 20, the calculation would be:
$900/31 = $29
$29 X 20 = $580
$900 - $580 = $320
$320 is the amount she would have to pay me for July.
Her summer visitation is ordered as follows:
"(Exwife) shall have the children for summer visitation beginning on June 24th at 6 pm and ending at 6 pm on the date that is 1 week prior to the children starting the new school year. The parties have agreed that it is in the children's best interest to be home for the week prior to school beginning."
This year, school starts August 4th, so her visitation would have been June 24th to July 28th.
She lives 8 hours away, and because of her work schedule, she won't have the kids at all this summer. (Not downing her for it, gotta do what ya gotta do to pay the bills.)
She and I spoke at the end of June, and she said she was going to try to get the kids on July 1st and keep them for a few weeks. She said that when she did that, she would still send the full amount of child support for July (even though it should/would be prorated) and the extra above the proration would go towards her $2950 arrears balance. Cool. I was fine with that.
July 1st came and went and I didn't hear from her about getting the kids. She emailed me late last week and said that because of work and the distance, she's not going to be able to get the kids at all this summer. Neither of us mentioned child support.
I got a payment of $450 from her today, and the memo says "back support." Because she isn't getting the kids, I am crediting it to current support that is due on the 15th. Leaving her arrears balance still at $2950. I emailed her about it so we would be on the same page.
She responded that because this is her court-ordered visitation time, she should get a proration whether she has the kids or not and wants the whole $450 and the $450 she sent on the 1st to be credited to her arrears. She said that leaves an arrears balance of $2050.
I think our order is specific and clear that she only gets a proration when she actually has the kids for 7 days or more, not when she's SUPPOSED to have them.
Which of us is interpreting the order correctly?