CS dischargeable??

[Gracie3787]

What is the name of your state? Florida
From what I have read on these boards I understand that sometimes a child support arrearage debt can be discharged in bankruptcy if the debt has been turned over to a collection agency . Some info before I ask my question:

CP filed for original CS order in Ga. Due to NCP living in Fl., Ga. sent proceedings to Fl.

The original and only orders have been issued by Fl. and Fl. retains jurisdiction over case.

Georgia (not Fl.) has done IRS refund intercepts.

In 2001 Ga. turned debt over to private collection agency, NCP recieved bills in mail and phone calls.

In 2002 Fl. issued an order (seperate from CS order) to pay CS arrears.

My question is this:
Under these circumstances, would the CS debt be dischargeable?

Any responses will be appreciated. Thanks.

 

[JETX]

In 2001 Ga. turned debt over to private collection agency, NCP recieved bills in mail and phone calls.
Under these circumstances, would the CS debt be dischargeable?

No. The support order itself was not sold or transferred to the 'private' agency. The 'private' debt collector is operating as an agent/assignee of the order owner.

 

[Gracie3787]

No. The support order itself was not sold or transferred to the 'private' agency. The 'private' debt collector is operating as an agent/assignee of the order owner.

Thanks for the reply. If the State of Florida had been the one to give debt to collection agency, would that have made any difference? I'm not sure what you mean by "order owner", however, I'm assuming that the owner is the state/court that has jurisdiction.

Until I started reading and posting on this site, I had always thought that CS debts and taxes can Never be discharged under any circumstances.
I am just trying to understand all of it, and I really appreciate your response.
Gracie

 

[JETX]

If the State of Florida had been the one to give debt to collection agency, would that have made any difference?

No. The state doesn't matter. The ONLY thing that matters is the OWNERSHIP of the order.

I'm not sure what you mean by "order owner", however, I'm assuming that the owner is the state/court that has jurisdiction.

Nope. The OWNER is the person who was awarded the judgment.... in the case of a child support order, that is the custodial parent.

From the US Bankruptcy Code, 11 USC 523:
(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228 (a), 1228 (b), or 1328 (b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt—
<snip>
(5) to a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor, for alimony to, maintenance for, or support of such spouse or child, in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record, determination made in accordance with State or territorial law by a governmental unit, or property settlement agreement, but not to the extent that—
(A) such debt is assigned to another entity, voluntarily, by operation of law, or otherwise (other than debts assigned pursuant to section 408(a)(3) of the Social Security Act, or any such debt which has been assigned to the Federal Government or to a State or any political subdivision of such State); or
(B) such debt includes a liability designated as alimony, maintenance, or support, unless such liability is actually in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support;

For other exceptions from discharge, go to:
http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode11/usc_sec_11_00000523----000-.html

 

[Anisah_H]

Sorry but this is just too much! Children are not possessions you buy on a credit card then cannot pay off. If cs could be bankrupted, there would be millions more bankruptcys, and many children would not be supported.

Anisah in NJ with 3 children, 1 of which is not being supported by his father

 

[Gracie3787]

Sorry but this is just too much! Children are not possessions you buy on a credit card then cannot pay off. If cs could be bankrupted, there would be millions more bankruptcys, and many children would not be supported.

Anisah in NJ with 3 children, 1 of which is not being supported by his father

You are very correct, children are not possesions you buy on a credit card and then not pay off.

On the other hand, children are also not possesions that a CP can run up credit cards for, then after they are grown, demand payment of 2 yrs total worth of CS arrears from NCP, claiming it to be "reimbursement" for those costs, AND after getting order, HAS THOSE COSTS DISHARGED IN BANKRUPTCY BY COMMITTING FRAUD. (long, sordid story).

I was simply asking a question because I couldn't understand how some CS is dischargeable and some isn,t, that's all.

Voicing your opinion is great, but please remember that you don't always know the whole story, or even what the poster asking the question plans on doing.
Anyway, your opinion has been noted.
Gracie

To Jetx, thanks for responding, I understand alot better now. Gracie

 

[JETX]

On the other hand, children are also not possesions that a CP can run up credit cards for, then after they are grown, demand payment of 2 yrs total worth of CS arrears from NCP

Sorry, but you are 100% WRONG!!.
The child support order was rendered by the court, based on an evaluation of the childrens needs... and the incomes/assets of the parents. It is ordered to be paid EVERY month.... not just the ones you want to pay. And if it had been paid as ordered.... then you would not find yourself in the position of being two years overdue!! And if you had paid as you were ordered.... it is possible that the custodial parent wouldn't have had to use those credit cards!!!

claiming it to be "reimbursement" for those costs, AND after getting order, HAS THOSE COSTS DISHARGED IN BANKRUPTCY BY COMMITTING FRAUD. (long, sordid story).

Sorry, but if your 'logic' (or actually ILLOGIC) is the same as that noted above.... please spare us the long sordid story.

 

[Gracie3787]

Sorry, but you are 100% WRONG!!.
The child support order was rendered by the court, based on an evaluation of the childrens needs... and the incomes/assets of the parents. It is ordered to be paid EVERY month.... not just the ones you want to pay. And if it had been paid as ordered.... then you would not find yourself in the position of being two years overdue!! And if you had paid as you were ordered.... it is possible that the custodial parent wouldn't have had to use those credit cards!!!


Sorry, but if your 'logic' (or actually ILLOGIC) is the same as that noted above.... please spare us the long sordid story.

Jetx,
Just a short explaination:
1. My logic is based on the LEGAL PRESUMPTIONS OF;
A. Arrearage payments are to "reimburse" CP for expenses paid during times of non payment.
B. CP had expenses that CP PAID for.

In this particular case the following happened:

1. NCP did not pay support from Aug. 1999 to April 2001.

2. During that time Oldest child emancipated (Apr'99), CP had only $380.00 in medical expenses for NCP's 2 other minor children (this number was provided to court/NCP by the CP herself) second oldest earned $22,000.00 and admitted to paying for her own car, toiletries, school lunches/supplies, CP was married, divorced again and produced 3 more children, CP had earned income of $56,000.00 . CP's credit card debts were for items such as DAYCARE (NCP'S youngest was 15 yrs old) clothes ( for all children) 4 televisions, 3 camcorders, 4 computers (3 sets of which mysteriously were "destroyed" IN VEHICLES and paid off by insurance. There was also a $12,000.00 above ground pool that the NCP's children had use of.(Please do not misunderstand me, this is not a reason to NOT pay support- NCP was VERY wrong for not paying for those 2 yrs.)

3.In Jan 2001 CP filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy- CP DID NOT list CS payments from father of her youngest child (ordered in Dec 2000).
4. On March 5 2001 CP recieved notice (and spoke to NCP who owed arrears) that a contempt hearing was set for Apr. 4.
5. On March 19 2001 CP had to amend bankruptcy petition, including fianancial statements- CP still did not disclose CS from youngest's father, nor did she disclose that an order existed for other NCP or the upcoming contempt hearing. CP's Chapter 13 plan was approved.

6.From April 4 2001 to June 2002 NCP paid ongoing support and $3,000.00 in tax intercepts. Second child emancipated Jan. 2002.
7. In June 2002 NCP was ordered to make weekly payments on arrears that were equal to on-going support for 1 remaining minor.

8. In July 2003 the bankruptcy trustee filed motion to dismiss CP's bankruptcy because payoff would not occur within allotted time. (Please remember- CP's chapter 13 payments were set according to the income she CLAIMED).

9. In response to trustees motion, CP filed to convert to CHAPTER 7. AGAIN, CP did not list/disclose youngest's fathers CS, nor NCP's On-going CS NOR NCP's arrears/ arrears payments. CP's Chapter 13 payments were stopped at that time.

10. From July 2003 to Dec.3 2003 there was 2 hearings on arrears for NCP- during which CP filed financial affidavits-claiming to still be paying Chapter 13 payments.

11. On Dec. 3 2003 CP's debts were disharged, even though if just $25.00 per month of the UNDISCLOSED income had been added to payments- debts would have been paid off within time allowed by law.

So, where is the arrears payments going?
To reimburse CP?- no, they were discharged-CP had expenses, but thru FRAUD-NEVER HAD TO PAY THEM.
To help CP with NCP'S MINOR KIDS' expenses? No- they are all adults and do not live at home.

The reality is that they go into the pocket of CP AND helps her support 3 children that are not NCP's.

Just an explaination of my "logic".
Think what you wish, but there are rights and wrongs in this world and alot of them are not always black and white, and EVERYTHING about this particular case is wrong, and sadly the CP is being rewarded for her many frauds.
Gracie

 

[JETX]

The only real lesson to learn here.... if you get a court order that you should pay child support.... pay it!!
Your 'logic' in trying to explain why you didn't pay... is feeble at best.

 

[Gracie3787]

The only real lesson to learn here.... if you get a court order that you should pay child support.... pay it!!
Your 'logic' in trying to explain why you didn't pay... is feeble at best.

Dam, I thought that you were able to read and understand, please re-read my post-

1. I specifically stated that I didn't believe that CP's fraud was a reason to not pay CS.

2. I also specifically stated that the NCP was very wrong for not paying.

3. You are correct, when an order to pay CS is issued the NCP should pay it, period. I am in no way shape or form "explaining" or excusing NCP's nonpayment.

4. You made the AUTOMATIC assumption that I am the NCP. I am neither the NCP nor the CP in this case. I am however, married to the NCP. Who, BTW I met in Nov 1998-when he was paying support. He stopped paying before we got married, which I disagreed with, to the point that I almost didn't marry him. I did marry him in Dec. 1999 because I thought that he would start paying again. We had many arguments about it and finally in Nov. 2000 I got tired of waiting for him to do right so I called CSE, told them our address and asked them to make him pay CS. Which, BTW he did from that time on.

5. My husband and I have no intention of filing bankruptcy, or not paying the arrears- as I have already explained, I was simply trying to understand why some CS is dishargeable and some isn't. There was nothing sinister about my question.

6.As for my comment about the situation of the CP's fraud, I am simply saying that BOTH CP and NCP did wrong in this case, and that 2 wrongs do not make a right- I don't care what the circumstances are.
Enuff said by me.
Gracie

 

[JETX]

You made the AUTOMATIC assumption that I am the NCP. I am neither the NCP nor the CP in this case. I am however, married to the NCP.

I knew that. Most NCP's are male (just the way it is) and I doubt that a male would use the name 'Gracie'.

Who, BTW I met in Nov 1998-when he was paying support. He stopped paying before we got married, which I disagreed with, to the point that I almost didn't marry him. I did marry him in Dec. 1999 because I thought that he would start paying again.

Wow!! Did you really think that your marrying him would be sufficient to get him to start following a court order?? You must have either a high esteem.... or a very low one.

My husband and I have no intention of filing bankruptcy, or not paying the arrears- as I have already explained, I was simply trying to understand why some CS is dishargeable and some isn't.

If that was your true reason... you would have read the US Bankruptcy Code that I orginally provided and said, "Hmmmm.... okay". And not whined, "On the other hand, children are also not possesions that a CP can run up credit cards for, then after they are grown, demand payment of 2 yrs total worth of CS arrears from NCP, claiming it to be "reimbursement" for those costs, AND after getting order, HAS THOSE COSTS DISHARGED IN BANKRUPTCY BY COMMITTING FRAUD. (long, sordid story)."

There was nothing sinister about my question.

Agreed in your original post. The 'other reasons' started to appear in your subsequent posts.

As for my comment about the situation of the CP's fraud, I am simply saying that BOTH CP and NCP did wrong in this case, and that 2 wrongs do not make a right- I don't care what the circumstances are.

I agree. However, being a RESPONSIBLE parent is far more important in my book then your claim that somehow the CP was 'fraudulent' in filing bankruptcy over the debts that she incurred.... especially when it is likely they were incurred (at least partly) as a result of YOUR husbands failure to obey the law.

 

[Gracie3787]

My last words in this thread:

1. Non payment of child support is a misdemeanor and/or a felony depending on the individual circumstances. Non payment of CS costs taxpayers millions of $ every year.

2. Bankruptcy fraud is a felony under any circumstances. Bankruptcy fraud costs taxpayers, consumers and creditors millions of $ every year.


Neither one should be condoned under any circumstances-period.

I did not condone, nor excuse NCP's non payment.

You, on the other hand, are condoning CP's fraud. Hey, why don't you put up a billboard- you can have it say:

Hey CPs, owed back CS? Go ahead- commit fraud, commit any crime you want- it is understandable, you will be forgiven, you won't be held accountable, you won't be sent to jail, you won't have to pay your debts- all you have to do is prove that you are a CP who is owed child support. Contact jetx for assistance and encouragement.

 

[JETX]

My last words in this thread

Promise??

Non payment of CS costs taxpayers millions of $ every year.

Agreed.

Bankruptcy fraud costs taxpayers, consumers and creditors millions of $ every year.

Agreed.

Neither one should be condoned under any circumstances-period.
Agreed.

You, on the other hand, are condoning CP's fraud.

Where did I say that?? What even suggests that??
Your post makes the HUGE leap from the CP including her credit card debts in her bankruptcy as somehow being fraud. You provide NO support for your claim. In fact, credit card debt is probably one of the most common causes of bankruptcy filing.

Hey, why don't you put up a billboard- you can have it say:
Hey CPs, owed back CS? Go ahead- commit fraud, commit any crime you want- it is understandable, you will be forgiven, you won't be held accountable, you won't be sent to jail, you won't have to pay your debts- all you have to do is prove that you are a CP who is owed child support. Contact jetx for assistance and encouragement.

Wow, you really got a full slice of that 'stupid cake', didn't you. Where is there ANY evidence of fraud in this thread??? Where is there ANY evidence in this thread of ANY crime (other than failure to pay court-ordered child support)???
You are really beyond all sense of reason with your unfounded ramblings and droolings. Now, go wipe your chin, you're drooling again!!