Mother committing insurance fraud stealing my child support

[justalayman]

Perhaps child support CAN be initiated by a child in some circumstances, but clearly that's not the case HERE. OP is over 21 so it's likely it's arrears being paid now anyway, and she is not initiating a new CS order at this age for herself.

If you knew it wasn't relevent to this thread, WHY did you even mention it, if not to nitpick one of my posts yet again?

. I tried. I nicely explained why I quoted your post.

Now, this is a nitpick of your post:

since you had such an issue with what I said, why did you say:

Child support is always for the parent, never for the child.

that too was completely irrelevant to this thread and incorrect on top of that.


I wrote it because it is a misconception that your statement is true, especially when speaking of NY. I was simply trying to cure ignorance. If you wish to remain ignorant, that is your choice. You are welcome to put me on ignore.

 

[ecmst12]

Because 99% of the time, INCLUDING in this case, it's true.

Just because YOU say you're being nice, does not mean it's true.

 

[justalayman]

Because 99% of the time, INCLUDING in this case, it's true.

Just because YOU say you're being nice, does not mean it's true.

so you are a statistician now? and you have no idea if it is true in this case. Especially since the OP's situation involves a trust, this may have nothing to do with actual child support. You are just guessing, like usual. Generalized statements and guesses; the mark of ecmst12

so,. let's see ho long you want to harass me today.

 

[ecmst12]

I didn't start this.

 

[justalayman]

I didn't start this.

actually, you did. I did not do anything other than use your statement as a point to address. I said nothing about you specifically. I did not say anything about you personally.

I simply used your statement to attempt to correct the misconception in that statement. Since that mentality was running through the thread, I figured I would address it. I even addressed you just so you would not think I was attempting to bash you, obviously to no avail.

You then attacked me, on a personal level with this post:

ecmst12
Perhaps child support CAN be initiated by a child in some circumstances, but clearly that's not the case HERE. OP is over 21 so it's likely it's arrears being paid now anyway, and she is not initiating a new CS order at this age for herself.




If you knew it wasn't relevent to this thread, WHY did you even mention it, if not to nitpick one of my posts yet again?

That makes it that you started this, not me.

 

[ecmst12]

Alrighty then.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

I'm sorry, you misinterpreted my response. I was intending to support your contention.

I am correct from the first letter I typed to the last. If you want to consider that; to a point, then I guess you would be right in your statement. If you want to apply it to a different situation than what I was speaking to, then it could be 100% wrong, 50% wrong, or any other amount.

I wrote that to address the statement that a child cannot be the recipient of child support and they cannot be a party to a child support action. In NY, they can. I did not write it to speak to the OP's case. It was obvious once the trust was brought up, this was not a typical child support case, if it was actually a child support case at all.

 

[justalayman]

I'm sorry, you misinterpreted my response. I was intending to support your contention.

Apparently I did. My error. My apologies.