Motion for Clarification

[rmet4nzkx]

The hearing master only did a finding of facts rmt. Her actual order, with the judges signature says she is to provide insurnce if it is available to her at a reasonable cost. The finding of facts isn't what is legally binding, the wording of the court order is.

And I have to agree.... $160 a week for insurance ($640 a month) is not a reasonable price. $160 a week is bring home pay for someone with a minimum wage job!

She agrees that she has a medical support order. She's never disputed that. But her court order states nothing about child support or arrears and THAT is what she wants clarified because CSE is coming up with a number that's totally different than what the court ordered her to pay for child support. CSE has even told her that ALL they have is a medical support order themselves and can't tell her why they have her listed in their system as neding to pay X amount a month for child support. We all know that any unmodified portion of an original order stays the same, but what her original order said to pay is one thing, it was not modified, CSE is saying she owes a monthly CS amount higher than that, but then say all she has is a medical support order with them, they have no arrears....

Therein lies the confusion and why she wants clarification. She has no clue what she owes because there's 3 or 4 different amounts per month.

I understand what the order says but the Master asked her if she has insurance, she said, "Yes" and if she was willing to put her child on the insurance, again she said "Yes", therefore the matter of the cost is moot, just lke opting to pay taxes and insurance directly rather than through an impound account with your mortgage. CSE doesn't have anything to do with it, but when the proof isn't tendered then the problem occurs. The problem is she didn't put her daughter on the insurance or provide proof to the court after she signed that she provided insurance. If she had said I have insurance but I can't afford to put my child on my insurance then that would be a different matter. Without insurance and a court order for mom to provide insurance and somehting signed by mom stating she will pay for insurance, well if dad or grandparnets apply for state medicaid guess who will eventually get billed?

 

[FrustratedMommy]

First-This was just put in place last year. Im not sure if you were aware of that when you posted.

Second the question was posed as "Should you be offered insurance through your employment at a REASONABLE COST are you willing to put your dd on it.
Yes is the answer if its REASONABLE.

Third- I moved here 4 years ago which was BEFORE the actual hearing. So, the fact that I moved really has no bearing on this issue.

The hearing master only did a finding of facts rmt. Her actual order, with the judges signature says she is to provide insurnce if it is available to her at a reasonable cost. The finding of facts isn't what is legally binding, the wording of the court order is.

And I have to agree.... $160 a week for insurance ($640 a month) is not a reasonable price. $160 a week is bring home pay for someone with a minimum wage job!

She agrees that she has a medical support order. She's never disputed that. But her court order states nothing about child support or arrears and THAT is what she wants clarified because CSE is coming up with a number that's totally different than what the court ordered her to pay for child support. CSE has even told her that ALL they have is a medical support order themselves and can't tell her why they have her listed in their system as neding to pay X amount a month for child support. We all know that any unmodified portion of an original order stays the same, but what her original order said to pay is one thing, it was not modified, CSE is saying she owes a monthly CS amount higher than that, but then say all she has is a medical support order with them, they have no arrears....

Therein lies the confusion and why she wants clarification. She has no clue what she owes because there's 3 or 4 different amounts per month.

Thats it in a nutshell.

I dont think its unreasonable to ask them to clarify this and get it in writing, so there is no doubt about ANYTHING. Past expierence with the court tells me it needs to be done.

This wasnt meant to sound crass, and I apologize if it does. I am running low on sleep. I hope this even makes sense.

 

[FrustratedMommy]

Bumping to see if anyone has any other ideas.....on how I may get this issue resolved....

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Bumping to see if anyone has any other ideas.....on how I may get this issue resolved....

Follow the agreement to pay for your child's medical insurance or pay for any and ol of your child's medical bills.

 

[FrustratedMommy]

I am only responsible for insurance IF its available through my employer at reasonable cost. I am not responsible for co-pays or anything else. DEFINE Reasonable cost.

Your not very helpful obviously you dont get the situation so if anyone else has any constructive help it would be appreciated.

 

[nicetryadmin]

I am only responsible for insurance IF its available through my employer at reasonable cost. I am not responsible for co-pays or anything else. DEFINE Reasonable cost.

"Reasonable cost" usually refers to the percentage annually one pays for it, compared to what they make. I believe it varies per state or maybe even agency.

For example, here in Ohio, it is my understanding that if the annual cost for health coverage through their employer is more than 10% of their gross, they consider it "excessive" (that is, the difference in cost between single coverage and family coverage).

Hope that clarified it a lil.

 

[FrustratedMommy]

Thank you that does help. I will have to see if I can find the guidelines for MD so far no such luck, and they dont want to answer my questions. I would think they would answer so that I can make sure that I am in compliance with my orders, without over extending myself to the max.

Thank you again.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

I am only responsible for insurance IF its available through my employer at reasonable cost. I am not responsible for co-pays or anything else. DEFINE Reasonable cost.

Your not very helpful obviously you dont get the situation so if anyone else has any constructive help it would be appreciated.

You are frustrated because you are not getting the response you want.
It is long past the point of clarification.
You have given several versions of what was said in court, even so, it is past the time for your objection that is why the judge isn't allowing your motion.
In the hearing you didn't ask for further clarification of what "reasonable" means, instead you agreed to put her on your insurance and then you signed that agreement. It is your responsibility to raise the question in a timely manner unless you are not competent. You failed to do that.

You don't have custody of your child for some reason and you have chosen to move away rather than be a part of their life, those are your choices. You don't get to choose not to support your child and try to blame someone or something else for your failure to follow the order, or voluntarily become un/under employed or drop the insurance.

If the state or someone else ends up providing for your daughter's medical care, eventually you will be charged. Every state has low cost medical insurance for children did you even try to apply for that? It's called, Maryland Children’s Health Program (MCHP).
http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/mma/Eligibility/medcareprog/html/MCP-program.html

 

[FrustratedMommy]

I am just trying to get an order in place that actually makes sense. That is all. I pay it even tho I dont really have an order to. Its seriously so vague I took it to the CSE office in my state and they laughed. If they got this order they wouldnt have a clue as to what I am to how much CS I am to pay if any, how much in arrears I may have, and where those figures came from.

Seriously its that bad.

As far as the insurance YES I had insurance, for my pregnancy thanks ok? I didnt think I should have to post that I was recieving state assistance on this board, and the state does NOT cover my daughter in another state. I should also make certain that before I post again I do not just paraphrase things as I did. The actual question posed to me in the court room was:

Should insurance become available at a reasonable cost through your employer will you put her on it?

OF COURSE if its a reasonable cost, it is my duty to provide this as well, even tho when I was married to the jerk it wasnt my responsibilty to do anything but cook clean and take care of our daughter. Thats off on a tangent tho and has no bearing sorry but this is all frustrating to me.


All I want is clarification.

Pretty simple request, no need to jump all over me. The only reason it was denied in my opinion is because it was handed to the same person that, screwed up this entire order in the first place.

I am not sure that he should have been the person to sign off on it?

 

[AlohaLawGal]

You are frustrated because you are not getting the response you want.
It is long past the point of clarification.
You have given several versions of what was said in court, even so, it is past the time for your objection that is why the judge isn't allowing your motion.
In the hearing you didn't ask for further clarification of what "reasonable" means, instead you agreed to put her on your insurance and then you signed that agreement. It is your responsibility to raise the question in a timely manner unless you are not competent. You failed to do that.

You don't have custody of your child for some reason and you have chosen to move away rather than be a part of their life, those are your choices. You don't get to choose not to support your child and try to blame someone or something else for your failure to follow the order, or voluntarily become un/under employed or drop the insurance.

If the state or someone else ends up providing for your daughter's medical care, eventually you will be charged. Every state has low cost medical insurance for children did you even try to apply for that? It's called, Maryland Children’s Health Program (MCHP).
http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/mma/Eligibility/medcareprog/html/MCP-program.html

First of all, I would like to ask the question as to why you are so callously assuming it was her choice to not be around her child. As she has already stated, her ex moved the child out of the state out of MD. This was not her choice, but the choice of her ex.
I find your words to be very presumptious and rude as to why she does not have custody. Until you know all the facts behind her situation, I would suggest you would just answer the question that was asked and not be so busy at assuming anything else about the situation. Not every mother who loses custody of their child(ren) is because they were a bad parent. Sometimes, it is due to the screwed up court system we currently have in place. Sometimes, it is because the other parent has more money or is a control freak and uses the child(ren) as pawns in a sick and twisted game.

She has only asked for clarification on her child support order which is very vague as to how it is written from the state of Maryland. If her local child support office can't even figure out what the order is for, and they are supposed to be the "professionals", how is anyone off the street supposed to understand an order that is so vague as hers. It makes it difficult for her to understand what her obligation to pay is when it is not clearly stated. IT is not her fault that the Child Support Master, the same one who denied the clarification, the one who wrote the vague order, is not competent enough to write an order that is clear and concise. The law is to be written so that everyone can understand it, unfortunately it is not. It is situations like this one, in which those in who do not spend years in law school, and years in courts on a regular basis can easily get "frustrated" because those who are supposed to write things in "layman's terms" fail to do so in the first place, and get upset when they are asked to clarify the very poorly worded orders that they wrote in the first place.

She did not come here to be attacked. She came here to gain insight. To me, I think she deserves to be applauded for asking exactly what her order is so that she can meet her obligation without any confusion. There are so many more deadbeat parents who will do anything they can to not be paying child support to provide for their children. Frustrated Mommy wants to provide and she is simply asking for clarification on her order to do so. This is not a reason for her to be attacked, or have people like you assume she chooses to not be a part of her child's life.

 

[FrustratedMommy]

If this was an ALJ you should be able to appeal to the court. If this is a magistrate (I am confused by your terminology) then you should have 14 days from the date of decision to appeal the outcome to the judge. So get your letter going which nips my research in the bud on what I was trying to find is how long they had to actually give you an answer so that you could write them and force an answer. Now that you got your answer, appeal it to the judge. And clarify if you are talking about a magistrate or an ALJ or just CSE employee.

Another thing you can do is ask the judge for a declaratory judgment which will just explain what the heck the judgment means as applied to your facts.

I have been sick with the flu, as have my other children here. I remember reading this but it didnt quite "sink in". Flu does that to ya.

Thank you for answering. It just needs to be a letter? I am going to be calling the court to see if there has been a reason for the denial entered, last week there was none.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

First of all, I would like to ask the question as to why you are so callously assuming it was her choice to not be around her child. As she has already stated, her ex moved the child out of the state out of MD. This was not her choice, but the choice of her ex.
I find your words to be very presumptious and rude as to why she does not have custody. Until you know all the facts behind her situation, I would suggest you would just answer the question that was asked and not be so busy at assuming anything else about the situation. Not every mother who loses custody of their child(ren) is because they were a bad parent. Sometimes, it is due to the screwed up court system we currently have in place. Sometimes, it is because the other parent has more money or is a control freak and uses the child(ren) as pawns in a sick and twisted game.

She has only asked for clarification on her child support order which is very vague as to how it is written from the state of Maryland. If her local child support office can't even figure out what the order is for, and they are supposed to be the "professionals", how is anyone off the street supposed to understand an order that is so vague as hers. It makes it difficult for her to understand what her obligation to pay is when it is not clearly stated. IT is not her fault that the Child Support Master, the same one who denied the clarification, the one who wrote the vague order, is not competent enough to write an order that is clear and concise. The law is to be written so that everyone can understand it, unfortunately it is not. It is situations like this one, in which those in who do not spend years in law school, and years in courts on a regular basis can easily get "frustrated" because those who are supposed to write things in "layman's terms" fail to do so in the first place, and get upset when they are asked to clarify the very poorly worded orders that they wrote in the first place.

She did not come here to be attacked. She came here to gain insight. To me, I think she deserves to be applauded for asking exactly what her order is so that she can meet her obligation without any confusion. There are so many more deadbeat parents who will do anything they can to not be paying child support to provide for their children. Frustrated Mommy wants to provide and she is simply asking for clarification on her order to do so. This is not a reason for her to be attacked, or have people like you assume she chooses to not be a part of her child's life.

Since you love to suggest how others should act on this forum, I will suggest something to you.

KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU POST!

She did move away four years ago. Dad moved six months ago.
FrustratedMommy
Member Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NH
Posts: 43


Original Order is in MD

He has custody and resides in WV, and has for over 6 months.

I reside in NH, and have for 4 years.

 

[AlohaLawGal]

Since you love to suggest how others should act on this forum, I will suggest something to you.

KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE YOU POST!

She did move away four years ago. Dad moved six months ago.
FrustratedMommy
Member Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NH
Posts: 43


Original Order is in MD

He has custody and resides in WV, and has for over 6 months.

I reside in NH, and have for 4 years.

This is quite comically interesting to me. She didn't provide the additional info on his multiple moves because of the behavior of who seem to think they know it all. I do know more about her situation than you think-I happen to be her friend; regardless of that fact, she came here to seek input on how she could get clarification on an order that is poorly worded and vague to say the least. This is not the first time he has moved and moved the child without informing the child support agencyor her either. He has moved and moved again, all in an effort to get child support orders without allowing her contact. She did not ask for judgements of know it all individuals, she asked for insight and input to get further clarification. It is people with judgemental mindsets that want to make judgements with their own assumptions without taking the time to find out all the facts that cause our court systems to be so messed up in the first place.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

First of all, I would like to ask the question as to why you are so callously assuming it was her choice to not be around her child. As she has already stated, her ex moved the child out of the state out of MD. This was not her choice, but the choice of her ex.
I find your words to be very presumptious and rude as to why she does not have custody. Until you know all the facts behind her situation, I would suggest you would just answer the question that was asked and not be so busy at assuming anything else about the situation. Not every mother who loses custody of their child(ren) is because they were a bad parent. Sometimes, it is due to the screwed up court system we currently have in place. Sometimes, it is because the other parent has more money or is a control freak and uses the child(ren) as pawns in a sick and twisted game.

She has only asked for clarification on her child support order which is very vague as to how it is written from the state of Maryland. If her local child support office can't even figure out what the order is for, and they are supposed to be the "professionals", how is anyone off the street supposed to understand an order that is so vague as hers. It makes it difficult for her to understand what her obligation to pay is when it is not clearly stated. IT is not her fault that the Child Support Master, the same one who denied the clarification, the one who wrote the vague order, is not competent enough to write an order that is clear and concise. The law is to be written so that everyone can understand it, unfortunately it is not. It is situations like this one, in which those in who do not spend years in law school, and years in courts on a regular basis can easily get "frustrated" because those who are supposed to write things in "layman's terms" fail to do so in the first place, and get upset when they are asked to clarify the very poorly worded orders that they wrote in the first place.

She did not come here to be attacked. She came here to gain insight. To me, I think she deserves to be applauded for asking exactly what her order is so that she can meet her obligation without any confusion. There are so many more deadbeat parents who will do anything they can to not be paying child support to provide for their children. Frustrated Mommy wants to provide and she is simply asking for clarification on her order to do so. This is not a reason for her to be attacked, or have people like you assume she chooses to not be a part of her child's life.

As a Pre Law student you have a great deal to learn, the first of which is to read and to comprehend. You have to look at the post with objective eyes, not from a biased viewpoint. This is not a rant/vent/support group. Unless and until OP makes the appropriate motion, the court will deny her petition. Perhaps she might obtain counsel. While your bias is clear being associated with The National Association of Non Custodial Mom

 

[Whyte Noise]

It doesn't matter who moved where and when. (And do you know for sure that this is the first time dad has moved? Nah, didn't think so.)

What matters is that she has an order that is so vague it doesn't even state a MONTHLY AMOUNT to pay. MD CSE comes up with these figures from..... where? That's why she filed a motion (Which, BTWRmet, WAS filed in a timely manner, it's just taken the court 8 months or so to get to it.) CSE is called Child Support Enforcement[/b[] for a reason. They are to enforce court orders. Kinda hard to enforce something when there's nothing there, huh? That's why she motioned for clarification... to GET an amount she's supposed to pay a month. what is so hard to undertsand about that?

I know FM from another board and know more of her situation than you do, and have seen her rinky-dink 2 page order with the "amount of" lines left blank and the words in the actual court order that say she is to obtain insurance THROUGH HER EMPLOYER if it is available at a reasonable cost. However I sent her over here to look for legal advice for this issue other than what I have been able to tell her. You'd think that after being on this board for almost 4 years I'd know better than to send a non-custodial mother here. That mistake won't happen again.