• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Need Help Fast!!!

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

father68

Junior Member
Illinois
I am a father who has been trying to get child support reduced for the past 2 years (4 attempts), due to a significant reduction in my income. I quit my job because of the employer was having financial trouble among many other problems (bouncing paychecks, cancelling medical and dental insurance, etc.). I finally quit after dealing with all of this for 7 years. I am remarried and have two small children. For two years I have been trying to make a go of doing business for myself. It has not been profitable. I am up to my eyeballs in debt as a result. I want to pay support that is not a problem with me, I just can't pay the same as what I used to because I make a lot less.
I went before the judge representing myself and he denied the reduction. I requested the reduction in March and it got denied July 26. I just got a new job (1 week ago). The new job pays $16K year less than the job the court ordered support payments were based on.
The judge said he didn't believe me when he gave his decision. I showed copies of the pay stubs I got from the business, bank records and all my bills, which showed my house nearing foreclosure. He did not reduce the support payments and said he doesn't believe me. He requested information about the business I started. At the advice of an accountant, he said to set the business up in my wife's name and me as an employee so we would not have to pay higher workman's comp insurance. So I did this.
Even though the business is not in my name, why is this necessary? Further, I don't understand the double talk, the lawyer says the bills in my wife's name are her responsibility (some of them are utility bills or loans she has taken out for the business), although she doesn't work outside the home, the business income or loss in this case is tied to her social security number. We file jointly. I provided a copy of our filed tax return. The business is an S corporation. What can I do further to get this reduced from March til the start of my new job? What do I need to show as further proof so the judge can believe me? And is there a deadline to request that the judge hear this case again? I am behind from March til now.
 


NotSoNew

Senior Member
its is my understanding that it is next to impossible to get your child support reduced because you now have a lower paying job. bottom line ~ they dont care. they feel that you once made more, that you have the potential to make that much again and everyone who doesnt make as much as they once did is a deadbeat dad trying to beat the system. There is nothing you are going to do to make a judge beleive you, espcially since the buisness is in your wifes name he prolly feels that you are trying to hide all your income, because your wifes income can not be counted in child support.

I am not saying I agree with this judge but this is how they think! There are too many real deadbeat dads out there for them to tell the difference.
 

brisgirl825

Senior Member
Judges very rarely give decreased modifications for people who are voluntarily underemployed. The fact is, is that you would not be in this situation had you not quit your job. That's how a judge sees it.
 
You apparently will need to find another way to pay all your bills other than by taking from your older children.
Your wife could get a job or you may have to work a second.
Families do it all the time!!


by the way 4 attempts in 2 years to reduce your child support is fishy. I hope your ex has a lawyer who gets her legal fees recovered!
 

eyemback

Member
username43 said:
by the way 4 attempts in 2 years to reduce your child support is fishy. I hope your ex has a lawyer who gets her legal fees recovered!
How is it fishy? Everyone is entitled to file for a modification if they experience a significant change in circumstance. And you don't necessarily need a lawyer for a modification. Gimme a break with your "I hope" crap. :rolleyes:
 

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
dynomight77 said:
its is my understanding that it is next to impossible to get your child support reduced because you now have a lower paying job. bottom line ~ they dont care. they feel that you once made more, that you have the potential to make that much again and everyone who doesnt make as much as they once did is a deadbeat dad trying to beat the system. There is nothing you are going to do to make a judge beleive you, espcially since the buisness is in your wifes name he prolly feels that you are trying to hide all your income, because your wifes income can not be counted in child support.

I am not saying I agree with this judge but this is how they think! There are too many real deadbeat dads out there for them to tell the difference.
Actually, your slant on this is completely wrong. What the judge sees is a person who voluntarily quit his job, and then rather than find another job spent two years self-employed on a losing proposition. And then took a position that pays significantly less than what he was making. This is a much different situation from the parent who is laid off (INvoluntary unemployment). So no, a judge is not going to be sympathetic.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
stealth2 said:
Actually, your slant on this is completely wrong. What the judge sees is a person who voluntarily quit his job, and then rather than find another job spent two years self-employed on a losing proposition. And then took a position that pays significantly less than what he was making. This is a much different situation from the parent who is laid off (INvoluntary unemployment). So no, a judge is not going to be sympathetic.
Plus putting the business in his wife's name is a classic attempt to hide income...so that would automatically make a judge suspicious (even if that wasn't his purpose)....and 4 attempts to reduce support in 2 years tends to make his actions look like a "fishing expedition"...to find a way to get the judge to lower support.

I can see exactly why the judge didn't believe him. Dad may have done everything that he did with the best of intentions...but unfortunately the combo of things makes him look like a guy willing to do anything to avoid/reduce support.
 
father68 said:
Illinois
I am a father who has been trying to get child support reduced for the past 2 years (4 attempts), due to a significant reduction in my income. I quit my job because of the employer was having financial trouble among many other problems (bouncing paychecks, cancelling medical and dental insurance, etc.). I finally quit after dealing with all of this for 7 years. I am remarried and have two small children. For two years I have been trying to make a go of doing business for myself. It has not been profitable. I am up to my eyeballs in debt as a result. I want to pay support that is not a problem with me, I just can't pay the same as what I used to because I make a lot less.
I went before the judge representing myself and he denied the reduction. I requested the reduction in March and it got denied July 26. I just got a new job (1 week ago). The new job pays $16K year less than the job the court ordered support payments were based on.
The judge said he didn't believe me when he gave his decision. I showed copies of the pay stubs I got from the business, bank records and all my bills, which showed my house nearing foreclosure. He did not reduce the support payments and said he doesn't believe me. He requested information about the business I started. At the advice of an accountant, he said to set the business up in my wife's name and me as an employee so we would not have to pay higher workman's comp insurance. So I did this.
Even though the business is not in my name, why is this necessary? Further, I don't understand the double talk, the lawyer says the bills in my wife's name are her responsibility (some of them are utility bills or loans she has taken out for the business), although she doesn't work outside the home, the business income or loss in this case is tied to her social security number. We file jointly. I provided a copy of our filed tax return. The business is an S corporation. What can I do further to get this reduced from March til the start of my new job? What do I need to show as further proof so the judge can believe me? And is there a deadline to request that the judge hear this case again? I am behind from March til now.
I am sorry you are having trouble paying your CS but maybe the judge picked out the same things I did. First you state that you started the business due to problems with your past employer, and then you state that it is in your wife’s name? (I understand the accountant told you to do this.) But if you are truly loosing money with the business why would you mind showing it to the judge? Just curious.......what type of business is this? And does your wife have a full time job along with running the "family business"?
You will still have to account for quitting your job in the first place, and in Illinois judges don't (at least the ones I've witnessed) have very many reasons that they consider "good" reasons for quitting a job.

I wish you well.............
 

father68

Junior Member
username43 said:
You apparently will need to find another way to pay all your bills other than by taking from your older children.
Your wife could get a job or you may have to work a second.
Families do it all the time!!


by the way 4 attempts in 2 years to reduce your child support is fishy. I hope your ex has a lawyer who gets her legal fees recovered!
It's real good to know that there are people like you who get a kick out of seeing others suffer. I never said I didn't want to pay child support. I have one child from my previous marriage that I have cared for single handedly without the mother's help for 4 years. You missed the message totally. I asked to reduce it because I had a snake for a boss who bounced my checks and I wasn't able to find a job paying the same amount so I tried to earn a living by doing work myself (I work in construction). I searched for the whole time I was self employed. No, I don't expect my wife to get a job to pay child support. The law states child support in Illinois is 20% of your net income. Stick to the facts. Take 20% of my net, not what I 20% of what I used to make. It amazes me that increases happen easily with raises and spouses want to take the ride, but don't like the ride when real life brings a decrease. The law shoudl work both ways! I stuck it out with a jerk of a boss for 7 years! I paid more than $700/month for COBRA insurance for my child. Yeah, I tried to do it 4 times because I couldn't afford to pay $180/week to an ex-wife who makes nearly 6 figures and kept asking for a modification review for more money. She's bitter and obviously so are you.
 

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
Unfortunately, all too many NCPs do take lower paying jobs simply to get out of paying as much support. That's why it's so hard to get a decrease w/a voluntary un/underemployment situation.
 
You say your self you are up to your eyeballs in debt and now with a job that is 16000 < year. Have your creditors worked with you? Were you able to refinance or get payments lowered? Probable not. but yet this older child should be refinanced so to speak. And if you are not married to the mom any more--well she isn't bound by the "for better and worse part". So of course she isn't going to jump in and help you.


By the way I am not in the least iota teensy bit bitter. I have no reason to be. Just because a mother(me) might post a rebuttle to a poster wanting child support decreased doesn't mean anything more than I can see it from the other perspective.
 

father68

Junior Member
Dads Always Get the Short End!

Thanks for your opinion. However yes, my creditors did stretch out payments over a longer period of time, even the mortgage, but it doesn't stop me from being in debt. However, if I was still married to the child's mother, the child would have to live as I do. So, yes her life would have been refinanced. It happens in many families. Should those children sue dad because he can no longer afford those extra trips to McDonalds or piano lessons? However, with CS cases, our law expects the child to be awarded a lifestyle that not even her dad has. What sense does that make? I thought the whole purpose of CS was to be sure the child got what she would have missed, financially. Isn't that the whole point of paying CS; to ensure the child has the same lifestyle advantages as if the dad was in the picture?

Do I expect a favor of my ex...? No! What I expect is for the law to work. CS should be based on the net income, whatever that is. I never wanted to take a job paying less, but decided to take it rather than slip behind in support. Everyone tells me I should have just let the guy fire me, since he was such a jerk, but I never was that kind of a guy. Yes, I did make money doing work on my own, but it wasn't the same net pay after I paid for my supplies and overhead. That is all I was saying. Sorry, if I sound angry, but I have always supported my children and won't ever stop. Let's face it, life's not fair, but dads get the short end, no matter what. The court assumes just because a woman bares a child, she deserves custody. How sad. My ex spends all of 2 days a week with our child and would rather let a babysitter keep her than be with me, my wife and our kids. That's called bitter. But I guess that's "okay" because she was the one who gave birth.
 
Last edited:

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
If you and the mother were still married, she would have had some input to the financial decisions you made. Since you're not, you made them unilaterally and expected her (and your kids) to fall in line. The law doesn't play that game. You don't get to choose a lower paying job and then expect that your obligations will decrease.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top