Post Majority Arrears ?

[Gracie3787]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state? Florida. To give a short background before I ask my question :After not paying support for 2 years my husband resumed paying in April 2001. In 2002 he was ordered to pay arrears in addition to on-going support, however on-going support stopped in Dec 2003 when his youngest turned 18.All 3 of his children are now adults, his ex has 3 younger children by 2 other fathers and my husband and I do not have any children together (we are in our 50's). My husband recently became disabled, and has filed for a modification of arrears payments. One of the things that he his asking for is for his adult children to recieve the arrears instead of their mother. My question is this: although the assumption of law is that the mother is entitled to recieve payment of post majority arrears as "repayment" of childrens' expenses paid by her when NCP was not paying, what happens when it can be proven in court that the mother did not have to pay for the childrens' expenses, by committing fraud? To explain: in Jan 2001 his ex filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy,($56,000.00 in debts, including a $9,000.00 pool for the kids).Although my husband was not paying support at the time, the 2 fathers of her 3 younger children were paying a total of $974.00 month support. Her bankruptcy payments were set real low because she falsely claimed to be getting only $600.00 of that support. Consequently, in July 2003 the bankruptcy court was going to dismiss her case (and she would have to pay the debts in full) because her payments were too low to pay off in the time limit allowed by law. The ex converted to a chapter 7, and filed a new financial statement, and yet again claimed only $600.00 in child support, even though she was actually getting $1,422.00, including my $237.00 0n-going and my $217.00 arrears payments. Consequently, she was able to have $40,000.00 in debts discharged. It does not seem right to "reward" the mother for her fraud while my husband's adult children could use the money to pay their own bills. And 1/2 of the arrears total is the amount of support my husband was charged for his oldest after she turned 18 ! Sorry this is long, but this case is complicated and any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Technically he has to pay the arears to the CP for the reason you stated. Certainly, she can turn gift that money to her children now to help them out like any good mother would do now that her debts are disposed of, right? Ask her. If she declines, simply petition the court for a modification and tell them the very same thing you said here, along with actual amounts, case numbers etc, because this is a sworn document and most states have laws about perjury, aiding and abetting, so he can't perjur himself after he knows the fruad, the court has the same obligation. All legal.

 

[Gracie3787]

Thanks for reply

rmet4nzkx, Thanks for your reply. I agree that a good mother would give her kids the money, but unfortunately judging by the events of the last 3 years, we cannot trust the ex to give the money to his kids. Example, last year the ex sent a letter to the Judge asking that the on-going support continue past the son's birthday stating that she wanted to make sure he wouldn't "try to take me to court to have it lowered before son graduates." She said that their son was doing well and would graduate with his class. My husband asked her for a copy of his report card, she refused, so he wrote to the school where they live and got a transcript of his son's grades. Well, lo and behold, his son was failing math english and science, and had been having problems in those subjects for years. (By his childrens' choice, my husband has not been involved in their lives, but that another story) Anyway, his ex had a $5,000 a month income, was recieving $57 weekly on-going support from my husband for their son's basic needs and was also getting $50.00 a week arrears payments. My husband wanted her to spend some of the extra $50 to hire a private tutor to help. She refused to, saying that the arrears money was "not extra support" for their son. So my husband e-mailed his son's teachers asking that they give his son extra help. Well that didn't help, the ex got mad, wrote a letter to the Judge complaining that he had written to "her son's" school, and my husband's son called his Dad to tell him that he was "crazy" for talking to his teachers. Combine this with the fact that this woman had no qualms about committing fraud on federal documents (here's a real kicker, she is a police officer) it is pretty certain that his kids will never see a dime of that money. Anyway, he goes to court next week for the modification, and I will post again with the results. Oh, he doesn't just have the case numbers to give the judge, he has all the documents themselves.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Let the facts speak for themselves, if she has committed fraud, so be it.

 

[LdiJ]

Ok...I have a somewhat different response to give you than the others. Child support is reimbursement to the custodial parent for the expenses of the children. Its NEVER payable to the children. I know of no case, anywhere in the country where a judge has ruled that CS arrearages are to be paid directly to the adult children. I simply don't see that as a viable matter to pursue.

Also, what benefit does it give you, OR especially the adult children, to get their mother in trouble regarding her bankruptcy? Please think that one through very carefully. It could have a dramatic effect on his future relationships with his children...and even his grandchildren....and I honestly don't think its going to cause the judge to allow you to pay the arrearages to the kids. In fact, it would probably just solidify you being required to pay the mother if you disrupt her bankruptcy.

Laura

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

Ok...I have a somewhat different response to give you than the others. Child support is reimbursement to the custodial parent for the expenses of the children. Its NEVER payable to the children. I know of no case, anywhere in the country where a judge has ruled that CS arrearages are to be paid directly to the adult children. I simply don't see that as a viable matter to pursue.

Also, what benefit does it give you, OR especially the adult children, to get their mother in trouble regarding her bankruptcy? Please think that one through very carefully. It could have a dramatic effect on his future relationships with his children...and even his grandchildren....and I honestly don't think its going to cause the judge to allow you to pay the arrearages to the kids. In fact, it would probably just solidify you being required to pay the mother if you disrupt her bankruptcy.

Laura

--------------------------------------------------------------------------How is your comment different?


rmet4nzkx
Member Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 579

Technically he has to pay the arears to the CP for the reason you stated. Certainly, she can turn gift that money to her children now to help them out like any good mother would do now that her debts are disposed of, right? Ask her. If she declines, simply petition the court for a modification and tell them the very same thing you said here, along with actual amounts, case numbers etc, because this is a sworn document and most states have laws about perjury, aiding and abetting, so he can't perjur himself after he knows the fruad, the court has the same obligation. All legal.

 

[LdiJ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------How is your comment different?


rmet4nzkx
Member Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 579

Technically he has to pay the arears to the CP for the reason you stated. Certainly, she can turn gift that money to her children now to help them out like any good mother would do now that her debts are disposed of, right? Ask her. If she declines, simply petition the court for a modification and tell them the very same thing you said here, along with actual amounts, case numbers etc, because this is a sworn document and most states have laws about perjury, aiding and abetting, so he can't perjur himself after he knows the fruad, the court has the same obligation. All legal.

My comment was VERY different. The judge isn't going to allow him to pay the arrearages to the adult children, period. Therefore there is no reason to go to court. Therefore there would be no need to address the issue of her bankruptcy.

in addition, I was trying to point out the severe damage it might do to his relationship with his children to pursue this....since there is no possibility that the judge will EVER order that he can pay his arrearages directly to his adult children...the ONLY purpose in going to court would be to get the mother into trouble over her bankruptcy.

I was trying to suggest that he not cut off his nose to spite his face.

 

[Gracie3787]

LdiJ, while the court may not be able to order that the disbursement unit send it directly to the kids, the court can order the mother to give the money to his ADULT kids. Most of our laws are from "case law"- where some Judge in a court deecided to be the first one to rule a certain way on a matter, even though no other Judge had had the guts to. Apparently you didn't read my posts closely, 1-my husband's children made the choice to not have any contact with him, so no "relationship" can be affected. 2- the ex's bankruptcy can't be "disrupted" it is said and done- she NEVER HAS TO PAY THOSE DEBTS. As for getting the ex in trouble- she has been very very insistant that my husband pay for his wrong of non payment, so if she is right, what makes her so special that she does not also have t0o answer and pay for her own wrongs? What is fair for one is fair for the other. Thanx for your opinion anyway.

 

[LdiJ]

LdiJ, while the court may not be able to order that the disbursement unit send it directly to the kids, the court can order the mother to give the money to his ADULT kids. Most of our laws are from "case law"- where some Judge in a court deecided to be the first one to rule a certain way on a matter, even though no other Judge had had the guts to. Apparently you didn't read my posts closely, 1-my husband's children made the choice to not have any contact with him, so no "relationship" can be affected. 2- the ex's bankruptcy can't be "disrupted" it is said and done- she NEVER HAS TO PAY THOSE DEBTS. As for getting the ex in trouble- she has been very very insistant that my husband pay for his wrong of non payment, so if she is right, what makes her so special that she does not also have t0o answer and pay for her own wrongs? What is fair for one is fair for the other. Thanx for your opinion anyway.

I did read your posts closely.

There may be no relationship between he and his adult kids now...but that doesn't preclude the possibility of a relationship in the future...or the possibility of a relationship with his grandchildren. Getting their mother in trouble over the bankruptcy however may very well guarantee that there will be no chance of a relationship in the future.

No, a judge cannot order her to give the money to her adult kids. A judge cannot order someone to do something with money that legally belongs to them unless there is a debt of some sort attached to it. Yes, law is often decided based on case law, but there still has to be a legal justification for it within the framework of our laws and constitution.

His "wrong" in his non-payment of child support is something that directly effected HER. Her "wrong" in allegedly lying on her bankruptcy petition has nothing whatsoever to do with HIM. I am sorry, but this looks like spite/revenge to me...and I suspect it would to a judge too.

What do you want these kids to eventually believe? Do you want them to eventually believe that maybe their dad is an ok guy, despite any mistakes he might have made in the past? Or do you want them to say "look what he did to mom...that just proves that he is the bad guy that we thought he was".

 

[LdiJ]

One more point. These kids grew up knowing that their dad wasn't paying his support...at least when they got to be teenagers. They know that their mom had to file bankruptcy and they probably blame it on the fact that she didn't get support.

Even if there was a possibility of getting a judge to order her to give the money to her adult children, they would probably turn around and give it right back to her. That is certainly what I would do.

 

[stealth2]

If there's no relationship with the "kids", how does Dad know they aren't getting financial aid from Mom?

 

[Gracie3787]

LdiJ, Re: possible future relationships w/ grandkids: 2nd oldest got pregnant, marreied and had baby-did not bother to inform her dad that he was a grandfather (during that time ex wrote letters to court saying daughter was still in home, and dependent on her). Daughter signed for certified letter to mom with her married name, this is how dad was "told" of marriage. Mother wrote letter to court asking for delay because 1st granchild due at time of hearing, this is how grandpa was "told" of first grandchild. His kids want nothing to do with him, ever, and they will pass this on to their kids. Actually, I have researched many child support/alimony/custody orders and a Judge can order anything as long as it is lawful, if you know of any federal or Florida laws preventing the judge from ordering her to pay kids, please let me know. Re: Wrongs- yes, his wrong affected her, but it also affected his kids, but they are the only people it affected. Yes, her wrong DOES affect not only my husband, but also every other person in this country. (bankruptcy frauds costs consumers millions of dollars a year). I won't go into detail, but the ex has committed other frauds, she just hasn't been caught yet.
Re: spite/revenge: no, my husband and I both know that she will have to answer for her wrongs on judgement day (as we all will) The problem is this- ex is a Police Officer- would you personally feel safe knowing that a person who is supposed to be upholding the law and protecting you and your loved ones is not honest or trustworthy and has broken the laws? You are right, if he succeeds, the kids could give the money back to mom, however, at least that way the kids would have the choice instead of no choice like they've had. Nuff said by me, I'll post the results of hearing tommorrow. (by the way, my husband expects to lose on that point, but if people don't stand up and try, nothing would ever change)

 

[Gracie3787]

If there's no relationship with the "kids", how does Dad know they aren't getting financial aid from Mom?

Mom has openly admitted that she does not give any of the arrears money to my husband's "kids". (at the same time she also openly goes on and on about her 3 younger kids' expenses, health problems, etc).

 

[Gracie3787]

Hearing Update

Just a quick update-My husband had heart attack this AM, airlifted to special cardiac hospital court notified by hopital- hearing postponed.