previous support order not being calculated

[beth_parr]

What is the name of your state?MI

My daughters father pays support to me, he pays over 100 a week. He also pays support on his son. when they calculated how much he would pay for his son they didn't take into account that he pays for our daughter too. Our daughters case is 2years older than his son's case. They are telling him that because we live together that they just have to give him a second family credit. But the second family credit is way lower then what he actually pays and it's not like the money comes back to us. The state takes it for the medical. We can't close our daughters case till we get married because she gets medical thru the state.

In the state's child support formula it clearly says that any previous child support orders must be subtracted dollar for dollar from the gross income before new orders are calculated. It also says that any deviation from the formula requires an application to deviate. We looked thru the file and there was never an application filed, there is infact nothing of the sort in there at all. But the referee keeps telling us that all they have to do is the second family credit. we filed a motion to object and we go to court on the 15th i'm just trying to understand how they can do this. They are going against the formula, without filing a deviation first.

anyone have any ideas or info it would be appreciated.

thanks, beth

 

[brisgirl825]

So you're upset b/c your attempt to play the system isn't working?

You say the money goes to the state for medical care. That's great, I'm glad that they're doing it. The rest of us have to pay medical premiums so you should be no different.

Nice try, chica.

 

[LdiJ]

So you're upset b/c your attempt to play the system isn't working?

You say the money goes to the state for medical care. That's great, I'm glad that they're doing it. The rest of us have to pay medical premiums so you should be no different.

Nice try, chica.

Legally though she really does have a valid argument. The second support order really should be calculated after deducting the first support order from his income. The magistrate is "playing games" with the system himself/herself to insist on calculating it as if its a second family.

It would also surprize me if the whole amount goes to the state....that would equal more than 400 a month for medical insurance for one child. Children's medical insurance, even on a private basis, is NOT that high.

If I am wrong, and it really is all going to the state for the medical insurance, then mom would be wise to get off medicaid....and use less than half of the money to buy a private policy.....

 

[saintkbsmom67]

Legally though she really does have a valid argument. The second support order really should be calculated after deducting the first support order from his income. The magistrate is "playing games" with the system himself/herself to insist on calculating it as if its a second family.

It would also surprize me if the whole amount goes to the state....that would equal more than 400 a month for medical insurance for one child. Children's medical insurance, even on a private basis, is NOT that high.

If I am wrong, and it really is all going to the state for the medical insurance, then mom would be wise to get off medicaid....and use less than half of the money to buy a private policy.....

Adding my son on my insurance plan costed me 400 a month.

 

[saintkbsmom67]

So you're upset b/c your attempt to play the system isn't working?

You say the money goes to the state for medical care. That's great, I'm glad that they're doing it. The rest of us have to pay medical premiums so you should be no different.

Nice try, chica.

It does read that way doesn't it? How is he living with her and paying her? Sounds like a Sean Combs scam lol.

 

[brisgirl825]

Legally though she really does have a valid argument. The second support order really should be calculated after deducting the first support order from his income. The magistrate is "playing games" with the system himself/herself to insist on calculating it as if its a second family.

It would also surprize me if the whole amount goes to the state....that would equal more than 400 a month for medical insurance for one child. Children's medical insurance, even on a private basis, is NOT that high.

If I am wrong, and it really is all going to the state for the medical insurance, then mom would be wise to get off medicaid....and use less than half of the money to buy a private policy.....

If they are living together, there is no need for her to be receiving cs. She and dad are playing games in order to get out of paying mom #2 as much in cs. The money goes back into the home, therefore it is not money that dad never sees.


Deviation Requirements.
(1) The court may enter an order that deviates from the formula if the court
determines from the facts of the case that application of the child support
formula would be unjust or inappropriate, and it includes all of the following:
(a) The child support amount determined by application of the child
support formula.
(b) How the child support order deviates from the child support formula.
(c) The value of property or other support awarded instead of the
payment of child support, if applicable.
(d) The reasons why application of the child support formula would be
unjust or inappropriate in the case. MCL 552.605(2).
See: MCL 552.605, Ghidotti v Barber 459 Mich 189 (1998), and Burba v
Burba 461 Mich 637 (2000).
(2) The Michigan Supreme Court has held that the statutory deviation factors
must be recorded. “While a trial court may enter an order of support that
deviates from the formula, it may not do so without setting forth in writing or
on the record why following the formula would be unjust or inappropriate.”
Ghidotti v Barber, 459 Mich 189 (1998). The criteria for deviating from the
formula are mandatory and, to fulfill its statutory duty, a court must carefully

 

[LdiJ]

Adding my son on my insurance plan costed me 400 a month.

Were you in Michigan?

If so, then you may want to consider shopping around for a private policy. Sometimes people don't realize that the low deductible, low copay insurance can actually be more expensive overall.

My ex was having a fit once because his medical insurance didn't have copays (it was private) and had a somewhat high deductible. I sat him down and worked through how much he was actually out of pocket in a year. Then, I got him a quote for the type of insurance he thought he ought to have. It ended up that he would have spent at least a thousand more in a year to have the greater coverage, than what he was spending out of pocket.

 

[NotSoNew]

my BF and i are living together and have our CS order still through the courts for several reasons.

1. if we break up i dont want to go through the trouble of re-opening it.

2. we keep our money seperate, so the money i get from CS i use to pay for her daycare, its not like the money comes back to my BF, it doesnt.

3. we arent attempting to scam the system. our CS amount is what we privatly agreed upon and not the courts calculations, if we wanted to scam mom #2 i could have mine raised to the court guidelines amount (a lot more) and mom #2's would be reduced.

so not everyone is trying to scam the system by leaving the CS order through the courts!

 

[brisgirl825]

my BF and i are living together and have our CS order still through the courts for several reasons.

1. if we break up i dont want to go through the trouble of re-opening it.

2. we keep our money seperate, so the money i get from CS i use to pay for her daycare, its not like the money comes back to my BF, it doesnt.

3. we arent attempting to scam the system. our CS amount is what we privatly agreed upon and not the courts calculations, if we wanted to scam mom #2 i could have mine raised to the court guidelines amount (a lot more) and mom #2's would be reduced.

so not everyone is trying to scam the system by leaving the CS order through the courts!

Sweetness, it's always a scam.

 

[NotSoNew]

ooooh kay

 

[saintkbsmom67]

Sweetness, it's always a scam.

Dyno you have to see it from the outside of what that or this looks like. If you all live together there should be no reason for a Court order. Court orders are for parents not living together am I right? I didn't think you'd be able to go to court still living with your partner and say you want cs but we still live together...you know that wouldn't fly.

 

[nextwife]

Dyno you have to see it from the outside of what that or this looks like. If you all live together there should be no reason for a Court order. Court orders are for parents not living together am I right? I didn't think you'd be able to go to court still living with your partner and say you want cs but we still live together...you know that wouldn't fly.

Except that, if she cancels the CS order and they ever broke up THEN her kids go to the BACK of the line for CS. If they were "there first", why should their slice of daddy's income pie get DROPPED?

 

[stealth2]

Maybe the real deal is that Daddy needs to stop screwing around and makign babies. There's a concept.

 

[saintkbsmom67]

Except that, if she cancels the CS order and they ever broke up THEN her kids go to the BACK of the line for CS. If they were "there first", why should their slice of daddy's income pie get DROPPED?

Because they are still together. Would it work if she went to court and said ok we are living together? No. it wouldn't. That's why i call it the Sean Combs scam. He has to pay his girlfriend 17k a month but ended up getting back with her so in essence the money is still his.

 

[nextwife]

The money ISN'T his. He doesn't get it back.

They aren't even married - the money goes to mom to raise her kids. It doesn't go toward his savings, he gets no marital interest in anything mom buys. There are NO marital property rights in their household for him toward whatever mom acquires while they are together. Nor does he have any rights to any retirement benefits she acquires while they are cohabitating. Cohabitating is NOT the same as being married as to financial acquisitions, retirement, benefits.

Maybe if the CS laws treated all kids of a father as entitled to equal support it would not matter. But the fact is that is she refiles after dropping her CS order, her kids will then be entitled to a lesser percentage of dad's income than they are now.