Should I "reaffirm" child support?

[ajkroy]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NH now, order from FL

Hi all, daily reader and sometime poster here with a question. I am CP and my son is nearly 18. CS order of $69 per week originated in FL and NCP repeatedly went through arrest/jail/purge cycles due to non-payment, with Dad refusing to pay CS. Eventually, I requested permission from the court and my son and I left FL, all without receiving CS (but the little assistance I received was paid back). I didn't transfer the CS to NH because Dad still lived in FL and thought it stayed there if one person still lived there and I wasn't getting anything anyway.

I know that the DOR stopped attempting to collect, and I just recently found out that Dad moved to another state. Do I have to do anything to reaffirm this before my son becomes 18? From other threads I've read (which aren't exactly like mine, but similar), Dad could potentially owe this forever, right? Have I made any irretrievable mistakes here? I welcome any advice you all have.

Dad (and his entire family) chose not to ever have contact with either of us. I have tried. I'm just including that to explain why I didn't know he moved.

Thanks,
- Andi

 

[wavehopper27]

Child support arrears never just go away. They will continue to follow the NCP acruing interest until it's either paid or death. It is not dischargeable through bankruptcy. That being said, the court can order the NCP to pay but actually making them do it is an entirely different matter.

 

[ajkroy]

Thank you, wavehopper. That's what I hoping to confirm. I was just afraid that the lack of collection or moving somehow voided the order.

 

[wavehopper27]

Don't make the mistake of handing the child support arrears over to a debt collector. If that happens, the NCP could then have it discharged through bankruptcy.

 

[Silverplum]

Thank you, wavehopper. That's what I hoping to confirm. I was just afraid that the lack of collection or moving somehow voided the order.

I was checking it out and using this: http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/bin/ChildSupportBenchbook.pdf

"V. COLLECTION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SUPPORT" begins at page 80. I'm no attorney, but I got a bit concerned for you at a few things I read. This is but one cite I urge you to follow up on:

In extraordinary or compelling circumstances, a court may decline to
enforce a past-due obligation to pay child support. Fox v. Haislett, 388
So. 2d 1261(Fla. 2d DCA 1980).​

 

[ajkroy]

wavehopper: I have heard urban legends about parents who have used collection agencies like SupportKids and end up with nothing or close to it. Thank you for the timely reminder.

Silverplum: Thank you for the informative and at first, unsettling citation. I looked up some cases to see if I could define what circumstances would be "extraordinary or compelling" enough to decline enforcement. From my layman's perspective, Fox v Haislett appeared to be about non-consecutive, private school tuition and subsequent college tuition, Smithwick v Smithwick had alimony and child support combined, and it seemed that the CP grossly overstated the income and assets of the NCP, and in Warrick v Hender, it seems that arrears were not enforced because of a seriously overstepping stepparent. At least one of these appears to have been overturned on appeal, anyway.

All of these refer back to a SCOTUS case of Pottinger v Pottinger, but I can't seem to find anything about that case, oddly enough. I would like to know what that case involved before I start to feel really relaxed, but none of the above situations seem even remotely close to mine. Of course, I am completely aware that I could have read these incorrectly and the above were actually EXACTLY like my situation and I am just a legal idiot. That is why I come here to ask you people.