slightly different court order

[Zigner]

EnforceSupport must be a psychic...he is able to discern from a question exactly what type of follow-up information the OP desires. Incredible.

 

[EnforceSupport]

I believe what the vast majority of posters here are interested in, is what's fair for the child/ren.

Please don't take what I'm about to say, out of context. Also, this reply is not intended to address anything specific about Chronicles post.

Proserpina, you say, "I believe what the vast majority of posters here are interested in, is what's fair for the child/ren." Well, most maybe, but I'm not. That is NOT to say that I am not a big advocate for children, nor does it diminish one bit my absolute love and admiration for our children. I would throw myself before a moving bus any day of the week, to save a child. So, don't confuse me with someone who doesn't care. Here's my point:

Our system is not always fair.
A person's legal right may not, necessarily, result in fairness for a child.
If a poster asks a question about his/her legal rights, I do not filter my answer through an analysis of whether it will be fair for the child/ren.

I don't mean to sound harsh, but, I do think that this forum is about answers to legal questions, which might not always be consistent with ensuring fairness for a child. Like the example I gave in an earlier post, if Dad (ncp) gets a huge raise and asks, must I seek an increase in my court ordered support? The answer which provides fairness to the child would be, YES. However, the legal answer (in most states, I presume), is NO.

I know many do, and hope others will join, in an effort to answer and serve the Poster, rather than allowing our answers to reflect what might be best for society, children, etc.

 

[Zigner]

I know many do, and hope others will join, in an effort to answer and serve the Poster, rather than allowing our answers to reflect what might be best for society, children, etc.

Awww, how cute. The newbie wants to dictate how the forum runs...

 

[EnforceSupport]

Awww, how cute. The newbie wants to dictate how the forum runs...

Dictate? No, it was an invitation.

I'll let you get back to Dr. Phil.

 

[Zigner]

Dictate? No, it was an invitation.

I'll let you get back to Dr. Phil.

Yeah - because who cares about what is best for the children, right?

Your choice of a user-id is wholly inappropriate.

 

[EnforceSupport]

Yeah - because who cares about what is best for the children, right?

Your choice of a user-id is wholly inappropriate.

See, you just don't get it. I spent a paragraph trying to assure that I care as much for children as anyone, and I do. But, when answering a legal question, one relies on the statutes and cases as they ARE, not as they should be.

By the way, I spend 10 hours a day doing virutally nothing but enforcing, writing and lecturing on enforcement. My user-Id is just fine, thanks.

 

[TheGeekess]

http://ocse.dhr.georgia.gov/

 

[stealth2]

(And, if I were to offer a moral comment, I certainly wouldn't make it under the vail of a legal advice.)

I pretty much skimmed your posts as I didn't find them interesting or informative, but I did notice this. It should be "veil". If you're going to try to sound smarter than you are? At least try to use the correct word in its proper context. Thanks.

Oh, and... a doesn't belong in that sentence, either. Tsk.

 

[CJane]

Interesting that the same people who back up every. single. word. that another attorney on here posts are bashing THIS attorney because s/he's a "cute newbie".

What's wrong with offering up the idea of a poster doing a risk/benefit before just seeking enforcement? I recommend that more often than not. And it's perfectly legitimate, perfectly legal advice.

 

[Proserpina]

Interesting that the same people who back up every. single. word. that another attorney on here posts are bashing THIS attorney because s/he's a "cute newbie".

What's wrong with offering up the idea of a poster doing a risk/benefit before just seeking enforcement? I recommend that more often than not. And it's perfectly legitimate, perfectly legal advice.

Which was never my point.

I asked a very simple and absolutely legitimate question and I got slammed for it. I even tried to explain the reasoning behind my question, to no avail.

I mean seriously - wth?

 

[Gracie3787]

I disagree with Gracie's blanket statement. I think you need to run the numbers and try to determine what kind of an order the court might issue, before you could possible decide to just risk a modification. After estimating your possible exposure, you then need to balance that against the possible upside of receiving the past-due monies, understanding of course, that once the past-due amounts are paid, you're still on the hook for the increased obligation. After all, you're looking for a net increase here, and therefore, ending up with a higher c/s obligation, only to be offset by the money he owes you, doesn't put an extra money in your pocket and in the long run, you'll be worse off.

Having said all that, it is critical that you educate yourself on the laws of your state as to the laws relevant to your issue. While there may not be a statute of limitations on enforcing support, sometimes there are laws which govern when a determination may be requested in order to seek reimbursement, as in your case. Also, your laws may dictate certain requirements (though common sense and good practice certainly do) regarding notice to your ex about his obligations. i.e., have you (and do) regularly send him copies of the expenses along with your evidence of having paid it, and requesting reimbursement? (asked rhetorically.) Also, are you complying with the terms of the order which may require mutual agreement or notice, before incurring certain medical, dental, tuition or extracurricular expenses for which he may be liable?

Good luck.

Did you really read what the OP wrote?
This is what she wrote:
"I make more than Dad (by about $10,000). If I go to the court to ask that the order be enforced, can Dad in turn request I start paying him child support since I make more than he does? "

She was asking a simple and direct question.
I answered with a simple and direct correct answer.

Although the OP didn't ask for all possibilities, it's nice that you decided to add further information for the OP. However, it certainly does NOT make my answer any less correct.

 

[Proserpina]

Did you really read what the OP wrote?
This is what she wrote:
"I make more than Dad (by about $10,000). If I go to the court to ask that the order be enforced, can Dad in turn request I start paying him child support since I make more than he does? "

She was asking a simple and direct question.
I answered with a simple and direct correct answer.

Although the OP didn't ask for all possibilities, it's nice that you decided to add further information for the OP. However, it certainly does NOT make my answer any less correct.

Precisely.

 

[EnforceSupport]

You will all be happy to know that this is my last post on this topic. (Ah, I know, you were hoping I would go away completely...no such luck.)

If you look at the history of these posts, I really didn't mean to hammer, slam or bash anyone, until that is, it seemed that some were backing up others just for the sake of being right. And, the last two posts really demonstrate my point. Yes, Gracie, your answer was entirely correct. (well, I suppose if I really wanted to argue, I could assert that the idea of a credit is not necessarily a foregone conclusion, for policy reasons (i.e. a custodial parent sometimes needs cash, not a mere offset against an arrearage obligation)...but, I won't get into that.)

Anyway, Gracie you were RIGHT. Nothing was wrong or incorrect about your post. Not in the least. Silverplum, Proserpina, you were both loyal defenders (Oh, and Zigner, you had some nice zingers, too.)

As an aside, I received a call today from someone with a 20 year old Cal. support judgment. She asked if the J needed to be renewed. I said no, which, by the way, was the correct answer.

Maybe it was presumptuous of me, but I immediately segued into a 5 minute explanation about the benefits of renewal, even though she never asked. Besides feeling like it would have been a disservice to her had I not gone on, I think it would have verged on malpractice -- but that's just me.

Stealth2, thank you for catching my errors. It was the most useful part of this thread, for me.

Let's do this again, real soon.

Chronicle, good luck to you. Take CJane's advice and do a risk/reward analysis in order to assist you in making the best choice.

 

[Proserpina]

If you look at the history of these posts, I really didn't mean to hammer, slam or bash anyone, until that is, it seemed that some were backing up others just for the sake of being right. And, the last two posts really demonstrate my point.

Yeap.

And nobody here understands the term "passive aggressive nonsense".

No, really.