irhsprnsiss
Junior Member
Location: California
Hello...
I am hoping for some insight and guidance for what appears to be a failure by the court to comply with the UIFSA. Here is the rundown...in 1989 I was divorced in Hawaii. My ex was in the military and we had one child, at the time of divorce he was 2+. Child support ordered (via wage garnishment) $360/mo. and he didn't want visitation, so it was a general stmt "...visitation upon mutual agreement of both parties...".
I remarried in 1990, moving back to California, w/child and ultimately the ex/bf was transfered here 8 mo. later. I was NEVER contacted for any type of visitation and yes, I made sure I sent notice to the base of my address/phone and called when medical emergency occured (per court order), BF never showed any interest or concern.
So, fast forward to 2001, I find myself yet again going through a divorce (ex #2) and have 2nd child. At this time I had been a stay at home mom for 13-14 yrs, I was left in $ mess, loss of house and looking for employment. In July 2001 I sought to register/modify c/s order of Hawaii as my circumstance had changed dramatically. This dragged on and on...finally July 2003 I was granted a $107 increase/mo.($467/mo. total) and retroactive to Feb 2002.
Needless to say BF never sent the $ for the increase, but I was still getting the c/s check ($360)from Hawaii. Now we have arrears owing w/interest. Then this past July 2004, I am served at work, OSC for C/S termination (child is 18 and graduated HS). Ok, you may say however, 1)BF has failed to pay any of the increase/arrears since ordered a year ago, AND 2)the Hawaii c/s order (controlling order) specifies clearly c/s ends when "...said child attains the age of 18 and so long as said child continues his education post high school on a full time basis at an accredited college, university, vocational or trade school, OR until said child attains the age of 23, whichever occurs first".
So, I had no concerns when appearing feeling I was proper in my argument against terminating c/s. Well...I was in shock as judge immediately orders c/s terminated and when I provided the original and the terms/duration, I was told "...no, sorry that has no bearing in this state and you are now subject to all laws/procedures of this state...". That being that c/s ends at age 18, not to mention terminating c/s arrears still owed and nothing said to BF for failure to pay added increase for the prior 1 yr.
I contacted Hawaii CSEA right away and they said that the court was not correct that the terms of the support are not modifiable but no info on where, what, how or who to turn to. Just the past week, I am lucky enough to find "FreeAdvice"
... reading the posts/replies, and found a link and reference to the "UIFSA" !!! Specifically, the subsection that prevents the modification of any nonmodifiable aspect (i.e. duration) of the original order (Hawaii) . Calif. has CEJ to modify per its guidelines, issues of support only.
So, what do I do now??? The support terminated 3mo. ago, DCSS says nothing for them to do as a case was not opened prior to child turning 18 yrs.
(that is a new law i was told went into effect same day as termination effective 8/1/04...lol) and Hawaii well they say they are/were merely a middleman for sending pymt per the original order/garnishment.
I have no idea what to do (i.e. a set aside for judicial error, OSC/Motion or Exparte???) as the judge failed to apply the UIFSA. The bottom line is my son is the one bearing the consequence as the c/s was to go to him to assist with FT school/car/ins. & allow working PT.
I am sorry for the long post, any input, guidence or information is greatly valued.
Thank you for your time to read/reply.
Hello...
I am hoping for some insight and guidance for what appears to be a failure by the court to comply with the UIFSA. Here is the rundown...in 1989 I was divorced in Hawaii. My ex was in the military and we had one child, at the time of divorce he was 2+. Child support ordered (via wage garnishment) $360/mo. and he didn't want visitation, so it was a general stmt "...visitation upon mutual agreement of both parties...".
I remarried in 1990, moving back to California, w/child and ultimately the ex/bf was transfered here 8 mo. later. I was NEVER contacted for any type of visitation and yes, I made sure I sent notice to the base of my address/phone and called when medical emergency occured (per court order), BF never showed any interest or concern.
So, fast forward to 2001, I find myself yet again going through a divorce (ex #2) and have 2nd child. At this time I had been a stay at home mom for 13-14 yrs, I was left in $ mess, loss of house and looking for employment. In July 2001 I sought to register/modify c/s order of Hawaii as my circumstance had changed dramatically. This dragged on and on...finally July 2003 I was granted a $107 increase/mo.($467/mo. total) and retroactive to Feb 2002.
Needless to say BF never sent the $ for the increase, but I was still getting the c/s check ($360)from Hawaii. Now we have arrears owing w/interest. Then this past July 2004, I am served at work, OSC for C/S termination (child is 18 and graduated HS). Ok, you may say however, 1)BF has failed to pay any of the increase/arrears since ordered a year ago, AND 2)the Hawaii c/s order (controlling order) specifies clearly c/s ends when "...said child attains the age of 18 and so long as said child continues his education post high school on a full time basis at an accredited college, university, vocational or trade school, OR until said child attains the age of 23, whichever occurs first".
So, I had no concerns when appearing feeling I was proper in my argument against terminating c/s. Well...I was in shock as judge immediately orders c/s terminated and when I provided the original and the terms/duration, I was told "...no, sorry that has no bearing in this state and you are now subject to all laws/procedures of this state...". That being that c/s ends at age 18, not to mention terminating c/s arrears still owed and nothing said to BF for failure to pay added increase for the prior 1 yr.
I contacted Hawaii CSEA right away and they said that the court was not correct that the terms of the support are not modifiable but no info on where, what, how or who to turn to. Just the past week, I am lucky enough to find "FreeAdvice"
... reading the posts/replies, and found a link and reference to the "UIFSA" !!! Specifically, the subsection that prevents the modification of any nonmodifiable aspect (i.e. duration) of the original order (Hawaii) . Calif. has CEJ to modify per its guidelines, issues of support only.So, what do I do now??? The support terminated 3mo. ago, DCSS says nothing for them to do as a case was not opened prior to child turning 18 yrs.
(that is a new law i was told went into effect same day as termination effective 8/1/04...lol) and Hawaii well they say they are/were merely a middleman for sending pymt per the original order/garnishment.
I have no idea what to do (i.e. a set aside for judicial error, OSC/Motion or Exparte???) as the judge failed to apply the UIFSA. The bottom line is my son is the one bearing the consequence as the c/s was to go to him to assist with FT school/car/ins. & allow working PT.
I am sorry for the long post, any input, guidence or information is greatly valued.
Thank you for your time to read/reply.
Last edited: