Spending Freeze 2.0, Child Support Shocker.

[Provincial]

The state gets involved because of deadbeat dads. Unfortunately, the ones with good intentions get to suffer, too.

This is proof of the saying "it's cheaper to keep her"

Not just the good dads. I had one employee who had a child support order requiring my company to pay the Court monthly. It amounted to about $57.00 each month. I finally got tired of making out a check each month, and sent them a full years amount.

You should have heard the screaming! "What are we supposed to do with this?" Keep it and use it to make the payments to the ex. "We have no way to do that!" Then you are worthless pieces of bubblegum. Figure it out.

Within three months, the judge had scheduled a hearing, discovered that the ex had a very high-paying job, and the child wanted to live with Dad anyway. He said "I should make you pay him!" and got everyone to agree to drop the payments.

I had to laugh about messing with them and having it work!

 

[pharmseller]

Help me understand why your support payment will increase by 325%.

 

[arakboss]

Help me understand why your support payment will increase by 325%.

I took the amount the child support calculator suggested I would have to pay if my son files for a modification x 100 ÷ by the original amount. The result was about 325%

 

[pharmseller]

New amount minus old amount, then divide by old amount equals percent change.

(425-100)/100 = 3.25, or 325%

That's a big change.

Does momma have to come up with some dough, too? It usually works that way. Make sure she pays her share.

 

[Hueco]

Wow.

I had no idea. How crappy that is that the state thinks they need to intercede?

Only 60 percent of noncustodial fathers have a legal obligation to pay child support; of those with a legal obligation, only half pay the full amount and 24 percent pay nothing; and more than half of the mothers with children potentially eligible for support receive nothing

Source: https://watermark.silverchair.com/2...Fo3P24vHG42Gf6IcEK1XWckABqCi3OLWM4TGeZjPn_5kw

The quote above was from research done in 1989. Do you think the situation has gotten better or worse since then? I'd guess to say: worse.

My own thought is that, if you have a child for any reason at any time, you have a moral obligation to that child and fate, god, Yahweh, Allah, the Buddha, or whoever you think spins the world will hold you to that obligation.

It's become increasingly obvious as I've gotten older that few share in this view. I imagine the state is more pragmatic about things: kids raised by single mothers struggling to get by make for poor societal outcomes, by probability. It's worth it for the state to intervene.

 

[arakboss]

New amount minus old amount, then divide by old amount equals percent change.

(425-100)/100 = 3.25, or 325%

That's a big change.

Does momma have to come up with some dough, too? It usually works that way. Make sure she pays her share.

My understanding is that unless both parents were ordered to pay child support in the original order, that only the parent originally ordered to pay child support is subject to modifications for child attending school. Regardless it wouldn't impact the amount I would have to pay. If my son files for modification, it will be up to the State to decide whether my ex has to pay or not.

 

[BBQ Guy]

Source: https://watermark.silverchair.com/2...Fo3P24vHG42Gf6IcEK1XWckABqCi3OLWM4TGeZjPn_5kw

The quote above was from research done in 1989. Do you think the situation has gotten better or worse since then? I'd guess to say: worse.

My own thought is that, if you have a child for any reason at any time, you have a moral obligation to that child and fate, god, Yahweh, Allah, the Buddha, or whoever you think spins the world will hold you to that obligation.

It's become increasingly obvious as I've gotten older that few share in this view. I imagine the state is more pragmatic about things: kids raised by single mothers struggling to get by make for poor societal outcomes, by probability. It's worth it for the state to intervene.

While I agree with you about the obligation to the child as a parent. That is where we part ways.

I have yet to see any outcome that ends well when the state intervenes. The state shouldn't be in the business of handling money if someone isn't delinquent in their payments.
You won't convince me otherwise.

 

[Hueco]

While I agree with you about the obligation to the child as a parent. That is where we part ways.

I have yet to see any outcome that ends well when the state intervenes. The state shouldn't be in the business of handling money if someone isn't delinquent in their payments.
You won't convince me otherwise.

You're confusing my pointing out a rationale for support of said rationale.

 

[Flopsweat]

None of this has ever made any sense to me. If a woman wants me to support her, she needs to be nice enough not to get kicked out of my house. Sound mean? Don't move in with me. You want to leave and take our children? They're your responsibility now. If you can't afford them, bring them back. You don't get to demand equal pay and also alimony. I don't care about the cries of how you "gave up my career". That might be valid in a few easily provable cases, but for everyone else it's just an excuse. I also don't buy that you got used to living at a particular level so I have to give you thousands of extra dollars. You have a new level now. If you can get used to it going up, you can get used to it going down.

 

[TTSX]

None of this has ever made any sense to me. If a woman wants me to support her, she needs to be nice enough not to get kicked out of my house. Sound mean? Don't move in with me. You want to leave and take our children? They're your responsibility now. If you can't afford them, bring them back. You don't get to demand equal pay and also alimony. I don't care about the cries of how you "gave up my career". That might be valid in a few easily provable cases, but for everyone else it's just an excuse. I also don't buy that you got used to living at a particular level so I have to give you thousands of extra dollars. You have a new level now. If you can get used to it going up, you can get used to it going down.

Yes! Seen more than one man get absolutely bent over by the family court system. One might have killed himself, haven't heard from in years. Denying a father access to his child while sucking out a mortgage worth of CP/alimony is cruel and unusual punishment. Well, sadly, not unusual.

 

[pharmseller]

My understanding is that unless both parents were ordered to pay child support in the original order, that only the parent originally ordered to pay child support is subject to modifications for child attending school. Regardless it wouldn't impact the amount I would have to pay. If my son files for modification, it will be up to the State to decide whether my ex has to pay or not.

Such was not the case when my stepdaughter went to college. A new order included payments from both sides. My wife was not required to have her wages garnished but the father's wages were.




P

 

[pharmseller]

The only reason his wages were garnished was because he stopped paying when she turned 18 and we had to take him to court to force him to keep paying. This despite his knowledge of the law and my stepdaughter's status as a student. He lost, of course, and we got to write the order, so we opted for him to pay the state instead of my stepdaughter.

Are you sure you're required to pay the state through garnishment?

 

[SonicBlue03]

The Spirit Airlines one would've pissed me off. It also would've been easily disputed with my bank. "You know how I fly, and you know I'm not poor."

 

[arakboss]

The only reason his wages were garnished was because he stopped paying when she turned 18 and we had to take him to court to force him to keep paying. This despite his knowledge of the law and my stepdaughter's status as a student. He lost, of course, and we got to write the order, so we opted for him to pay the state instead of my stepdaughter.

Are you sure you're required to pay the state through garnishment?

As far as I know. If he files for modification I will pursue the issue further and see if we can handle with out garnishment.

 

[arakboss]

The only reason his wages were garnished was because he stopped paying when she turned 18 and we had to take him to court to force him to keep paying. This despite his knowledge of the law and my stepdaughter's status as a student. He lost, of course, and we got to write the order, so we opted for him to pay the state instead of my stepdaughter.

Are you sure you're required to pay the state through garnishment?

It looks like there may be a way to avoid the garnishment if they approve an EPW:

Two Types: EPW 1 and EPW 2

There are two types of automatic EPW arrangements. Both require an active child support case and approval from all users of the payor's bank account. The bank must be a member of the National Automated Clearing House Association (NACHA) », and the applicant cannot have any dishonored checks in the past 12 months.


EPW 1 is an exception to income withholding. Automatic monthly payments may be set up instead of regular income withholding when the parent receiving support (or the child attending school, if applicable) agrees, and there is no past-due support owed. The payor may request one or two withdrawal dates per month, as long as the full monthly amount is paid on or before the court-ordered due date.

What happens if my request for EPW is not approved?

You will receive a notice in the mail explaining why your EPW request was not approved.

 

[arakboss]

Yesterday I got more motivation to start my spending freeze. I was looking through my checking account online and discovered two purchases that weren't mine. One was for Draftkings and one for Spirit airlines. The total for both was about $900. I immediately went down to my local branch and filed disputes but they said it could take 10 days to get the funds restored to my checking account. I very rarely used the debit card attached to this account for online purchases so I think the debit card info was snagged locally.

From now on, I am using cash or a credit card for purchases and I will keep a close eye on credit card statement.

The money from the unauthorized charges was finally returned to my account. The title of the credits was "Temp Credit". It took them 10 business days to get the money back into my account, I hope they don't have plans to take it back out.

 

[Ferryman]

I am getting back on the spending freeze bandwagon Feb 1st. My son turned 18 this month but is still a minor (for child support purposes) until he graduates. After he graduates from high school his new status will be Child Attending School (community college). At that point he can file for a modification to the current child support order whenever he feels like it. I did the calculations on the Oregon Child Support Calculator and if/when he files for a modification my new child support rate will increase about 325% over the current rate. This new amount will be equal to about 26% of my after tax income.
My plan is to go ahead and start saving the difference of what I am paying now and what I would be paying if/when he files for a modification.

February 1st my latest effort at saving money begins. I am going to forget about buying a new car until after my son turns 21 and child support obligations end. I am going to have to baby the beater and hope it keeps going strong for another three years.

Edited: for math errors.

Drop him off at the Marine Corps recruiting depot and don't look back. Pretty sure in four years time everyone will be better off. (If you can keep him out of the Ukraine)

 

[Flopsweat]

Drop him off at the Marine Corps recruiting depot and don't look back. Pretty sure in four years time everyone will be better off. (If you can keep him out of the Ukraine)

Yep. Meantime you can call him your multiplication error.

Reminds me of an accountant I dated for a while. It may sound a little shallow, but I dumped her after she put on some weight. Now I call her my rounding error.

 

[arakboss]

@slimmer13 has motivated me to hop back on the spending freeze 2.0 saddle again. I have racked up $3400 on a credit card again and have spent money like crazy during the last couple of months. Well over a thousand in the last couple of weeks.

I am setting aside $200 cash for firearm related purchases (doesn't include TCGC membership dues which I will cover from checking acct) to get me through Oct 31st, 2022. That will coincide with end of weightloss challenge. If I want to purchase firearm related items with costs beyond the $200, I will sell existing firearm stuff to cover cost or trade where possible.

In order to have some accountability, I will keep track of running total starting with this post.

Current firearm spending related fund is at $200.

 

[ma96782]

The state gets involved because of deadbeat dads. Unfortunately, the ones with good intentions get to suffer, too.

This is proof of the saying "it's cheaper to keep her"

Deadbeat Women too.

Seems to me that the Courts.......

STOP, Stop, stop......deep breath.

Aloha, Mark

PS........Hint : Military Service for the kid.