Quick test for you all

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in
:


"John Meyer" wrote in message
...
This comes from a divorce forum I frequent. I'd like to know a few
things about you and your child support relative to your income.
Since I'm asking, I'll start first about my income.
Right now, I make about $15392 (bad situation; I'm trying to improve,
but you know the economy). Were it not for relatives, I'd very
likely be out on the streets. My child support order currently is
set at $293/month for 2 children.
And, like many modern court child support orders, this one also has a
health insurance mandate. The current health insurance I have to
take out for myself and my two sons is $117 biweekly, or $253.50 a
month. Now, given that A I would very likely be putting the money
away for a place for myself and my children when I got out on my feet
and B. the mother doesn't use the insurance because it's too
expensive (not on her; very likely it is), that makes for a total
of $546.50 actual child support, with half of it being POST tax. To
give you an idea, my last paycheck, NET, was $222.93. And we are not
even counting in arrears here. So, I'd like to ask you all a few
pertinent questions: specifically:

What's your income, monthly or annually?

I would hope that you and others realize a self-selected survey like
this is meaningless. Every case is different but the more you earn
the more items you are ordered to pay.

This survey excludes alimony, life insurance, attorney fees, uninsured
healthcare, the tax consequences, college education support, etc. that
are part of some total court orders.

To give you a general concept of my case I paid 37% of my gross in
federal/state/fica/Medicare taxes, 38% for alimony/child support/life
insurance/ healthcare insurance, and was ordered to pay 50% of
unreimbursed healthcare. The combination would have left me with
about 25% of my gross before I refused to pay any uninsured
healthcare. You can run the numbers anyway you want, but the net
result was I had 25 cents on the dollar to live on.

The court refused to understand a lot of the details in my case. I
came away believing the judges are intentionally stupid. As an
example, the judge ruled a car allowance I received was income but
refused to acknowledge there were any business expenses related to
owning and operating the car for business.


I agree with Bob. There are a lot of other "costs" that should be
included. I'm in Canada. My annual income is 78,000. I net about $4000
per month (after taxes, CPP). My CS is for $1114 per month for two kids.
So that looks okay. $4000 - $1114 is $2886. So that 17% of my gross or
28% of my net income. BUT, we should also include these other divorce
and child related costs. I pay $800 per month child care. I also pay
$500 per month in legal fees since I have been in court for about 5
years over custody, access, holidays, vacation, travel, spousal support
and child support. I figure I will be paying for another 1.5 years at
$500 month (thank god my lawyer has a payment plan). I also have the
children 50% of the time yet I receive no reduction in CS. I also pay
their day-to-day when they are with me. But I also pay a hefty amount of
their activities since my ex refuses. So soccer practice, sporting
equipment, summer camps are all paid by me. I also must pay for post
secondary education - even though if I had remained married, I would not
be forced to.

So we have:

Income: $4000

CS: $1114
Legal: $500
Dayca $800
Child Expenses: $500
Education Plan: $200
Total: $3114

That leaves me with, $886 per month. So now I am at 78% of my net. So
how could I reduce my costs? Well, I could have abandoned by children.
That would have prevented all the legal hell. So I would get back $500
in legal fees. And with almost no access, I would not be feeding them,
buying books, clothes, etc. That would also get me back another $500 per
month.

I currently do not get any tax breaks at 50-50 since the law in Canada
states the children are dependents to my ex since she receives support!
Huh?

Oh, and I used to pay my ex SS too!!!!

So with my $1000 per month I must provide a furnished home. Oh, I drive
them everywhere, so I need a car and gas is $1 per litre. Unreal, when I
make close to $80K a year yet a am going negative each month. But the
judges do not care!! As long as my ex is all fine, they just don't care
about the payor.

Oh, and my ex refuses to work... that's the kicker.

H.

wrote:
I actually had a wench attorney from Virginia's Division of Child
Support Enforcement actually try to get a judge to order me to put my
two boys in daycare so I could go out and get a job to pay my support.

Yeah, after they screwed my credit and suspended my driver's license.
I can't a job to even meet my support obligation thanks to them -- let
alone the cost of childcare for two kids.



you do know wench is redundant both on attorney and Child Support
Enforcement ;-) Sorry, I'm a stickler on the language.

Speaking of which, you said she tried to, indicating it was
unsuccessful. What did yon judge say to yon ambulance chaser?

On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:03:25 GMT, "DB" wrote:


wrote in

Yeah, after they screwed my credit and suspended my driver's license.
I can't a job to even meet my support obligation thanks to them -- let
alone the cost of childcare for two kids.


Yea, I don't get what reporting a CS debt to the Credit agencies
accomplishes?
Seams to be really spiteful!

Suspending a car license, what is that suppoered to do again?


Has CSE tactics gone beyong the limit of being Dumb?




Although I have never had CSE help me with child support issues
(looked into it and decided it could make a bad situation worse), I do
agree with having arrears listed on a credit report in some cases. I
wonder if my ex would have behaved any differently when he was
neglecting to pay child support yet was able to come up with a
downpayment on a house if he knew he wouldn't be able to get a
mortgage. I'll never know. Some people are willing to bite off their
nose to spite their face. The option CSE has of reporting to credit
bureaus would only be a threat to many, but I understand it harms
people who are really trying and just cannot meet an exorbitant
expectation. Threats, however, are empty if never followed through
upon.

The same goes for suspending licenses. I believe it was meant to be a
threat that kept those with the ability to pay their obligation
paying. It has gone way too far, though, because men whom are trying
and simply having a tough time are made to have it rougher. The
question is... who really can assess whether someone is doing the best
they can?

Although men have an absolute right to be upset with a system which
cares little if the economy bites someone in the butt and women who
use child support for their own means as well as or in place of the
children's, I also feel that men would be enraged with the true
deadbeats (those who can but won't contribute) who made threats
necessary. Unfortunately, follow through is most difficult for those
who are NOT deadbeats and that is truly an injustice.

My question to you is.... how would you fix the system so that only
the truly irresponsible, where threats can be avoided from reaching
fruition, are affected?

Beverly

"Beverly" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:03:25 GMT, "DB" wrote:


wrote in

Yeah, after they screwed my credit and suspended my driver's license.
I can't a job to even meet my support obligation thanks to them -- let
alone the cost of childcare for two kids.


Yea, I don't get what reporting a CS debt to the Credit agencies
accomplishes?
Seams to be really spiteful!

Suspending a car license, what is that suppoered to do again?


Has CSE tactics gone beyong the limit of being Dumb?




Although I have never had CSE help me with child support issues
(looked into it and decided it could make a bad situation worse), I do
agree with having arrears listed on a credit report in some cases. I
wonder if my ex would have behaved any differently when he was
neglecting to pay child support yet was able to come up with a
downpayment on a house if he knew he wouldn't be able to get a
mortgage. I'll never know. Some people are willing to bite off their
nose to spite their face. The option CSE has of reporting to credit
bureaus would only be a threat to many, but I understand it harms
people who are really trying and just cannot meet an exorbitant
expectation. Threats, however, are empty if never followed through
upon.

Beverly - CS orders are backed up with money judgments filed in the courts
as abstracts from the actual order. They name the judgment creditor and the
judgment debtor and set out the basic terms of the order including interest
and interest rates. All money judgments (not just CS money judgments) are
reported to the credit services.

It is for this reason it is extremely important for NCP's to be certain
their CS case is closed out correctly upon termination and all the proper
documentation is filed with the court to remove the money judgment from
their credit report.

As an aside - At one point I was struggling to pay the court's ordered
amount and all the extras. I applied for a line of credit to give me a
cushion of financial backing during difficult months. I was turned down
because according to my bank my CS/SS was "too high". They knew exactly
what I owed from the money judgment on my credit report.

At another point the CS file was transferred from the original county to
another county. Both counties reported the money judgment so it appeared I
owed double the CS order amount. I had to get both counties to remove their
money judgments from my credit reports when the file was closed.

On Feb 3, 9:07�pm, "Bob Whiteside" wrote:
"John Meyer" wrote in message

...





This comes from a divorce forum I frequent. *I'd like to know a few
things about you and your child support relative to your income. *Since
I'm asking, I'll start first about my income.
Right now, I make about $15392 (bad situation; I'm trying to improve,
but you know the economy). *Were it not for relatives, I'd very likely
be out on the streets. *My child support order currently is set at
$293/month for 2 children.
And, like many modern court child support orders, this one also has a
health insurance mandate. *The current health insurance I have to take
out for myself and my two sons is $117 biweekly, or $253.50 a month.
Now, given that A I would very likely be putting the money away for a
place for myself and my children when I got out on my feet and B. the
mother doesn't use the insurance because it's too expensive (not on her;
very likely it is), that makes for a total * of $546.50 actual child
support, with half of it being POST tax. *To give you an idea, my last
paycheck, NET, was $222.93. *And we are not even counting in arrears here.
So, I'd like to ask you all a few pertinent questions: specifically:

What's your income, monthly or annually?
What is your child support order set for?
Does it have a health insurance clause and if so for how much?
What do you end up going home with at the end of the week?
Are there any arrears and if so how much (in my case, through some
negotiating, I got it down to $25/month)?

The purpose is to put a real face on these child support amounts. *These
are not just abstract figures here, this is what you expect humans to
live on (if any CSE figures are brave enough to read this). *You think
that the cost of housing and feeding an American male comes out to about
$100 / week.

I'm publishing these figures should I get them on my web site, the NCP
Revue (http://www.pueblonative.com/blog)

I would hope that you and others realize a self-selected survey like this is
meaningless. *Every case is different but the more you earn the more items
you are ordered to pay.

This survey excludes alimony, life insurance, attorney fees, uninsured
healthcare, the tax consequences, college education support, etc. that are
part of some total court orders.

To give you a general concept of my case I paid 37% of my gross in
federal/state/fica/Medicare taxes, 38% for alimony/child support/life
insurance/ healthcare insurance, and was ordered to pay 50% of unreimbursed
healthcare. *The combination would have left me with about 25% of my gross
before I refused to pay any uninsured healthcare. *You can run the numbers
anyway you want, but the net result was I had 25 cents on the dollar to live
on.

The court refused to understand a lot of the details in my case. *I came
away believing the judges are intentionally stupid. *As an example, the
judge ruled a car allowance I received was income but refused to acknowledge
there were any business expenses related to owning and operating the car for
business.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

My situation was the same as Bob's. I ended up with 22-24% of what my
gross was. I had CS, I had insurance, day care, school cost, medical,
ortho, college, even was ordered to pay for the kids car insurance. I
went into arrears one time. For around $7000 (mother was getting
around $50K a year) and it was for car insurance, school lunches,
school clothes..all lumped into "educational cost"..and 1/2 of that
was "paid" for in cash..and I was still ordered to pay for it.

"Beverly" wrote in

paying. It has gone way too far, though, because men whom are trying
and simply having a tough time are made to have it rougher. The
question is... who really can assess whether someone is doing the best
they can?

That's the quagmire the government stepped into when they decided they could
control the living conditions of every child living in a single home. The
greater majority of people live from pay check to pay check, what were these
government officials thinking?

Henry wrote:

That leaves me with, $886 per month. So now I am at 78% of my net. So
how could I reduce my costs? Well, I could have abandoned by children.
That would have prevented all the legal hell. So I would get back $500
in legal fees. And with almost no access, I would not be feeding them,
buying books, clothes, etc. That would also get me back another $500 per
month.

This infuriates me. I also have care of my son an equal number of hours
as his mother does, and was told in court that this would entitle me to
a mere 10% "discount" on CS. Now that he is in school it would be even
less, as any time not spent with me is counted as time spent with his
mother. Time spent at school counts as time spent with his mother.
Time spent with MY PARENTS counts as time spent with his mother. Mind
you, she isn't listed as the Custodial Parent -- she is just the Woman
and the Lower Earner (take your pick as to which entitles her to receive
payments from me). My ex, too, chooses not to work. She doesn't have to.

You are right in that the most cost-effective solution is to up and
abandon your kids. This is horrid. If our courts were REALLY in the
business of doing things "for the children" they would NOT be rigging
the system to encourage divorced fathers to walk out on their kids.

There is no sense to be made of a system that forces one parent to pay
another parent CS when both parents have care of the children an equal
number of hours per week!

- Ron ^*^

On Feb 6, 4:12�pm, Werebat wrote:
Henry wrote:
That leaves me with, $886 per month. So now I am at 78% of my net. So
how could I reduce my costs? Well, I could have abandoned by children.
That would have prevented all the legal hell. So I would get back $500
in legal fees. And with almost no access, I would not be feeding them,
buying books, clothes, etc. That would also get me back another $500 per
month.

This infuriates me. *I also have care of my son an equal number of hours
as his mother does, and was told in court that this would entitle me to
a mere 10% "discount" on CS. *Now that he is in school it would be even
less, as any time not spent with me is counted as time spent with his
mother. *Time spent at school counts as time spent with his mother.
Time spent with MY PARENTS counts as time spent with his mother. *Mind
you, she isn't listed as the Custodial Parent -- she is just the Woman
and the Lower Earner (take your pick as to which entitles her to receive
payments from me). *My ex, too, chooses not to work. *She doesn't have to.

You are right in that the most cost-effective solution is to up and
abandon your kids. *This is horrid. *If our courts were REALLY in the
business of doing things "for the children" they would NOT be rigging
the system to encourage divorced fathers to walk out on their kids.

There is no sense to be made of a system that forces one parent to pay
another parent CS when both parents have care of the children an equal
number of hours per week!

* * - Ron * ^*^

What they need is a National CS guideline rather tahn controlled by
the states,

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Feb 6, 4:12?pm, Werebat wrote:
Henry wrote:
That leaves me with, $886 per month. So now I am at 78% of my net. So
how could I reduce my costs? Well, I could have abandoned by children.
That would have prevented all the legal hell. So I would get back $500
in legal fees. And with almost no access, I would not be feeding them,
buying books, clothes, etc. That would also get me back another $500 per
month.

This infuriates me. I also have care of my son an equal number of hours
as his mother does, and was told in court that this would entitle me to
a mere 10% "discount" on CS. Now that he is in school it would be even
less, as any time not spent with me is counted as time spent with his
mother. Time spent at school counts as time spent with his mother.
Time spent with MY PARENTS counts as time spent with his mother. Mind
you, she isn't listed as the Custodial Parent -- she is just the Woman
and the Lower Earner (take your pick as to which entitles her to receive
payments from me). My ex, too, chooses not to work. She doesn't have to.

You are right in that the most cost-effective solution is to up and
abandon your kids. This is horrid. If our courts were REALLY in the
business of doing things "for the children" they would NOT be rigging
the system to encourage divorced fathers to walk out on their kids.

There is no sense to be made of a system that forces one parent to pay
another parent CS when both parents have care of the children an equal
number of hours per week!

- Ron ^*^

What they need is a National CS guideline rather tahn controlled by
the states,

It's the other way around. Marriage and divorce are states' rights issues.
The Federal government has stepped into the middle of the CS in ways that
the states would fight if it weren't for the Federal money they get for not
challenging the Federal intervention.

National CS guidelines would be a very bad idea. As it stands right now,
states can develop their own guidelines based on local economic conditions.
One of the criteria for CS guidelines is they be validated by local economic
data. This is an "iffy" process but the fact the states are required to
look at local data is a positive requirement.

On Tue, 6 Feb 2007 09:46:31 -0800, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote:


"Beverly" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 20:03:25 GMT, "DB" wrote:


wrote in

Yeah, after they screwed my credit and suspended my driver's license.
I can't a job to even meet my support obligation thanks to them -- let
alone the cost of childcare for two kids.


Yea, I don't get what reporting a CS debt to the Credit agencies
accomplishes?
Seams to be really spiteful!

Suspending a car license, what is that suppoered to do again?


Has CSE tactics gone beyong the limit of being Dumb?




Although I have never had CSE help me with child support issues
(looked into it and decided it could make a bad situation worse), I do
agree with having arrears listed on a credit report in some cases. I
wonder if my ex would have behaved any differently when he was
neglecting to pay child support yet was able to come up with a
downpayment on a house if he knew he wouldn't be able to get a
mortgage. I'll never know. Some people are willing to bite off their
nose to spite their face. The option CSE has of reporting to credit
bureaus would only be a threat to many, but I understand it harms
people who are really trying and just cannot meet an exorbitant
expectation. Threats, however, are empty if never followed through
upon.

Beverly - CS orders are backed up with money judgments filed in the courts
as abstracts from the actual order. They name the judgment creditor and the
judgment debtor and set out the basic terms of the order including interest
and interest rates. All money judgments (not just CS money judgments) are
reported to the credit services.

This is very interesting. I paid court ordered child support for a
while and my credit report shows/showed nothing regarding it. Is it
because I was never delinquent?


It is for this reason it is extremely important for NCP's to be certain
their CS case is closed out correctly upon termination and all the proper
documentation is filed with the court to remove the money judgment from
their credit report.

As an aside - At one point I was struggling to pay the court's ordered
amount and all the extras. I applied for a line of credit to give me a
cushion of financial backing during difficult months. I was turned down
because according to my bank my CS/SS was "too high". They knew exactly
what I owed from the money judgment on my credit report.

At another point the CS file was transferred from the original county to
another county. Both counties reported the money judgment so it appeared I
owed double the CS order amount. I had to get both counties to remove their
money judgments from my credit reports when the file was closed.


Beverly